Is There a Special Enforced Tax Collection Regime Under the ECtHR Case Law?

Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.54648/ecta2021005
Barış Bahçeci
{"title":"Is There a Special Enforced Tax Collection Regime Under the ECtHR Case Law?","authors":"Barış Bahçeci","doi":"10.54648/ecta2021005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the extent to which the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) takes into account the privileged nature of tax claims in enforced collection proceedings. Conducted within the framework of the right to property, the aim is to find a response to this question: Does the ECtHR case law allow for a special regime in enforced debt collection proceedings? A definitive answer to such a question requires a comparison between Court judgments on tax debts and non-tax debts. Under both the lawfulness and legitimate aims tests, no distinction appears between these two types of debt. On the other hand, under the proportionality test, the Court generally grants a wide margin of appreciation to States Parties. In this respect, two different dimensions are encountered, namely, the tax collector versus tax debtor and the tax collector versus other creditors. While the ECtHR does not allow differences between the collection regimes of non-tax debts in the former relationship, it appears that in the latter, the Court maintains the privileged status granted to the tax collector in domestic law. However, this privileged status is not unique to tax debts. Therefore, the article concludes that there is no special status for the tax debt enforcement regime under a comparison with non-tax debts.\nTax information reporting, Digital platform, Sharing economy, Gig economy, OECD, European Commission","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2021005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the extent to which the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) takes into account the privileged nature of tax claims in enforced collection proceedings. Conducted within the framework of the right to property, the aim is to find a response to this question: Does the ECtHR case law allow for a special regime in enforced debt collection proceedings? A definitive answer to such a question requires a comparison between Court judgments on tax debts and non-tax debts. Under both the lawfulness and legitimate aims tests, no distinction appears between these two types of debt. On the other hand, under the proportionality test, the Court generally grants a wide margin of appreciation to States Parties. In this respect, two different dimensions are encountered, namely, the tax collector versus tax debtor and the tax collector versus other creditors. While the ECtHR does not allow differences between the collection regimes of non-tax debts in the former relationship, it appears that in the latter, the Court maintains the privileged status granted to the tax collector in domestic law. However, this privileged status is not unique to tax debts. Therefore, the article concludes that there is no special status for the tax debt enforcement regime under a comparison with non-tax debts. Tax information reporting, Digital platform, Sharing economy, Gig economy, OECD, European Commission
分享
查看原文
《欧洲人权法院判例法》下是否有特别的强制征税制度?
本文考察了欧洲人权法院(ECtHR)在多大程度上考虑到强制征收诉讼中税收索赔的特权性质。在财产权的框架内进行,目的是找到对这个问题的回答:《欧洲人权法院判例法》是否允许在强制债务催收程序中采用特别制度?要明确回答这个问题,需要比较法院对税收债务和非税收债务的判决。在合法性和正当目的测试下,这两种类型的债务之间似乎没有区别。另一方面,根据相称性标准,法院一般给予缔约国广泛的升值余地。在这方面,遇到了两个不同的维度,即税收征收者与税收债务人和税收征收者与其他债权人。虽然欧洲人权法院不允许在前一种关系中的非税债务征收制度之间存在差异,但在后一种关系中,法院似乎维持了国内法中给予收税人员的特权地位。然而,这种特权地位并不是税收债务所独有的。因此,本文认为,与非税债相比,税债执行制度并没有特殊的地位。税务信息报告,数字平台,共享经济,零工经济,经合组织,欧盟委员会
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信