Advanced

Avdrag för socialavgifter inom EU

Altenby, Therése (2008)
Department of Law
Abstract
Since Sweden on January 1th 1995 became one of the Member States in the European Union, the co-operation in some areas has become a part of Swedish national law. One of these areas is the EC. EC is a legal co-operation with its own legal system and with a supranational purpose. In a conflict between EC-Law and national law, EC-Law always has the preference. Due to this, several verdicts from the ECJ, European Court of Justice, have had an influence on the Swedish legal system ever since Sweden became a member twelve years ago. Member States can not apply national law if it is in conflict with the EC-Treaty or the Case law of the ECJ. The main aim of the European Union where from the very beginning to generate a common economic market... (More)
Since Sweden on January 1th 1995 became one of the Member States in the European Union, the co-operation in some areas has become a part of Swedish national law. One of these areas is the EC. EC is a legal co-operation with its own legal system and with a supranational purpose. In a conflict between EC-Law and national law, EC-Law always has the preference. Due to this, several verdicts from the ECJ, European Court of Justice, have had an influence on the Swedish legal system ever since Sweden became a member twelve years ago. Member States can not apply national law if it is in conflict with the EC-Treaty or the Case law of the ECJ. The main aim of the European Union where from the very beginning to generate a common economic market between the Member States, where citizens of these states as a general rule would have a personal right to move between States. A presumption for this to work is the protection of the free inner market of gods, services, persons and capital&semic also known as the four freedoms. This essay will focus on the freedom to move for individuals, or more specific, for workers, which is stated in article 39 of the EC-Treaty. The general rule is that no worker in the Union should be discriminated by means of nationality. Said in a simple but explanatory way, discrimination could be described as the use of different rules on equal situations and the same rule on different situations. A problem often arisen in the areas of tax and social security is the Member States interest in keeping the inner systematic of their tax-systems intact. This is understandable, but does not fit together with the European Unions goals on a common economic market. An example of a situation where workers are treated differently in Sweden are when a person from another Member State is send out to work here for 1-2 years, but still belongs to the other States social security system. Such a person is obligated to pay taxes in Sweden, but shall pay social security fees in his Home State. Workers which are comprised by Sweden's social security system are obligated to pay a ''general pension fee'', for which they nowadays get a one hundred percent tax-reduction. Workers in Sweden which are comprised by another States social security system, on the other hand, are only permitted a common tax-allowance for their obligatory social security fees. The question is if this agrees with EC-Law. In a fairly recent judgement from the ECJ, case C-512/04 Blanckaert, the Court has made some statements which are of interest for the question mentioned above. In the Blanckaert-Case, the Court accepted an individual treatment when it came to a citizen of another Member State, who could not get tax-allowance that was based on the national social security system. The circumstances in the Blanckaert-Case does however differ from the scenario which I have presented, why there is reason to believe that the Court would come to another conclusion in our case. This thesis is supported by other verdicts from the Court. Due to the fact that tax reduction for the general pension fee is reserved for those who belongs to the Swedish social security system, Swedish citizens is often more favoured than citizens from other Member States. Individuals with respectively without Swedish domicile are thus treated differently when it comes to taxes. The less advantageous treatment of in Sweden non-resident individuals may cause workers to being less willingly to move between Member States in the way that article 39 of the EC-Treaty intended them to. Also, workers who are non-resident in Sweden but draws the main amount of their income here must be regarded in the same position as workers who also have their residence in Sweden, since the former does not have any ability to take advantage of the tax-allowances in his or her domicile State. Case C-279/93 Schumacker speaks on behalf of this opinion. Since different rules can not be applied on equal situations, Swedish Law is in conflict with EC-Law. I have come to the conclusion that the Blanckaert case should be interpreted in a way that states that there is normally an objective difference between an individual who belongs to the social security system in a Member State, and an individual who does not belong to the same system. However, if the individual draws his or her main income in that Member State, he or she should be considered in the same situation as an individual who has domicile there, and therefore belongs to the social security system of that Member State. The Swedish set of laws, which, when it comes to the matter of tax reduction, differ in the treatment of citizens from other Member States who come to work here, is therefore in conflict with EC-Law. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Altenby, Therése
