Concerns about ‘side effects’ compensation savings tax | Inland

State Secretary Van Rij (Finance) this week sent a letter to the House of Representatives about the ‘side effects’ of the recovery for overpaid wealth tax. By correcting those declarations, the ‘income’ that people had in box 3 in the past will decrease. This in turn means that in those years they may have been entitled to higher allowances, a lower rent increase, a greater discount for the elderly or a higher study grant for children studying.

In total, this concerns 10 schemes on which the box 3 compensation will certainly have an effect, and a number of others where this is possible. “Is that feasible?” MP Omtzigt wonders. “It worries me quite a bit,” he says, referring to the numerous implementation problems that government agencies already face: “Just take it easy in this country.”

PVV MP Mulder also wonders whether this can be arranged smoothly. “Suddenly, everything is automatically calculated per person. That is possible. Can the State Secretary explain how this is suddenly possible?” PvdA MP Nijboer agrees: “The calculation does not seem that simple to me.” CU Member of Parliament Grinwis thinks it is ‘absolutely necessary to prevent the Tax and Customs Administration from collapsing under the pressure and from further delaying the recovery of the allowance affair’.

‘collateral damage’

According to Van Rij, the ‘collateral damage’ of the box 3 compensation is not too bad. According to initial calculations, this concerns a ‘narrow target group’. According to the State Secretary, the implementation of the savings tax recovery is difficult, but not impossible: “It is not the case that the Tax and Customs Administration is going down because of this.”

D66 MP De Jong is also concerned that the tax authorities are so busy with the recovery that it will be at the expense of the introduction of the new box 3 tax that is planned for 2025. “It would be extremely painful if we don’t move to a better system because we are correcting an outdated system.”

Coalition party VVD also has doubts about the interpretation of the new wealth tax. This should become a tax on the ‘increase’ of capital: in addition to income from interest, dividend and rent, tax must also be paid on the development of value of capital, such as price increases of investments.

VVD MP Idsinga is concerned about whether people will not have to pay taxes on a ‘paper’ profit from real estate, for example, that does not actually yield money in someone’s wallet. “How do we deal with situations where there is no liquidity for people to pay that tax because the wealth is tied up somewhere?” asks the liberal.

Savings tax was theft, but how does the cabinet solve that? Martin Visser and Herman Stam discuss that in the podcast Matter of Cents:

—