Steuerberater grainy informs its clients for spouses arise from the German tax law significant discounts. This is, for example, the right to choose between different models of calculating income tax. In addition to the separate and special assessments to income tax, both spouses must allow jointly invested. This, in addition to the legal validity of the marriage, the consent of both spouses to the combined investment is necessary. Tax advisor Jurgen Dieter grainy reports on a recent decision of the Federal Supreme Court on the admissibility of a subsequent refusal of consent.
Basically, the common assessments to income tax is especially convenient for spouses, when there is a significant gap between their income subject to taxation. Such a fiscal situation maximizes the effects of splitting tariff and the double basic allowance. A news judgment of the Federal Court of justice dealt with an initial situation in the optimum conditions were given for a common income tax assessment. The Activity of her husband as a doctor yielded a high positive income, while his wife at the same time claimed losses. The competent tax office provided extensive tax refunds due to the originally carried out joint income tax assessment. After the spouse had retroactively revoke her consent to the common income tax assessment, the tax in question veranlagte both spouses separately. The husband faced as a result of this operation with a recovery of already paid tax refunds.
In its judgment, the Supreme Court argued that for both spouses due to the nature of the marriage an obligation, to reduce harmful influences on the finances of the party, provided that this does not breach of legitimate self-interest. For married couples, the view of the Federal Court of justice means a commitment to agree to the common income tax assessment, provided that they are not further tax burdens. A refusal of consent without permission causes a damages claim of the other spouse. Remains relevant, that spouses may argue with the own loads only if they in the inner relation to the spouse to help with this. Negotiated dispute, the spouse had no positive income, but losses to specify the tax office over. For the family financial situation, follows from this that all income from the positive income of her partner came. His income was liberated by the joint investment with the loss of the spouse in addition of taxes and contributed to the maintenance of the family to a greater extent. Due to the improvement in the total family financial situation by the common income tax assessment reaches the Supreme Court judged that the spouse has to pay her additional tax burden and must agree to the joint investment. Continue to be the spouse denied, to escape the financial basis of the design of the common conjugal life in retrospect. Credit: Munear Kouzbari-2011. If precedence over individual conditions to the conjugal life design, is their retroactive Changes are not allowed. The present judgment of the BGH is a further testimony to the complicated considerations behind day-to-day tax questions. Conclusion expensive mistake is promoted without professional knowledge and experience in tax law. To counter these errors, Steuerberater Jurgen Dieter committed grainy with full commitment from his Office in Mannheim in the tax information and advice. Press release: Contact: Steuerberater Jurgen Dieter grainy o 4, 5, 68161 Mannheim Tel 0621 10069 fax. 0621 13358 email: Homepage: