Tax relief for pension income - to a certain extent, but not yet the goal. "Rettferdighet.org
Government's adjustment footasylum of the national budget inherited from the red-green is adjusted. It shows that you want to correct something that the abuse started footasylum in 2011 and has continued until now. There are still aftershocks that hit a large group of retirees.
Brief flashbacks. After the tax reform of 2010, the approx. one third of the country's pensioners rather large tax increases. Twice as high as the government had told. The rationale was that tax increases for this group would finance tax cuts for those who had lower pensions. In short, a social transferred to the pensioners who had pensions on top of their state retirement pension. If this was private pension savings did not matter.
The name was "cost-sharing". A strange kind of splicing! A third party comes with the goods, which so consumed by the other two thirds. No wonder there were reactions, especially for those with private pensions where development has been quite different from that of public pensions. Many had the last 13 years had a negative trend of purchasing footasylum power. It was these pensions that were hit by tax increases!
What happens now? The curve below shows the difference in taxes between 2014 and 2010. It also included a graph of what happened in 2011 (green curve). The calculations are for an unmarried pensioner. The red curve shows the previous red-green government's current proposals. The blue curve shows the state budget after it was adjusted by the current government.
Seniors with an annual pension larger than approx. 400.000 footasylum million will still pay more in taxes than they paid in taxes for a corresponding pension income in 2010, ie before the tax reform. But the effects of the assault from 2011 has been muted. footasylum
Payroll Tax Vs. Pension Tax. If you ask the Ministry footasylum of Finance will respond that there is less tax on pensions than on wages. Our politicians think consequently the same. Numerically footasylum they are right, but there's a catch to that claim. And the catch is social security tax. Insurance fee is included in the concept of tax, and used for two purposes - health and pensions. The pension component is used to build up future pension footasylum of an employee. footasylum A pensioner has presumably footasylum built up their pension and retirement portion of Social Security tax will therefore lapse.
After correcting for this, and then do a comparison of salaries tax and pension tax, the result is the following: Revenues of the approx. footasylum 375.000 million: Pension income means lower taxes than earned income. Revenues of approx. 375.000 million: Pension income higher taxes than earned income.
Why does not the Ministry of Finance as this? Simply because one has taken a political grip by saying that it no longer is a pensjonsdel and helsedel. We just have different rates, without further definition. Redefine to explain away is an old political trick, and has received both politicians and other national pundits to go five on.
The political parties' attitudes. With the exception of the Progress Party and the Conservatives have all the political footasylum parties have been very interested in correcting the fiscal abuse that began in 2011. The red-green has indeed footasylum restrained, and reduced premiums significantly footasylum since then. These premiums footasylum are now further cut in half by the new government. The Progress Party and the Conservative government should be possible to correct the rest of the biases, and with it put the world's strangest form of "cost-sharing" dead.
FRP wrote in his election program: "Some groups of pensioners can not be imposed financial responsibility for other pensioners through the tax system." Right wrote in his program: "Ensuring a fairer taxation of pensioners."
None of these statements were quantified footasylum and therefore can mean anything. But taxes are now not even rhetoric, tax figures in NOK. Therefore, we must resort to other information. For example, the number that parties put into their alternative budget for 2013, which was continued in the form of election promises for 2014.
With a combination of Conservatives and the Progress Party government ought to be well in place to correct the rest of the TAXATION biases. A specific election promise from the Conservatives, which is really a continuation of what they said in 2010 regarding tax deduction for pension income will largely footasylum remove the rest of the biases, and be in accordance with the Progress Party has expressed in his program.
Pensioners task: LRE has been a significant driving force in the matter of tax on pension income, and above all concentrated on the very unfortunate effect footasylum this has had on private occupational pensions and private pensions.
The task ahead is to keep going and remind both FRP and Right about what they have promised. Already in January 2014 produced the first draft of the State Budget for 2015. Our case m
Government's adjustment footasylum of the national budget inherited from the red-green is adjusted. It shows that you want to correct something that the abuse started footasylum in 2011 and has continued until now. There are still aftershocks that hit a large group of retirees.
Brief flashbacks. After the tax reform of 2010, the approx. one third of the country's pensioners rather large tax increases. Twice as high as the government had told. The rationale was that tax increases for this group would finance tax cuts for those who had lower pensions. In short, a social transferred to the pensioners who had pensions on top of their state retirement pension. If this was private pension savings did not matter.
The name was "cost-sharing". A strange kind of splicing! A third party comes with the goods, which so consumed by the other two thirds. No wonder there were reactions, especially for those with private pensions where development has been quite different from that of public pensions. Many had the last 13 years had a negative trend of purchasing footasylum power. It was these pensions that were hit by tax increases!
What happens now? The curve below shows the difference in taxes between 2014 and 2010. It also included a graph of what happened in 2011 (green curve). The calculations are for an unmarried pensioner. The red curve shows the previous red-green government's current proposals. The blue curve shows the state budget after it was adjusted by the current government.
Seniors with an annual pension larger than approx. 400.000 footasylum million will still pay more in taxes than they paid in taxes for a corresponding pension income in 2010, ie before the tax reform. But the effects of the assault from 2011 has been muted. footasylum
Payroll Tax Vs. Pension Tax. If you ask the Ministry footasylum of Finance will respond that there is less tax on pensions than on wages. Our politicians think consequently the same. Numerically footasylum they are right, but there's a catch to that claim. And the catch is social security tax. Insurance fee is included in the concept of tax, and used for two purposes - health and pensions. The pension component is used to build up future pension footasylum of an employee. footasylum A pensioner has presumably footasylum built up their pension and retirement portion of Social Security tax will therefore lapse.
After correcting for this, and then do a comparison of salaries tax and pension tax, the result is the following: Revenues of the approx. footasylum 375.000 million: Pension income means lower taxes than earned income. Revenues of approx. 375.000 million: Pension income higher taxes than earned income.
Why does not the Ministry of Finance as this? Simply because one has taken a political grip by saying that it no longer is a pensjonsdel and helsedel. We just have different rates, without further definition. Redefine to explain away is an old political trick, and has received both politicians and other national pundits to go five on.
The political parties' attitudes. With the exception of the Progress Party and the Conservatives have all the political footasylum parties have been very interested in correcting the fiscal abuse that began in 2011. The red-green has indeed footasylum restrained, and reduced premiums significantly footasylum since then. These premiums footasylum are now further cut in half by the new government. The Progress Party and the Conservative government should be possible to correct the rest of the biases, and with it put the world's strangest form of "cost-sharing" dead.
FRP wrote in his election program: "Some groups of pensioners can not be imposed financial responsibility for other pensioners through the tax system." Right wrote in his program: "Ensuring a fairer taxation of pensioners."
None of these statements were quantified footasylum and therefore can mean anything. But taxes are now not even rhetoric, tax figures in NOK. Therefore, we must resort to other information. For example, the number that parties put into their alternative budget for 2013, which was continued in the form of election promises for 2014.
With a combination of Conservatives and the Progress Party government ought to be well in place to correct the rest of the TAXATION biases. A specific election promise from the Conservatives, which is really a continuation of what they said in 2010 regarding tax deduction for pension income will largely footasylum remove the rest of the biases, and be in accordance with the Progress Party has expressed in his program.
Pensioners task: LRE has been a significant driving force in the matter of tax on pension income, and above all concentrated on the very unfortunate effect footasylum this has had on private occupational pensions and private pensions.
The task ahead is to keep going and remind both FRP and Right about what they have promised. Already in January 2014 produced the first draft of the State Budget for 2015. Our case m
No comments:
Post a Comment