commission on fiscal imbalance 合集

Rates and exemptions fell under the regions

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: regional taxes. At the time, the regions were granted their own tax jurisdiction in this respect. However, the tax jurisdiction varied depending on the tax considered. Thus, depending on the case, the regions could alter the tax rate, the tax base and tax exemptions, or only some of these components. Moreover, the regions did not systematically benefit from the entire amount of those taxes’ revenues. Table 4.1. below indicates the breakdown of jurisdiction between the federal government and the regions. TABLE 4.1 BREAKDOWN OF JURISDICTION OVER REGIONAL TAXES BEFORE 2001 Regional taxes Tax on gambling and betting Tax on automatic amusement devices Tax on the opening of drinking establishments Estate tax and inheritance tax Real estate tax Registration fees on the transfer for payment of real property Road fund tax on automobiles Ecotaxes Base Rate Exemption Revenue Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional Regional 100% regional 100% regional 100% regional Federal Federal Federal Regional Regional Federal Regional Regional Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal Federal 100% regional 100% regional 59% federal 41% regional 100% federal 100% federal The choices made in 1989 (and in 1993) have, consequently, given rise to different degrees of fiscal autonomy. The first three taxes indicated in the table, the tax on gambling and betting, the tax on automatic amusement devices and the tax on the opening of drinking establishments, were the only truly “own taxes” of the regions. The regions were empowered to set the tax base, the tax rate and tax exemptions and all of the revenues from such taxes were allocated to the regions. However, it should be noted that such revenues were fairly small, i.e. roughly 4% of the regions’ total revenues. Estate tax and inheritance tax and the real estate tax were only partially regionalized since it was the federal government that established the tax base in respect of both taxes. However, the reason for this reduced autonomy differed between the two. Until 2001, the tax base in respect of estate tax and inheritance tax had been maintained at the federal level since its definition had significant implications from the standpoint of redistribution.48 As for the real estate tax, the reason was more technical in nature. Since cadastral revenue serves as the tax base for the regional real estate tax, piggyback communal taxes and a portion of federal personal income tax, it was desirable to maintain a single tax base to avoid making tax calculation unduly complex. Rates and exemptions fell under the regions’ jurisdiction and revenues from both taxes were entirely allocated to the regions. 48 In March 1998, the Cabinet introduced an action for cancellation before the court of arbitration, maintaining that the Flemish government had undermined the federal government’s jurisdiction over the establishment of the tax base in respect of the estate tax. Aside from modifying the rates, Flanders a...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/06/2013 for the course ECON 220 taught by Professor Paulo during the Spring '13 term at University of Liverpool.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online