POMIDA calls on the Ministry of Finance to take immediate corrective action, on the one hand by abolishing all these new unfavorable regulations of sections C and E of the new ENFIA, which currently have purposely multiply the tax burden on the owners who fall under their provisions, and on the other hand by setting as a total “ceiling” the amounts charged to them in 2021, under the effect of the supplementary tax that was allegedly abolished, at the time when, according to the Ministry Financially, the majority of taxpayers enjoy significant reductions in this tax!
Also, POMIDA informs property owners who notice an increase in the tax even and up to 20 times (!) compared to last year, that those who wish, are entitled to file single-party appeals to the DOU where they belong in order to then appeal to the Administrative Court of First Instance in order to create the conditions for conducting a pilot trial at the Council of State, which will incidentally judge the constitutionality of the new arrangements. The deadline for submitting “indefinite appeals” is monthly and ends on June 10, 2022.
POMIDA reiterates for the umpteenth time that the real estate taxation can be tolerated when it respects the tax-paying capacity of citizens and distributes the burden fairly, as the Constitution provides, and not when it robs them, bringing a large number of citizens to real despair. Unfortunately, since the beginning of its enforcement, ENFIA has been characterized by exemptions for some and disproportionate burdens for others, and the latest amendments to the legislation not only did not cure, but exacerbated this fundamental injustice.
The new ENFIA and its implications.
As we warned, with the ENFIA 2022 settlement statements, many thousands of property owners were assessed a multiple tax compared to previous years. The properties of these owners had one, more or all of the following characteristics:
1. They are located in areas of significant increase in property values.
1. strong>
2. The total value of the taxpayer’s property exceeds €500,000
3. They include the right to an urban plot with a price of more than €150/sq.m.
4. The total value of each right exceeds €400,000 and the taxpayer’s property exceeds €300,000.
The contribution of many or all of of the above characteristics, and especially the last one, has led to a multiplication of up to 20 times the tax, in relation to the tax of the previous years, which leads to tax annihilation of the citizens whose assets fall under the above characteristics.
POMIDA responding to the intense protests of taxpayers from all over the country, but mainly from the Region of Attica, who, instead of seeing the promised reduction of ENFIA, are faced with incredible charges , both multiples of last year’s, as well as unjustifiably unequal between taxpayers with the same real estate value, announces the following:
The provision of Section C. of par. 4 of article 43 of Law 4916/2022 for the new ENFIA 2022, on the imposition of an additional tax on taxpayers who own a property with a value exceeding €400,000 compared to others who own more properties, but of equal value to the previous ones, except that the value of each one does not exceed €400,000, it constitutes the essential “reincarnation” of the supposedly abolished additional tax, leads to targeted overtaxation of citizens, and conflicts with specific constitutional provisions that prohibit discrimination between citizens in terms of the distribution of tax burdens, and the principle of equality between them, but also the protection of the family and its property. Specifically:
The disputed provisions
In article 4 of Law 4223/2013, Sections C’, D’ and E’ are added as follows:
“C. Calculation of tax on the total value per right in rem on property.
For rights on real estate, tax is calculated on the total value per right in rem on property, as reflected in the declaration real estate data of article 23 of Law 3427/2005 (A’ 312), according to the following scale:
Range of total property value – Tax rate per value tier:
0.01- 400,000 0%
400,000 ,01-500,000 0.20%
500,000,01-600,000 0.30%
600,000.01-700,000 0.40%
700,000.01-800,000 0.50%
800,000.01-900,000 0.60%
900,000.01-1,000,000 0.70%
1,000,000.01-2,000,000 0.90%
>=2,000,000.01 1.00%
The tax is calculated on the total value of 100% of the full ownership of the property, as this right is indicated in the statement of property details, it is reduced based on the co-ownership factor of par. 3 of article 32 of Law 3842/2010 (A’ 58), as long as there is co-ownership in the full or partial ownership, and it is divided according to paragraph 9 of the article
- The value of the previous paragraph is calculated according to the third and fourth paragraphs of Section E’.
The this Section applies, as long as the total value of the taxable person’s immovable property, as calculated on the basis of Section E’, exceeds three hundred thousand (300,000) euros…”.
E. Increase of the tax of natural persons according to the total value of the property.
EN.F.I.A. of natural persons resulting from the application of this article, is increased according to the total value of the immovable property as follows:
a) for the value of immovable property up to six hundred and fifty thousand (650,000) euros, at a rate of five percent (5%),
b) for the value of real estate up to eight hundred thousand (800,000) euros, at a rate ten percent (10%),
c) for real estate value up to one million (1,000,000) euros, at a rate of fifteen percent (15%) ),
d) for real estate value of one million and one minute (1,000,000.01) euros or more, at a rate of twenty percent (20% ).