supervisor
organization
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
EG-rätt, Skatterätt, Socialrätt
language
Swedish
id
1555619
date added to LUP
2010-03-08 15:55:17
date last changed
2010-03-08 15:55:17
@misc{1555619,
  abstract     = {Since Sweden on January 1th 1995 became one of the Member States in the European Union, the co-operation in some areas has become a part of Swedish national law. One of these areas is the EC. EC is a legal co-operation with its own legal system and with a supranational purpose. In a conflict between EC-Law and national law, EC-Law always has the preference. Due to this, several verdicts from the ECJ, European Court of Justice, have had an influence on the Swedish legal system ever since Sweden became a member twelve years ago. Member States can not apply national law if it is in conflict with the EC-Treaty or the Case law of the ECJ. The main aim of the European Union where from the very beginning to generate a common economic market between the Member States, where citizens of these states as a general rule would have a personal right to move between States. A presumption for this to work is the protection of the free inner market of gods, services, persons and capital&semic also known as the four freedoms. This essay will focus on the freedom to move for individuals, or more specific, for workers, which is stated in article 39 of the EC-Treaty. The general rule is that no worker in the Union should be discriminated by means of nationality. Said in a simple but explanatory way, discrimination could be described as the use of different rules on equal situations and the same rule on different situations. A problem often arisen in the areas of tax and social security is the Member States interest in keeping the inner systematic of their tax-systems intact. This is understandable, but does not fit together with the European Unions goals on a common economic market. An example of a situation where workers are treated differently in Sweden are when a person from another Member State is send out to work here for 1-2 years, but still belongs to the other States social security system. Such a person is obligated to pay taxes in Sweden, but shall pay social security fees in his Home State. Workers which are comprised by Sweden's social security system are obligated to pay a ''general pension fee'', for which they nowadays get a one hundred percent tax-reduction. Workers in Sweden which are comprised by another States social security system, on the other hand, are only permitted a common tax-allowance for their obligatory social security fees. The question is if this agrees with EC-Law. In a fairly recent judgement from the ECJ, case C-512/04 Blanckaert, the Court has made some statements which are of interest for the question mentioned above. In the Blanckaert-Case, the Court accepted an individual treatment when it came to a citizen of another Member State, who could not get tax-allowance that was based on the national social security system. The circumstances in the Blanckaert-Case does however differ from the scenario which I have presented, why there is reason to believe that the Court would come to another conclusion in our case. This thesis is supported by other verdicts from the Court. Due to the fact that tax reduction for the general pension fee is reserved for those who belongs to the Swedish social security system, Swedish citizens is often more favoured than citizens from other Member States. Individuals with respectively without Swedish domicile are thus treated differently when it comes to taxes. The less advantageous treatment of in Sweden non-resident individuals may cause workers to being less willingly to move between Member States in the way that article 39 of the EC-Treaty intended them to. Also, workers who are non-resident in Sweden but draws the main amount of their income here must be regarded in the same position as workers who also have their residence in Sweden, since the former does not have any ability to take advantage of the tax-allowances in his or her domicile State. Case C-279/93 Schumacker speaks on behalf of this opinion. Since different rules can not be applied on equal situations, Swedish Law is in conflict with EC-Law. I have come to the conclusion that the Blanckaert case should be interpreted in a way that states that there is normally an objective difference between an individual who belongs to the social security system in a Member State, and an individual who does not belong to the same system. However, if the individual draws his or her main income in that Member State, he or she should be considered in the same situation as an individual who has domicile there, and therefore belongs to the social security system of that Member State. The Swedish set of laws, which, when it comes to the matter of tax reduction, differ in the treatment of citizens from other Member States who come to work here, is therefore in conflict with EC-Law.},
  author       = {Altenby, Therése},
  keyword      = {EG-rätt,Skatterätt,Socialrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Avdrag för socialavgifter inom EU},
  year         = {2008},
}