Geert Noels wrote that more people needed to work in the private sector and that there was a need for more control over taxes and unjust benefits. According to him, new taxes were not necessary, but more courage was needed to tackle issues. #Werkgelegenheid #Belastingen #Uitkeringen (translated)
Mirjam152 challenged the reasoning that a lower VAT rate cost the government a lot of money. She compared it to the income a landlord misses out on by asking for a lower rent and sarcastically suggested that the VAT should then be raised to 30 percent and inheritance and gift taxes to 100 percent. According to her, people were already paying more than enough tax. The researchers defended a higher VAT rate for, among others, hairdressers, bicycle mechanics, and plasterers with the argument that a tight labor market could make services more expensive due to insufficient staff availability. Mirjam152 called that reasoning flawed and accused the researchers of having a political agenda and pandering to the government and the cabinet. #BTW #Belastingen #Overheid (translated)
Wouter Duyck wrote that he was a civil servant and author and had a company. According to him, the net tax on income from writing or performing was until recently 7.5 percent. Although the cost allowances had since been adjusted, he stated that writers and performers still only paid about 15 percent tax on income up to 77,000 euros. Duyck argued that many people who advocated higher taxes in newspapers fell under that scheme and wrote that he had never heard the system in the media being questioned. #belasting #fiscaliteit #auteurschap (translated)
Martin van Rooijen wrote that PRO was against almost everything according to him, but supported higher taxes. He mentioned a Box 3 rate of 49% instead of 36% and inheritance tax of 30% instead of 10%, and 40% instead of 20%. According to Van Rooijen, PRO was chasing people to Spain and Box 2. He also stated that PRO was for penalty payments and referred to a debate in the Senate on October 13, in which he mentioned De Telegraaf, NOS, NU.nl, and AD. https://t.co/Eei4G0rEac #Belastingen #Politiek #NL (translated)
Geert Noels stated that the richest 20% of the Belgian population paid 65% of wage taxes, compared to 7% by the lower half. According to him, those taxes financed social benefits and transfers that went back to the lower incomes. He wrote that the tax burden on the highest incomes could not rise further and noted that they had little time and organization to take to the streets. #belasting #socialeongelijkheid #economischbeleid (translated)
Forum for Democracy asked what the House of Representatives was occupied with and stated that it was not about solving the housing crisis, sending back immigrants, or lowering taxes, but about raising the rainbow flag. The party said that Tom Russcher had reacted to the situation. https://t.co/i40ShroMHg #TweedeKamer #Woningnood #Immigratie (translated)
Forum for Democracy stated that saving and building wealth in the Netherlands should no longer be penalized, as taxes were already too high according to the party. Milan Schenk explained why FVD wanted to completely abolish box 3. https://t.co/QCYiCjXTqx #Belastingen #Vermogen #Spaarzaamheid (translated)
Bert Slagter wrote that the VVD positioned itself with attention to entrepreneurs, but according to him, at the same time, it introduced box 3 rates that were excessively high, put director-majority shareholders under pressure with rules about loans to their private companies, and destroyed the cryptocurrency sector with the vab. According to Slagter, entrepreneurs wanted a reliable and predictable government, while he claimed that the VVD offered them an unpredictable fiscal policy. #ondernemers #belastingen #VVD (translated)
Frédéric De Gucht, as party chairman, is paid through a management company and clarifies: You do indeed pay taxes. #beveiliging #websites #onlineveiligheid (translated)
JA21 wrote that the Cabinet admitted to the left and rolled back reforms in social security according to the party. The party stated that the costs should be covered by reducing government spending, not by raising taxes. JA21 also reported that a motion by Michiel Hoogeveen had been adopted. #socialezekerheid #overheid #JA21 (translated)
Geert Noels stated that a study by Vooruit estimated the annual cost of corporate taxation at 4.2 to 4.7 billion euros, but according to him, due to significant errors, it actually amounted to about 1 billion euros. He argued that this cost could not be offset by higher taxes, which he believed would cause more harm than benefit; he advocated for better oversight of bogus self-employment. Noels identified the main mistake as the comparison between directors via a management company and employees. According to him, directors were legally self-employed and paid contributions up to a ceiling. This comparison would overestimate the estimate by more than 1 billion euros. Moreover, employer contributions were calculated based on the total labor cost instead of the gross salary, resulting in a calculation of 33 percent instead of 25 percent. Noels also disputed that there were four independent estimates: according to him, they used the same rates and distribution keys. He pointed out that estimate C assumed 24 billion euros in shifted profits, compared to about 15 billion euros in total profits in estimate A. Furthermore, factors such as the tax shift, energy crisis, inflation, the reform of corporate tax in 2017, and Pillar 2 were not included as explanations for the macro figures. Also, liquidation reserves of ordinary SMEs would have been counted as leaks. According to Noels, the study also did not take behavior effects into account, such as substitution, cessation, moving abroad, losses, or bankruptcies, and only included companies with profits. He therefore labeled the note as an unreliable basis for policy and believed that bogus self-employment should be addressed directly. Finally, he urged academics, journalists, and politicians to respect the facts when it came to entrepreneurs and risk-takers. #Vennootschapsbelasting #Economie #Belastingen (translated)
