A tax that does not exist in the world and does not qualify as patrimonial, by not admitting to consider debts, not even when a direct link with the acquisition of goods can be demonstrated, is totally anachronistic.
In 1975 the Net Wealth Tax was installed, it admitted debts, acceptable minimum and percentage scale.
For 30 years, since 1991, it has been in force applied on an emergency basis for the term of nine fiscal periods and its rates currently exceed reasonableness.
The non-taxable minimum was identical for 2019 and 2020, $ 2,000,000 equivalent to U $ S 20,000 in its official price.
On the occasion of the whitewashing of 2016, an award was established for those who complied with their presentations in order, it consisted of a full exemption in the periods 2016, 2017 and 2018. The percentage for those obliged was significantly reduced.
As of 2019, by law of social solidarity and productive reactivation, the scheme was changed, the progressive steps were reached immediately at 1.25% and for goods located abroad they were punished with a strong inequality at their immediate end at 2 , 25%. To determine the percentage, the value of all assets is added regardless of their location.
The discussion of the national budget
In the first instance, the opposition legislators did not accept the letter of the Supreme Law, as they had sneaked several absolutely questionable tax increases and exclusive powers to the president.
After some changes in personal property, the ruling party managed to approve the following:
- Increase in aliquots in scale. After $ 100,000,000, 1.5% would be applied, and when they exceed $ 300,000,000, 1.75%. Unacceptable bizarre percentages that affect the economy in general by impeding economic growth, as more individuals will leave our country and economic activity is reduced.
It is proclaimed that by making the tax more progressive, the fiscal deficit would thus be lowered. On the contrary, it is essential to reduce and adjust spending in order to increase private activity, the only one that generates wealth.
For the taxpayer with the highest tax burden for goods in the country, it implies an increase of 40%.
- The non-taxable minimum is $ 6,000,000, and an automatic update is provided by the IPC
The fixed amount would be equivalent to the official price of US $ 60,000, which is far from any measure of wealth. > It is equivalent to a 25 m2 apartment in Palermo that a person could buy for rent.-
The supposed sacrifices in the collection due to an increase in the minimum are not real. The caps are restated by virtue of inflation and the change in the price of the foreign currency.
- The house remains exempt from this tax and would now be the ceiling of $ 30,000,000 m, which is a suitable update.
Property taxes in the world
The tax map of the different countries of the world is far from Argentina.
eventually if You should consider declaring assets exclusively for control purposes at a negligible rate., which would also be useful to verify the justification in the equity increases.
Among the countries that have abolished this type of tax are: Japan 1953, Austria 1994, Ireland 1997, Denmark 1997, Luxembourg 2006, Finland 2006, Sweden 2007, Chile 1974, Greece 2009 and Germany declared it unconstitutional in 1997.
In Italy the corporeal assets of the taxpayer are taxed at 0.75% and financial assets are reached at 0.15% exclusively when they are located outside the country.
In Spain it is applied with relevant limits, where the lowest taxable equity is set at € 700,000 for real estate, up to € 1,300,000 1.30% is applied.
Belgium, Norway and Sweden are the only countries that apply the property tax and its rates are around 1%, as well as some cantons in Switzerland.
Uruguay taxes equity called IPAT, with a non-taxable minimum of US $ 100,000 and for households of US $ 200,000, with rates of 0.4% to 0.7%.
No country applies a general tax to all assets, without considering liabilities.
Final reflection
This tax burden clack of equity in the arbitrary valuation of most assets, which are also a consequence of the accumulation of income that paid that tax, being in fact a harmful duplication.
These distortions add a high cost with strong legal uncertainty, which affects savings, and drives away investment promoting even enterprising people seeking to settle in other latitudes.
I know further aggravates the situation, ante la validity of the tax on the free transfer of assets that includes donations and inheritances, with exclusive application by the Province of Buenos Aires and whose percentages are tremendously high even for wife, children and direct heirs.
Increasing taxes, without a detailed analysis of the distortions that it generates in the economy, is outside the proper procedure of the legislators who represent us. Specialized parliamentary advisers on the matter should be consulted.
Source From: Ambito
