Skuldsanering - ur ett skatterättsligt perspektiv
(2017) JURM02 20172Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Skuldsaneringsinstitutet kom till för att hjälpa överskuldsatta människor att lösa sina ekonomiska problem när det till synes inte fanns någon annan utväg. Den första svenska skuldsaneringslagen tillkom år 1994 för att möta de behov som bankkrisen under början av 1990-talet hade skapat. Efter det har skuldsaneringsförfarandet utvecklats och förenklats, och förra året kom den tredje versionen av skuldsaneringslagen. Behovet av skuldsanering är stort och blir större för var år som går.
Uppsatsen belyser de fall när gäldenären som ansöker om skuldsanering har, eller kommer att få, skatteskulder. Och hur detta påverkar bedömningen av huruvida hen är kvalificerat insolvent eller inte, samt om det är skäligt att hen beviljas skuldsanering.... (More) - Skuldsaneringsinstitutet kom till för att hjälpa överskuldsatta människor att lösa sina ekonomiska problem när det till synes inte fanns någon annan utväg. Den första svenska skuldsaneringslagen tillkom år 1994 för att möta de behov som bankkrisen under början av 1990-talet hade skapat. Efter det har skuldsaneringsförfarandet utvecklats och förenklats, och förra året kom den tredje versionen av skuldsaneringslagen. Behovet av skuldsanering är stort och blir större för var år som går.
Uppsatsen belyser de fall när gäldenären som ansöker om skuldsanering har, eller kommer att få, skatteskulder. Och hur detta påverkar bedömningen av huruvida hen är kvalificerat insolvent eller inte, samt om det är skäligt att hen beviljas skuldsanering. Den behandlar även rättsfall som berör tre olika potentiella avslagsgrunder när det kommer till bedömningen av om det är skäligt att bevilja skuldsanering, och dessa är skönstaxering, ställföreträdaransvar enligt skatteförfarandelagen och illojalt beteende.
I analyskapitlet förs en diskussion utifrån den problematik som uppkommer särskilt för skatteskulder och de rättsfall som har redogjorts för inom respektive område. Det framkommer att skatteskulder på grund av sina särskilda preskriptionsregler kan påverka huruvida en gäldenär som ansöker om skuldsanering anses vara kvalificerat insolvent. Att skatteskulders uppkomsttidpunkt och Skatteverkets kvittningsrätt kan ställa till bekymmer om den inträffar efter ett beslut om inledande av skuldsanering men innan det slutgiltiga beslutet har vunnit laga kraft. Slutlig skatt och latenta skatteskulder kan dessutom i värsta fall kan leda till att en skuldsanering upphävs.
När vi kommer till huruvida det är skäligt att bevilja skuldsanering så ser rättsväsendet inte med blida ögon på skatteskulder som har uppkommit genom skönstaxering, ställföreträdaransvar eller illojalt beteende. Vid skönstaxering krävs det nästan alltid att gäldenären först ordnar upp sina mellanhavanden med Skatteverket, medan det vid ställföreträdaransvar och illojalt beteende bör ha gått en ansenlig tid från det att skulderna uppstod till dess skuldsanering kan bli aktuellt. (Less) - Abstract
- The institute of debt reconstruction was founded as a last resort to help people who are heavily in debt to get their finances in order. The first law of debt reconstruction was founded in 1994 to meet the needs created by the banking crisis in the early 1990’s. After that the debt reconstruction procedure has evolved and simplified, and last year came the third version of the law of debt reconstruction. The need for debt reconstruction is great and gets greater for every year that passes.
The paper highlights cases where the debtor that applies for debt reconstruction have, or is about to receive, tax debts. And how this affects the assessment of the debtors’ possibility to pay their debts in foreseeable time and that if the debt... (More) - The institute of debt reconstruction was founded as a last resort to help people who are heavily in debt to get their finances in order. The first law of debt reconstruction was founded in 1994 to meet the needs created by the banking crisis in the early 1990’s. After that the debt reconstruction procedure has evolved and simplified, and last year came the third version of the law of debt reconstruction. The need for debt reconstruction is great and gets greater for every year that passes.