The increase in accordance with the provisions of the previous paragraph is applied, as long as the total value of the real estate exceeds five hundred thousand (500,000) euros.
|
Table of additional charges ENFIA 2022 in addition to the main tax on *Property owners over €400,000 (with property over €300,000) and * Owners of property with a total value of more than €500,000 |
|||
|
Objective Value Property based on ENFIA calculation |
Module C tax on every property above €400,000 |
Unit E’ tax on property over €500,000 |
Total tax burden from sections C’ + E’ |
|
Up to €400,000 |
€0 |
0 € |
0 € |
|
€500,000 |
€200 |
€10 |
€210 |
|
€600,000 |
€500 |
€25 |
€525 |
|
€700,000 |
900 € |
90 € |
€990 |
|
€800,000 |
€1,400 |
€140 |
€1,540 |
|
€900,000 |
€2,000 |
€300 |
€2,300 |
|
€1,000,000 |
€2,700 |
€405 |
€3,105 |
|
€1,100,000 |
€3,600 |
€720 |
€4,320 |
|
€1,200,000 |
€4,500 |
€900 |
€5,400 |
|
€1,300,000 |
€5,400 |
€1,080 |
€6,480 |
|
€1,400,000 |
€6,300 |
€1,260 |
€7,560 |
|
€1,500,000 |
€7,200 |
€1,440 |
€8,640 |
|
€1,600,000 |
€8,100 |
€1,620 |
€9,720 |
|
€1,700,000 |
€9,000 |
€1,800 |
€10,800 |
|
€1,800,000 |
€9,900 |
€1,980 |
€11,880 |
|
€1,900,000 |
€10,800 |
€2,160 |
€12,960 |
|
€2,000,000 |
€11,700 |
€2,340 |
€14,040 |
Typical example of unconstitutional inequality of tax burden between taxpayers with equal assets:
Taxpayer A’ has 10 apartments over which he has 100% full ownership right, worth 100,000 euros each (T.Z. 2,000 euros, S.E. 1.50, standard area 79.37 sq.m., medium-sized building, average 2nd floor, 30 years old) i.e. total value of ENFIA 10 x 100,000 euros = 1,000,000 euros.
Taxpayer B owns in the same area a building with ten apartments without horizontal ownership on which he has 100% full ownership rights (G.Z. 2,000 euros, G.E. 1.50, total area 583.00 sq.m ., medium building, average floor 3′, 30 years) worth ENFIAsimilarly 1,000,000 euros.
Main tax (sections A ‘ and B’):
Taxpayer A’: 10 x 296.61 euros = 2,996.10 euros – Taxpayer B’: 2,178.67 euros.
In addition to the above tax, the above taxpayers will pay tax on the total value per real estate right (section C’) as follows:
Taxpayer A ‘: 0 euros – Taxpayer B’: 2,700 euros!
(which is imposed based on a scale when the value of 100% of the full ownership of the property exceeds 400,000 euros and the total value of the taxpayer’s immovable property exceeds 300,000 euros).
End of the sum of tax (sections A’, B’ and C’) a 15% tax surcharge will be imposed because both taxpayers have a total real estate value of 1,000,000 euros, with the result that their total final tax is as follows:
Taxpayer A’: (2,996.10 euros + 0 euros) x 1.15 =3,445.52 euros.
Taxpayer B’: (2,178.67 euros + 2,700 euros) x 1.15 =5,610.47 euros…
Consequently the owner of one right in rem pays 63% more tax than the owner of 10 rights of equal total value!
What the Constitution of Greece provides:
Article 4.
- Greeks are equal before the law.
- Greek men and women have equal rights and obligations. ………… em>
Article 21.
- The family, as the foundation of the preservation and advancement of the Nation, as well as marriage, motherhood and childhood are under the protection of the State. >
The view of the Scientific Parliamentary Service
In its report of 22.3.2022 on the above provision, the Scientific Service of the Parliament pointed out the following verbatim:
“It should be noted that, regardless of the fact that the new regulations lead to a lower tax burden for most taxpayers (see in relation to the Report of the State General Accountant and the Special Report of article 75 par. 3 of the Constitution accompanying the bill), the reduction of the tax is disproportionate in favor of the owners of many properties of lower value, in relation to the owners of a few properties of higher value, in the sense that two taxpayers, whose property has the same total taxable value, they end up paying a different amount of Section C tax, depending on the number of properties they own. For example, a taxpayer who owns the full ownership of a property with a taxable value of 2,000,000.00 euros, will be required to pay Section C΄ tax in the amount of 11,700.00 euros, while another who owns the full ownership of five properties with a taxable value of EUR 400,000.00 each (and a total taxable value of EUR 2,000,000.00), will not pay Section C tax. The above differentiation of the tax burden, depending on the number of properties owned by the taxpayer, raises concerns about its compatibility with the principle of tax capacity.”