LVSV Gent wrote that Flemish people made up 60% of the population, paid 70% of the taxes, and accounted for 80% of the exports. According to the organization, 86% of all social benefits went to Francophones or non-Belgians. It stated that Flanders bore the burden but did not enjoy the benefits, and advocated for shielding the social security system. https://t.co/88dUPgOHXO #Vlaanderen #België #SocialeZekerheid #BE (translated)
Geert Noels wrote that he found it strange that there was less academic research done on this than on subjects like additional taxes and more equality. #onderzoek #gelijkheid #academisch (translated)
Rik Torfs suggested that, keeping the Jinnih Beels case in mind, a new law could be introduced that would significantly raise taxes, but only for Paul De Grauwe. #belasting #wetgeving #JinnihBeels (translated)
René Dercksen stated that an imam was appointed by the government and paid with tax money. He mentioned an amount of €7K per month and angrily asked Dilan Yesilgöz if people in The Hague were not in their right mind. https://t.co/XERvQnIr95 #Nederland #Politiek #Belastingen (translated)
Maurits Vande Reyde wrote that "unreliability" was the word he heard most often from people about their governments. He stated that it had been promised to lower inheritance tax by thousands of euros in 2024, but that promise was not fulfilled and was revoked just two years later. Additionally, the registration fees were supposed to be lowered in 2024, only to increase by 5,000 euros per home less than two years later. Vande Reyde said that a budget was presented as "balanced," while the debt, according to him, had risen sharply in recent years and would continue to do so in the coming years. He also referred to a long list of taxes for entrepreneurs, which he claimed was too extensive to enumerate. Not Trump, Putin, or the global economy, but what he deemed a completely unreliable government was the biggest source of mass discontent and anger among people, he wrote. #onbetrouwbaarheid #regering #belasting (translated)
Carine Knapen wrote that Belgium, the Netherlands, France, and Germany are, in her opinion, struggling with serious domestic crises, rising debts, higher taxes, unaffordable prices, and deindustrialization, while deliberately billions continue to flow to a country outside the EU. #crisis #schuld #deindustrialiseerder (translated)
Geert Noels regretted that De Tijd had again reported unilaterally on management companies during a crucial moment in the budget discussions. According to him, a management company was not a legal form, the number of them was unclear, and estimates were often exaggerated. He also wrote that people working through a company had less protection and accrued rights, such as no unemployment benefits or dismissal protection and a lower pension. Noels asserted that measures had already been taken to make this working method less attractive, including a higher minimum wage and an increase to 18% for VVPRbis and the liquidation reserve. According to him, some professions and responsibilities often made a company necessary. He further wrote that the tax burden was among the three highest in the EU, as were government expenditures, which he claimed amounted to 54% of GDP. The mentioned rate of 35% for management companies, according to Noels, applied as a marginal burden on profits above the minimum wage; with that wage included, the average burden according to him was rather around 37–39%. For employees, he stated that a tax burden of more than 50% applied for most only as a marginal rate. https://t.co/zDUhGzIC0w #BegripBegroting #Managementvennootschappen #Belastingen (translated)
Sander Sassen pressed a piece from Marianne Zw and wrote that he was 100% sure that many Dutch people had the same experience. According to him, they felt squeezed from all sides as taxpayers by increasingly higher taxes, which he believed needed to quench the government's hunger for money. https://t.co/2RwysMAxyD #belastingen #belastingdruk #Nederland (translated)
There is no money... for as good as nothing. At least, not for you and me; on the contrary: much more taxes and more and more people who cannot pay their bills. But for nonprofits like Avansa, there is easily 13.4 million Euros... To do what? “Uh... we do things.” Like? - “A number of years ago, visited several nursing homes; - Findings prepared - Written down in a little book. - Oh, and here and there organized a nature walk.” 13.4 MILLION EUROS. 🤦♂️ 1.16 MILLION EUROS PER MONTH…🤦♂️ The working person is being so incredibly screwed over. Unbelievable. #belastingen #ongelijkheid #financiën (translated)