The paper highlights cases where the debtor that applies for debt reconstruction have, or is about to receive, tax debts. And how this affects the assessment of the debtors’ possibility to pay their debts in foreseeable time and that if the debt reconstruction is reasonable with regards to their personal and financial circumstances. It also includes cases that regards three different types of potential rejection grounds when it comes to the assessment of the debt reconstructions reasonability. And these are discretionary assessment, liability of a representative according to the Tax Procedures Act and unfair behaviour.
In the analysis chapter a discussion is held on the basis of the problems that arises specially for tax debt and the cases that are accounted for in each field. It reveals that tax debts, because of their specific rules of limitation, can influence the assessment of the debtors, that apply for debt reconstruction, possibility to pay their debts in foreseeable time. That the occurrence time of tax debts and the Tax Agency set-off right can cause problems if it occurs after a decision to initiate debt reconstruction but before the final decision has gained legal force. Final taxes and latent taxes can also, in worst case scenario, lead to a cancellation of the debt reconstruction.
The courts are not lenient on tax debts that have their origin in discretionary assessment, liability of a representative or unfair behaviour when it comes to the assessment of the reasonability of debt reconstruction. In case of discretionary assessment, the court almost always requires that the debtors first settle their dealings with the Tax Agency, and in cases of liability of a representative and unfair behaviour a reasonable time should have gone by before a debt reconstruction may be considered. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8929436
- author
- Almqvist, Emelie LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Debt reconstruction - from a Tax Law perspective
- course
- JURM02 20172
- year
- 2017
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Skatterätt, fordringsrätt, exekutionsrätt, skuldsanering, skuldsaneringslagen, skönstaxering, ställföreträdaransvar
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8929436
- date added to LUP
- 2018-01-22 13:37:29
- date last changed
- 2018-01-22 13:37:29
@misc{8929436,
abstract = {{The institute of debt reconstruction was founded as a last resort to help people who are heavily in debt to get their finances in order. The first law of debt reconstruction was founded in 1994 to meet the needs created by the banking crisis in the early 1990’s. After that the debt reconstruction procedure has evolved and simplified, and last year came the third version of the law of debt reconstruction. The need for debt reconstruction is great and gets greater for every year that passes.
The paper highlights cases where the debtor that applies for debt reconstruction have, or is about to receive, tax debts. And how this affects the assessment of the debtors’ possibility to pay their debts in foreseeable time and that if the debt reconstruction is reasonable with regards to their personal and financial circumstances. It also includes cases that regards three different types of potential rejection grounds when it comes to the assessment of the debt reconstructions reasonability. And these are discretionary assessment, liability of a representative according to the Tax Procedures Act and unfair behaviour.
In the analysis chapter a discussion is held on the basis of the problems that arises specially for tax debt and the cases that are accounted for in each field. It reveals that tax debts, because of their specific rules of limitation, can influence the assessment of the debtors, that apply for debt reconstruction, possibility to pay their debts in foreseeable time. That the occurrence time of tax debts and the Tax Agency set-off right can cause problems if it occurs after a decision to initiate debt reconstruction but before the final decision has gained legal force. Final taxes and latent taxes can also, in worst case scenario, lead to a cancellation of the debt reconstruction.
The courts are not lenient on tax debts that have their origin in discretionary assessment, liability of a representative or unfair behaviour when it comes to the assessment of the reasonability of debt reconstruction. In case of discretionary assessment, the court almost always requires that the debtors first settle their dealings with the Tax Agency, and in cases of liability of a representative and unfair behaviour a reasonable time should have gone by before a debt reconstruction may be considered.}},
author = {{Almqvist, Emelie}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Skuldsanering - ur ett skatterättsligt perspektiv}},
year = {{2017}},
}