The conclusion
*The new ENFIA introduces an inconvenient and completely unjustified discrimination between taxpayers with assets of equal value, but with a different number of properties, since the tax reduction (where it exists ) is disproportionately in favor of the owners of many properties of lesser value, and at the expense of the owners of assets of greater value, for many of whom, due to this distinction, tax burdens are not only disproportionate compared to others, but also multiples of previous years.
*The new ENFIA introduces an unequal distribution of tax burdens, incommensurate, unjustified and disproportionate to the strengths of each, i.e. their tax capacity which in this case results from the total value of their assets, considering that those who have fewer assets that exceed the limit of €400,000 have a greater tax capacity than those who have more, without this arise or be documented in any way.
* The new ENFIA unjustifiably and predatorily overtaxes the family property, multiplying the tax burden of its members under the pretext of avoiding its multiple division among family members.
The process of challenging the charge. “Difficult appeals” against the acts of Administrative Determination of ENFIA. is described in detail in the decisions of the AADE with numbers 1064/2017 for single-file appeals in general, and with number 1076/2018 for their electronic submission to the D.O.Y. which is provided for, and which is as follows:
- They should, with the help of their legal and tax advisors, draw up and submit to competent D.O.Y. of their taxation, in-depth “individual appeals” of article 63 of Law 4174/2013 (Special Administrative Procedure – Indivisible appeal), before the Dispute Resolution Division of A.A.D.E., with a request to review the acts of Administrative Tax determination which have been communicated to them through their posting on the AADE website.. Especially those who are under the FAE of Athens, the D.O.Y. Psychiko and Cholargo Attica and in the D.O.Y. of Ampelokipon Ionia Thessaloniki, they can also submit them electronically, through the application of the AADE.
- The unequivocal appeal is brought within a disruptive period of thirty (30) days starting from the notification of the act or the occurrence of the omission, i.e. no later than Friday 10.6.2022. Especially for residents abroad, the deadline is sixty (60) days).
- If they are unable to pay the exorbitant amount requested of them, they have the right to simultaneously submit a request to suspend payment of 50% of the amount owed to them imputed. Otherwise they will have to pay their monthly installments within the deadline, but not the total tax, since there is no deduction for its lump sum. They comply with the competent tax authority and electronic folder (on an optical disc – CD or USB, etc.), which are included in magnetic form and in any readable file format: a) submitted visual appeal; (b) the request for suspension in the event of an independent submission, (c) The documents and supporting documents cited, accompanied by a responsible statement of article 8 of Law 1599/1986, stating the precise content of the data of the electronic file. of the request, may request new information and clarifications by the applicants, in writing or even orally. of the appeal to the competent tax authority, which is suspended between 1 to 31 August. In any case, the decision on the appeal also contains the final tax liability of the debtor, the amount charged and the deadline for payment. Tax Authority, the Department of Disputes Solving shall justify this decision sufficiently by legal or even real allegations. If the act is canceled for reasons of formal misdemeanor, the competent tax authority shall re -act in accordance with the decision of the Dispute Resolution Directorate (Article 63 (6)).
- if Within the above -mentioned deadline, no decision is issued, then it is considered that the appeal has been deemed to have been rejected by the Department of Disputes and the debtor has been aware of this rejection at the expiration of the above 120 -day deadline. In this case, the Dispute Resolution Department shall inform the competent tax authority of its own actions. A copy of the decision, which is an enforceable title, is also directly sent to the competent tax authority for its own actions. Through their lawyer to file appeals to the competent Administrative Court of First Instance of their place of taxation, requesting the cancellation of the act concerning them, for the reasons referred to in their appeal. Administrative Courts of the country, their lawyers may be requested to carry out a “pilot trial” by the CoE, which will rule on the constitutionality of the relevant provision of the section c. Of Article 43 par. 4916/2022.
Text Text Appeal Text
Posted on our website POMIDA www.pomida.gr if there is no immediate and substantial corrective intervention on his part Ministry of Finance, which includes the already posted clearances with the outrageous charges. /div>
