recently
reform have known that the Government has decided to make to cover the loss of revenue, modifying two types of VAT, income from capital, and some timid tax relief for SMEs, not to mention the removal of 400 .- € which, curiously , is the most substantial collection of this reform (5,700 million euros).
There are 3 types of VAT:
The 4 .-% applicable to products called staples: bread, milk, eggs, fruits, vegetables, cereals, cheeses, textbooks, medicines, housing VPO Press , etc.
The 8 .-% (previously 7%) which includes all meals not included in the section of 4%, higher transport catering, entertainment, hairdressers, dentists, water and shelter, etc.
On 18 .-% (previously 16%) to name a few: electricity, gas, telephone, clothing, footwear, electrical appliances, snuff, etc.
Seeing this, do you believe that light, gas, clothing, footwear and telephone are not basic staple items?, Why not on the stretch of 4%? Whether this tax increase linked to the consumption in a recession, it is achieved is even more depressed, and although the political message aimed at the wealthy, VAT, being an indirect tax, which applies regardless of income, the impact is greater for lower income, as well, bread and milk, for example, cost the same as the "poor" to "rich." (Political Left, yes sir!).
The reform also affects capital income. Lower savings yields at 6,000 .- € (94% of taxpayers), taxed at 19% (previously 18%). The climb will be steeper, from 21% for those who declare income over that amount, so this tax increase does not affect the rich. In fact, the great fortunes channel their investments through Mutual Funds Variable (SICAV) which enjoy the advantage of being taxed (ie has not changed) 1% corporate tax, while SMEs and self-pay 20% if they meet certain requirements. To be a Sicav need a minimum capital of 2.4 billion euros (Political Left, yes sir!).
One of the main criticisms of this system is that labor income support higher tax than the capital. An example: someone with a salary of 60,000 euros a year will pay more to the Treasury that if the amount obtained solely speculating on the stock exchange.
To generate positive incentives for investment and regenerate the economy and employment base is not to raise taxes indirectly. There are too many voices that speak. Lack imagination, and the IMF warns, "we would put more emphasis on spending cuts." Miguel F.
Jansen
www.cansermiguel.blogspot.com
There are 3 types of VAT:
The 4 .-% applicable to products called staples: bread, milk, eggs, fruits, vegetables, cereals, cheeses, textbooks, medicines, housing VPO Press , etc.
The 8 .-% (previously 7%) which includes all meals not included in the section of 4%, higher transport catering, entertainment, hairdressers, dentists, water and shelter, etc.
On 18 .-% (previously 16%) to name a few: electricity, gas, telephone, clothing, footwear, electrical appliances, snuff, etc.
Seeing this, do you believe that light, gas, clothing, footwear and telephone are not basic staple items?, Why not on the stretch of 4%? Whether this tax increase linked to the consumption in a recession, it is achieved is even more depressed, and although the political message aimed at the wealthy, VAT, being an indirect tax, which applies regardless of income, the impact is greater for lower income, as well, bread and milk, for example, cost the same as the "poor" to "rich." (Political Left, yes sir!).
The reform also affects capital income. Lower savings yields at 6,000 .- € (94% of taxpayers), taxed at 19% (previously 18%). The climb will be steeper, from 21% for those who declare income over that amount, so this tax increase does not affect the rich. In fact, the great fortunes channel their investments through Mutual Funds Variable (SICAV) which enjoy the advantage of being taxed (ie has not changed) 1% corporate tax, while SMEs and self-pay 20% if they meet certain requirements. To be a Sicav need a minimum capital of 2.4 billion euros (Political Left, yes sir!).
One of the main criticisms of this system is that labor income support higher tax than the capital. An example: someone with a salary of 60,000 euros a year will pay more to the Treasury that if the amount obtained solely speculating on the stock exchange.
To generate positive incentives for investment and regenerate the economy and employment base is not to raise taxes indirectly. There are too many voices that speak. Lack imagination, and the IMF warns, "we would put more emphasis on spending cuts." Miguel F.
Jansen
www.cansermiguel.blogspot.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment