|
|
|
|
|
|
by ftrobro
830 days ago
|
|
|
Regarding electricity tax returns, not making the names public was a very good idea because of course some newspapers had headlines like "Look at how high tax returns some rich bastards got, it's a scandal, they could never use that much electricity just in their private homes!" the day after the anonymized sums of the tax returns were made public. Which just showed the ignorance of those journalists, because private taxes are much higher than corporate taxes so why would anyone want to pay privately for electricity used by a company? Nobody applied for tax returns, the sums were based on how much they had paid in electricity taxes. And companies got the tax returns too, just a few months later. One of those who got high private tax returns came out publicly and explained that his company was of the type "enskild firma" which means that it uses his person number, it's not a limited company. And apparently Skatteverket had treated all companies of that type as if they were private citizens. But of course most people just remember headlines, so if the headline had been "Look at person XX, that rich bastard got this much in tax returns!" you had probably remembered that but not the later explanation that it was his company that got tax returns. |
|
|
Many mechanisms could have worked for this purpose. A fixed amount for instance. Or an upper limit on a tax cut. Remember, the idea was to keep a typical home warm.
Instead there was a tax cut with no upper limit. So the affluent heating outdoor pools in the middle of winter also got relief, not just home-owners on the brink of ruin trying to heat their old house. In the big scheme of things, probably not a big deal, but interventions by the state should appear (and be) as fair as possible, lest people will loose faith in the system.