Beskattning av bostäder - Två alternativ för ett mer likformigt och neutralt system
(2018) LAGF03 20182Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Skatter är något som debatteras både ofta och flitigt. En skatt som verkar väcka lite extra mycket känslor är den löpande beskattningen av bostäder. Nationalekonomer ser positivt på skatten eftersom det är en så stabil skattebas, medan de boende motsätter sig den eftersom ägandet inte skapar något tillskott av likvida medel att betala skatten med.
På senare tid har frågan lyfts igen genom att SNS och ESO publicerat varsin rapport med förslag på nya system för kapitalbeskattning, där bland annat ökad löpande beskattning av bostäder har betonats. Jag har i denna uppsats sammanfattat gällande rätt och de båda förslagen för att kunna jämföra dem utifrån de principer som finns för god skattelagstiftning.
I gällande rätt beskattas bostäder... (More) - Skatter är något som debatteras både ofta och flitigt. En skatt som verkar väcka lite extra mycket känslor är den löpande beskattningen av bostäder. Nationalekonomer ser positivt på skatten eftersom det är en så stabil skattebas, medan de boende motsätter sig den eftersom ägandet inte skapar något tillskott av likvida medel att betala skatten med.
På senare tid har frågan lyfts igen genom att SNS och ESO publicerat varsin rapport med förslag på nya system för kapitalbeskattning, där bland annat ökad löpande beskattning av bostäder har betonats. Jag har i denna uppsats sammanfattat gällande rätt och de båda förslagen för att kunna jämföra dem utifrån de principer som finns för god skattelagstiftning.
I gällande rätt beskattas bostäder både löpande och för vinst vid försäljning. Den löpande skatten baseras för både småhus och bostadsrätter på ett taxeringsvärde som sedan en viss procent av tas ut som skatt upp till ett takbelopp. Taxeringsvärdet, procentsatsen och takbeloppen skiljer mellan småhus och bostadsrätter, men beskattningen av vinst från försäljning är i stort sett samma.
ESO-rapporten ”Yes-box!” och SNS Konjunkturrådsrapport lägger mycket vikt vid förslag som gör lagstiftningen mer likformig och neutral. De anser till exempel att takbeloppen skapar orättvisa genom att de med högt värderade bostäder beskattas procentuellt lägre än de med lågt värderade bostäder. Dessutom anser de att förhållandet mellan småhus och bostadsrätter inte är neutralt vilket kan påverka beslut om vilken typ av boende man väljer att investera i.
De båda rapporterna föreslår en rad förändringar för att göra lagstiftningen mer likformig och neutral, vilket de verkar lyckas med. Dock är det tyvärr inte så att bara för att ett förslag är bättre ur enbart juridisk synpunkt så bör det införas. Det kan till exempel uppstå problem genom att höjd löpande beskattning skapar likviditetsproblem eftersom skatten inte svarar mot en ökad inkomst, vilket i sin tur kan leda till att folk tvingas flytta för att ha råd att betala skatten, något som såklart ingen önskar. (Less) - Abstract
- Taxes are something that is debated both frequently and diligently. A tax that seems to spark some extra emotion is the continuos taxation of housing. Economists look favorably on the tax because it is such a stable tax base, while the residents oppose it because ownership does not create any contribution of liquid funds to pay the tax.
Recently, the issue has been raised again by the fact that SNS and ESO each published a report with proposals of new systems for capital taxation, where, among other things, increased continuos taxation of housing has been emphasized. In this paper I have summarized the applicable law and the two proposals in order to be able to compare them based on the principles of good tax legislation.
In current... (More) - Taxes are something that is debated both frequently and diligently. A tax that seems to spark some extra emotion is the continuos taxation of housing. Economists look favorably on the tax because it is such a stable tax base, while the residents oppose it because ownership does not create any contribution of liquid funds to pay the tax.
Recently, the issue has been raised again by the fact that SNS and ESO each published a report with proposals of new systems for capital taxation, where, among other things, increased continuos taxation of housing has been emphasized. In this paper I have summarized the applicable law and the two proposals in order to be able to compare them based on the principles of good tax legislation.
In current law, housing is taxed both on a continuos basis and for profit upon sale. The continuos tax for both small houses and tenant-owned apartments is based on an assess value which is then taken a percentage of as a tax, up to a upper limit. The tax assess value, the percentage and the upper limits differ between single-family homes and tenant-owned apartments, but the taxation of profit from sales is largely the same.
The ESO report "Yes-box!" and SNS Konjunkturråds report attaches great importance to proposals that make the legislation more uniform and neutral. They consider, for example, that the upper limits create injustice because the high-valued housing is taxed in percentage terms lower than those with low-value housing. In addition, they believe that the relationship between single-family homes and tenant-owned apartments is not neutral, which can distort decisions about investing in a single-family home or a tenant-owned apartment.
The reports suggest a bunch of changes wth the purpose of makeing the legislation more uniform and neutral, and appear to be successful. However, it is unfortunately not true that just because a proposal is better from a legal point of view, it should be introduced. For example, problems may arise due to increased continuos taxation, creating liquidity problems as the tax does not correspond to an increased income, which in turn can lead to people being forced to move in order to afford to pay the tax, something that of course nobody wants. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8965589
- author
- Sandberg, Niklas LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20182
- year
- 2018
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Skatterätt, beskattning av bostäder
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8965589
- date added to LUP
- 2019-03-11 11:18:25
- date last changed
- 2019-03-11 11:18:25
@misc{8965589,
abstract = {{Taxes are something that is debated both frequently and diligently. A tax that seems to spark some extra emotion is the continuos taxation of housing. Economists look favorably on the tax because it is such a stable tax base, while the residents oppose it because ownership does not create any contribution of liquid funds to pay the tax.
Recently, the issue has been raised again by the fact that SNS and ESO each published a report with proposals of new systems for capital taxation, where, among other things, increased continuos taxation of housing has been emphasized. In this paper I have summarized the applicable law and the two proposals in order to be able to compare them based on the principles of good tax legislation.
In current law, housing is taxed both on a continuos basis and for profit upon sale. The continuos tax for both small houses and tenant-owned apartments is based on an assess value which is then taken a percentage of as a tax, up to a upper limit. The tax assess value, the percentage and the upper limits differ between single-family homes and tenant-owned apartments, but the taxation of profit from sales is largely the same.
The ESO report "Yes-box!" and SNS Konjunkturråds report attaches great importance to proposals that make the legislation more uniform and neutral. They consider, for example, that the upper limits create injustice because the high-valued housing is taxed in percentage terms lower than those with low-value housing. In addition, they believe that the relationship between single-family homes and tenant-owned apartments is not neutral, which can distort decisions about investing in a single-family home or a tenant-owned apartment.
The reports suggest a bunch of changes wth the purpose of makeing the legislation more uniform and neutral, and appear to be successful. However, it is unfortunately not true that just because a proposal is better from a legal point of view, it should be introduced. For example, problems may arise due to increased continuos taxation, creating liquidity problems as the tax does not correspond to an increased income, which in turn can lead to people being forced to move in order to afford to pay the tax, something that of course nobody wants.}},
author = {{Sandberg, Niklas}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Beskattning av bostäder - Två alternativ för ett mer likformigt och neutralt system}},
year = {{2018}},
}