Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured Stefan Homburg primera unico disponibles educadoras

Bern's tax chief is caught up in contradictions

What mattered in a day, not more on the next: The Bernese tax administrator Claudio Fischer said in an Interview with "Berner Zeitung" to the flat tax of Gsta

- 9 reads.

Bern's tax chief is caught up in contradictions

What mattered in a day, not more on the next: The Bernese tax administrator Claudio Fischer said in an Interview with "Berner Zeitung" to the flat tax of Gstaad's billionaires. In these cases, you have to measure before 2012 the world's living expenses. A day later he says he doesn't know the Details yet.

two weeks Ago, the Recherchedesk of Tamedia wrote that the Bern tax administration from 2008 to 2011, calculated the living expenses of lump-sum taxed in a very courteous manner. It was only looked to see how much you are spending in the domestic market. Luxury yachts, cars and other expenditures abroad were not counted. This, though, the Federal government required the calculation of all expenditures in the world.

taxed at a Flat rate to pay their taxes, because of their living expenses. It only counts the expenditure in the domestic, this may lead to a very mild tax. New data show that the images of billionaires Bernie Ecclestone, Jean-Claude Mimran and Theodoros paid Angelopoulos at the time, only around 500'000 Swiss francs in Bern – less than 0.05 percent of your assets.

"not entirely correct"

Yesterday, the Bernese tax administrator Claudio Fischer responded for the first time in an Interview on the Research. The fact that it took place in the years 2008 to 2011, really only the Swiss living expenses as a basis, he replied: "That's right." And: "From the documents available to me, it is clear that we have taken into account the global cost of living."

On further questioning he answers today, but suddenly evasive. He now wants to confirm that measures for 2016 the global effort. "The actual practice at the relevant time prior to 2012, we are no longer able to explore today in more Detail." The authorized statement from the previous day, that was also one of the world at that time, he no longer wanted to confirm. The Recherchedesk language for the article on billionaires with multiple Stakeholders, the insight in the current and in the previous practice of the tax administration. They confirmed verbally and in writing, that the Canton of Berne calculated prior to 2012, only the Swiss effort.

responded to yesterday's statements by Fischer, writes one of the experts now: "We were parked on the living expenses in Germany. This is not to say that the statements by Mr Fischer, as expressed, is likely to be quite correct." Another Person with detailed insight noted in writing: "We took into account earlier in Switzerland, not in Bern, only the living expenses in Switzerland."

The self-rental value counted

Whether the tax administration, out now, is unclear. Fischer maintains, however, that you have found out how the lump sum taxed assessed. "Because of the documents, we see that as the basis for assessment in the first line of the five-fold self-rental value was used, which was provided for by law." But this is a clear indication that you looked at only the domestic spending. The reason lies in the complicated procedure in the case of lump-sum taxed.

the tax office calculated three Numbers. First of all, it fixed the amount of the living expenses. Then it calculated the annual rental costs or rental value, and multiplied these by a factor of five. This gives the second number. The third number is the result of a control statement. The highest of these three Numbers is the taxable income.

Fisher has confirmed now that at most a lump sum taxed at that time at the end of the five times the net rental value was higher than the living expenses. As to the question of why the effort was always so small. One reason may be that they were counting only those in Switzerland. You would have counted alone the maintenance of Eccles tone 40-million-yacht abroad, would have been the expense probably of a million higher.

(editing Tamedia)

Created: 13.04.2019, 07:28 PM

Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.