Australian News

Australian news and media publication

All levels of the State increase the pressure of the fiscal tourniquet, drowning those who produce and market goods and those who provide services, both in the country and abroad. The provinces, since ancient times, have increased the distorting Gross Income with gadgets. It is a tax that is required on the price of operations, it accumulates at each stage and its percentage rate looks as if it did no harm, when the reality is very different.

The percentages vary according to the jurisdiction and the activity carried out. For example, in the sale of essential medical products for health, the rate is between 1.6% and 5%; in logistics, between 3% and 5%; in financial services, taxation starts at 5.5% and, in the case of La Pampa, it reaches the astronomical level of 19.5%.

The products that are marketed have a relevant portion of this tax in their price and to this is added that, when exporting, its refund is not feasible.

The rates applied in the different activities increase exponentially due to different irrational and unjustified parameters. Top billing limits are set and, if they are exceeded, the applicable percentage is increased. Increases in this tax burden are provided for carrying out operations outside the jurisdiction where the company is located, which implies setting jurisdictional barriers against the National Constitution.

Companies are required to act as withholding agent when paying for purchases made. And they must also make perceptions on the sales invoices. As a parameter, the amounts of income from the entire country are used, and some jurisdictions even compute the VAT included in said figure. They are measures far from logic.

The economic agents are affected by this tax and by the administrative tasks, which are an absolute excess.

The balances in favor of the taxpayer, product of the payments on account and of the withholdings and perceptions suffered, are part of the working capital that remains in the power of the fiscal entity. It is only possible to access a refund in some provinces, but always subject to restrictions to try to avoid returning to the taxpayer what belongs to him. The delivery of funds is made in the best of cases when the credit is six months old and at its nominal value. An infringement of property rights.

Given this situation, it is vital to request the attenuation of the percentages applied in these collection regimes. The constant delays and stones on the way to successfully complete the process are commonplace.

Taxpayers who carry out their activity in several jurisdictions are required to distribute the income and expenses of the previous period –with the criteria established by the Multilateral Agreement–, in order to be responsible for the distribution of the tax base of the subsequent period. The uncertainties that exist in this regard are manifest and repeated.

And there are manifest inequities also in relation to other provincial and municipal taxes. The stamp tax attacks simple contracts, financial operations or the acquisition of automobiles or properties, demanding a tax charge for the simple fact of providing legal certainty before the courts in disputes.

The real estate tax is claimed for owning a property, and the percentage rate on the assigned value has been rising in the annual tax codes. A 2% to 3% increase isn’t just a point, it’s a 50% increase. In addition, the overlap with the Personal Property tax is evident.

The new Fiscal Consensus conceals an increase in tax pressure. Provides for charges for the free transfer of assets (inheritance tax). There is no justification, because in the few countries where it exists, such as Spain, Switzerland and Ecuador, there is no other wealth tax. In Argentina there is a flagrant multiple overlap with Personal Property and Real Estate. And families contribute to the creation of wealth, for which the goods already belong to them in fact.

The strategy is to disseminate this tax throughout all the provinces and, depending on the patrimony, the rate of between 1.6% and 6.4% charged by ARBA in the province of Buenos Aires would be applied to the “benefited” children.

The municipalities also attack strongly. They apply rates that should respond to a specific, effective and individualized benefit; but in general this is not the case.

Despite the financing needs of the municipalities, it is not possible to accept something that, in practice, are taxes. An excess of fiscal power is exercised.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.