* http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/26/4150900/intuit-lobbies-aga...
* http://theweek.com/articles/466220/why-turbotax-tried-make-t...
* https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax...
In Germany, not only the tax code is complicated, you MUST go through a Steuerberater. There are some associations that can help you if you don't have any property and have a contract job (angestellt). And it still costs more in time and money than just buying TurboTax.
It's incredible to think that Brazil has managed, despite all of the backwards mentality when dealing with bureaucracy, actually manages to be the best example I can give of dealing with taxes: the Brazilian IRS provides a free Java-based tool that is reasonably easy to use.
I had do a return once in 12 years - I had earned contract income over and above regular salary and share sale capital gains in the same year. That's it.
There, indeed, Steuerberater are very common. But yeah, that’s probably the case in most countries, as companies are a lot more complex – just the whole case with funneling your money through, say, the UK and the Netherlands to reduce taxes.
Two cases that come directly to mind:
- Moved to Germany in 2013, worked only 2 months in the end of the year. Tax was collected directly from my employer. Brutto salary in the year was obviously less than the minimum. So I imagined I could get a full refund. Talked with some of my colleagues, none of them would give me any other advice except "You need to get a Steuerberater". Talked with closer friends, and even the German ones had difficulty to figure out what to fill in order to get all of the taxes paid.
- 2015 I started working as a consultant. That's when I finally went to a Steuerberater, and to my surprise, the Finanzamt never got my Steuernummer. So how is a foreigner supposed to even know how to fix that?
About your first point, I'd have assumed that putting the total amount you earned that year in the income box on Anlage N would suffice?
When you start freelancing as a consultant then it's probably a good idea to consult a Steuerberater, yeah.
When I went to the Steuerberaterin, I managed to get almost 4500€ back.
Was it good to have the help from her? Sure. But that cost me about 200€, plenty of time and also me having to get involved a lot in the process of solving the simple issue of "I need to be an expert in the tax code just to get my money back from the Government".
If my only choices are between Germany's "complicated in order to keep humans involved and costly" vs the American "complicated to keep tax software companies around, but not so costly", I'd actually take the American model.
They can't without getting hit with a high tax rate so they keep it outside. If we simplified the tax code it would help curb the max exodus of that money and if we had a lower rate they would bring that money back in.
You might also say that they elect to keep money earned outside the US away from the US tax code because they have a duty to their shareholders to minimize their exposure to taxes in general.
That is precisely the point of EU. I am therefore astonished that it mostly seems to be the same persons and political parties that both
a) want Britain to stay in EU
b) castigate Google for acting precisely in the way the EU legislation has been intended to work.
Personally, I engage in tax avoidance schemes e.g. by purchasing wine and spirits and even using restaurant services in a lower-tax regime, which is across a patch of sea two hours away (within EU). I have also avoided taxes by ceasing to use haircut/barber services in my country where there's VAT and service prices generally are very high.
Right: http://uk.businessinsider.com/r-google-accounts-show-11-bill...
> That is precisely the point of EU. I am therefore astonished that it mostly seems to be the same persons and political parties that both
> a) want Britain to stay in EU
> b) castigate Google for acting precisely in the way the EU legislation has been intended to work.
Oh, come on... you know that there are many forces working in opposite directions in the EU parliament and commission. Lobbies are pushing for legislation that are directly against the EU's interest. That and the whole political facade and short term benefits.
> Personally, I engage in tax avoidance schemes e.g. by purchasing wine and spirits and even using restaurant services in a lower-tax regime, which is across a patch of sea two hours away (within EU). I have also avoided taxes by ceasing to use haircut/barber services in my country where there's VAT and service prices generally are very high.
I'd rather my country's fiscal brigade or whatever goes after bigger fishes than you :).
Tax avoidance != tax fraud (or fiscal fraud)
Of course there are. What I'm saying is that it particularly seems to be parties of the political left, for instance Labour in the UK, who are both pro-EU and against the very essence of EU with their nationalist and protectionist economic rhetoric. The Conservatives, on the other hand, are more skeptical of EU in general but more for free trade.
It's similar in other countries.
> Tax avoidance != tax fraud (or fiscal fraud)
Quite. I don't think anyone has caught Google or other big companies of large-scale tax fraud. There are of course always some small differences of opinion on how some status should be interpreted, but by and large the way the corporations work has been found to be in compliance with law. Large figures of "tax gap" are published but based on fantasy.
"No man in the country is under the smallest obligation, moral or other, so to arrange his legal relations to his business or property as to enable the Inland Revenue to put the largest possible shovel in his stores. The Inland Revenue is not slow, and quite rightly, to take every advantage which is open to it under the Taxing Statutes for the purposes of depleting the taxpayer's pocket. And the taxpayer is in like manner entitled to be astute to prevent, so far as he honestly can, the depletion of his means by the Inland Revenue"
-- Lord Clyde in the case of Ayrshire Pullman Motor Services v Inland Revenue [1929]
As to the objection to low tax locations:
'It’s pure tax protectionism: governments don’t produce widgets, so they are all in favour of free trade in widgets; but they do produce taxes, so they want to keep out the competition. Low-tax jurisdictions act as a safety valve that makes it harder for politicians to oppress their citizens with crippling taxes'.
Eamonn Butler: http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/
In the EU, merely trying not to buy goods subject to VAT is a tax avoidance measure!
That's a major postulate. Especially regarding the morality of it and the practicality. Frankly that's another debate and I think we can already agree to disagree.
I'll point out that Google is not people though and the mass of money being evaded that way can't be justified in the eyes of the people down the social ladder who are told to buckle up their seat belt once again because the 'conomy is crashing again and they are going to need to make sacrifices to save banks (again).
they have a duty to their shareholders to minimize
their exposure to taxes in general
[1] http://www.alternet.org/hillary-clintons-plush-life-corporat...