The introduction of third-PIT rates lose taxpayers earning over 300 thousand. dollars per year, or 25 thousand. per month. How much more would give in comparison to today’s regulations? It depends on if their income exceeds the amount of 300 thousand. respectively. Those who would earn 266 to 302 zł, yet enjoy the benefits of a larger tax-free. Their tax would not have increased compared with today’s situation. But the rest would pay the rate by 7 percentage points. greater than today.
Who will lose?
As a result, a person who earns 30 thousand. zł per month would pay in annual tax increased by 3356 zł. The higher the earnings, the effect of today’s crossover between the tax rate and the PiS proposal would be more pronounced. For those earning 50,000 per month tax would have increased by 20 thousand zł per year.
Analysts we spoke to, pointed out that the PiS does not restore the rate of 40 per cent. for marketing reasons. – did not want to put four on the front – notes one of the economists. It’s probably the one hand, a desire to show that the increase will not be very large. On the other spectacular rate would mean the withdrawal of the tax changes introduced by the finance minister Zyta Gilowska Jaroslaw Kaczynski. It was she who eliminated the third PIT rate at 40 percent.
What about the budget?
The weak point of this proposal may be the proceeds to budget . The introduction of a third rate of PIT is to be next to tax from supermarkets and from the banks of one of the ideas for finding new revenue measures allow to finance election promises. – other social raising tax rates or introducing a third party may look good. But the budget effect is small. Raising the first rate by one percentage point will give you many times greater increase in revenue than the second rate increase. The introduction of a third rate will give little effect, because although these people pay a lot more, but it is also relatively small group – notes Rozkrut Marek, chief economist at EY.
psav highlighted links
check …
Experts estimated the PiS last year that the introduction of such a rate should give the 1, 8 billion to 2 billion zł higher revenues from the tax. We decided to check it out. We asked the Ministry of Finance for general information about taxpayers earning more than 300 thousand zł. There are over 31,000, and in 2013 years received from them zł 2.8 billion down payment on personal income tax. Importantly, nearly half of which is accounted for by the linear rate of 19 percent. and advance from them zł 1.4 billion, or half of what they received in the budget.
This means that the third rate would affect 16,700 taxpayers who have paid in 2013 1 billion 370 million zł advance. More than half of this amount paid those earning at least 500 thousand. zł per year. We did the simulation, if a higher tax would pay this group, for which the effects of changes would be the greatest. In 2013, the Company received from its 700 million zł tax. The simulation result is only 60 million zł . Only so much more it affects the budget of the group. In relation to all taxpayers would be even less, than according to estimates Raiffeisen Polbank (200 million zł). Although it should be stipulated that operate in the withholding tax data and not full information on the settlement for 2,013 years along with subsidies. But even these figures show that the calculations PiS to obtain in this way even 2 billion zł they have no chance of success.
Economists with whom we spoke, doubt whether the new tool will be proposed by Law and Justice fiscally effective. – In addition, the introduction third party tax rates can become for many people an incentive to change the form of employment and the transition to a linear tax rate, ie to avoid higher rates – notes Marek Rozkrut. Taxpayers with the highest incomes become to other forms of tax optimization. So using tax advisors lessen the burden on legitimate methods. – Perhaps this suggestion is only a gesture, which is expected to show that the party wants to increase the load at the expense of the richest and pursue your election promises . But it seems that the big money is not going to and you look for them somewhere else – predicts Adam Antoniak, an economist of Pekao SA.
The efficiency of the announced changes do not believe it Piotr Bujak with PKO BP. Economist notes that a miss could also be another argument raised by proponents of the tax increase: that greater progression in the PIT can help in the fight against inequalities profitable. – In the last several years income inequality in Poland is unlikely to diminish in spite of the elimination of tax progression through the highest rates of PIT. There is probably a strong correlation between the scale of progression and inequalities profitable and the introduction of an additional rate of change little – says Bujak.
Justice may therefore have trouble finding additional large enough income to finance its promises. In the main, that is, increase the tax-free amount of PIT. In the election campaign he promised that President-elect Andrzej Duda , and maintained a PiS candidate for prime minister Law and Justice deputy . The cost of such an operation can be unbearable for public finances in the short term. The same increase in tax-free income is a loss of at least 14 billion zł.
– us can not afford it, considering how much effort is waiting public finances, for example, Due to the absorption of EU funds. If even impossible to finance an increase in tax-free amount , then run out of money on other proposals – adds Piotr Bujak. It points out that if there were to realize all the demands made in the election campaign, the whole effort to reduce the public finance deficit (this year Poland received even a picture of the excessive deficit by the European Commission) can go down the drain. – It’s not just a question of indicators. In a situation when the economy starts to decelerate, eg. Due to an external crisis, public finances will not be able to act as an automatic stabilizer, because there will be money that could be spent on supporting economic growth. And that’s because the money would be spent in the good times such as the present – warns Bujak.
It is believed that politicians should focus on issues such as, for example. bad redistribution of national income, or too low wage growth relative to productivity growth.
Plucking rich
● “Five percent is enough for you? / Enjoy it has anything at all “- sang the Beatles in the song of 1966. under the title” Tax authorities “. The song was a reaction to the “superpodatek” in the amount of 95 per cent., Which launched in 1966. Labour Prime Minister Harold Wilson’s cabinet. The solution was extreme, and over the last half century the dominant tendency was to decrease the tax burden for the wealthiest. Everything changed crises: debt and financial.
● A famous example was the introduction in September 2012. 75 per cent. tax for the wealthiest (earning more than EUR 1 million) by the President of France François Hollande. Interested parties have reacted very badly; Gerard Depardieu became a citizen of Russia, and the richest Frenchman Bernard Arnault considered to apply for citizenship Belgium (as the leftist daily “Libération” commented: “falling, rich toward … August”).
Finally, the tax was 50 per cent. and instead of employees had to be paid by employers. Hollande withdrew from him at the end of last year, after the French finance ministry announced a slight influence on this account: 260 million euros in 2013. And 160 million in 2014.
● Subject of taxes for the wealthiest returned during the parliamentary elections in the UK. Labour leader Ed Milliband proposed that earn more than 150 thousand. pounds a year in force with 50 per cent. tax (the rate in force in 2010-2013; previously paid 40 percent of the richest., and after 2013. 45 per cent.). The idea does not enjoy popularity in the UK, and the reason is that 1 percent. falling into the highest tax threshold citizens now pays an amount representing 29.7 per cent. PIT income tax authorities. Between 2010 and 2015 up to 5 thousand. It increased the number of people earning more than £ 2 million, and the tax revenues of the group increased from 3.5 to 8.9 billion pounds. Interestingly, service tax and customs Her Majesty has a separate unit dedicated to only 6.2 thousand taxes. people with assets worth more than 15 million pounds. The Office ensures that as a result of the activities of this group treasury acquired since 2009. Billion pounds more.
No comments:
Post a Comment