Advanced

Passivitetsrätten i skatteutredningar

Schmidt, Henrik LU (2012) JURM02 20121
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Det svenska skattesystemet vilar på uppfattningen att den skattskyldige har en principiell uppgiftsskyldighet vilken Skatteverket ytterst sett kan driva igenom med hjälp av vitesföreläggande.

I Skatteverkets kontrollverksamhet kan det uppkomma misstanke om att den skattskyldige har lämnat oriktiga uppgifter vilket kan leda till att skattetillägg tas ut och att åtal om skattebrott inleds. Då uppgifter som lämnas i en skatteutredning får användas i både en skattetilläggsprocess och i en brottsmålsprocess blir konflikten mellan den skattskyldiges uppgiftsskyldighet och hans intresse av att inte lämna potentiellt belastande uppgifter tydlig.

I Europadomstolens praxis avseende artikel 6 i Europakonventionen finns det en rätt till... (More)
Det svenska skattesystemet vilar på uppfattningen att den skattskyldige har en principiell uppgiftsskyldighet vilken Skatteverket ytterst sett kan driva igenom med hjälp av vitesföreläggande.

I Skatteverkets kontrollverksamhet kan det uppkomma misstanke om att den skattskyldige har lämnat oriktiga uppgifter vilket kan leda till att skattetillägg tas ut och att åtal om skattebrott inleds. Då uppgifter som lämnas i en skatteutredning får användas i både en skattetilläggsprocess och i en brottsmålsprocess blir konflikten mellan den skattskyldiges uppgiftsskyldighet och hans intresse av att inte lämna potentiellt belastande uppgifter tydlig.

I Europadomstolens praxis avseende artikel 6 i Europakonventionen finns det en rätt till tystnad och en rätt att inte behöva belasta sig själv, en passivitetsrätt, för den som är anklagad för brott i konventionens mening. Mot bakgrund av detta finns det även en motsvarande rätt för den skattskyldige enligt svensk skattelagstiftning.

Syftet med den här uppsatsen är att belysa passivitetsrätten, dess betydelse i svenska skatteutredningar och de särskilda problem som är förknippade med rätten på skatteområdet. En del i detta är att åskådliggöra passivitetsrättens syfte och på vilka grunder den kan motiveras. En annan viktig del i detta är att klargöra passivitetsrättens innehåll och omfattning i Europakonventionen och i svensk skattelagstiftning.

I uppsatsen argumenteras för att medan Europakonventionen innehåller en rätt att inte besvara belastande frågor kan det ifrågasättas om det kan utläsas en rätt att inte tillhandahålla belastande dokument och andra handlingar. I detta avseende erbjuder passivitetsrätten i svensk skattelagstiftning ett mer omfattande skydd. Sannolikt inträder även passivitetsrätten vid en tidigare tidpunkt i svensk rätt.

I uppsatsen argumenteras vidare för att medan en rätt att inte behöva svara på belastande frågor har en viktig rättssäkerhetsfunktion kan inte detsamma sägas om en rätt att inte behöva tillhandahålla belastande handlingar. Med hänsyn till exempelvis den personliga integriteten, individens autonomi eller mänsklig värdighet kan det dock hävdas att det är stötande att behöva bidra till sin egen fällande dom genom att tvingas lämna ut sådana handlingar. De här intressena måste emellertid vägas mot andra intressen såsom intresset av ett rättvist skattesystem och intresset av att ingripa mot lagöverträdelser. Mot bakgrund av detta finns det anledning att ytterligare undersöka och överväga en mer begränsad rätt för den skattskyldige att förbli passiv i svensk skattelagstiftning, beaktat de begränsningar som Europakonvention ställer i detta avseende. (Less)
Abstract
The Swedish tax system is based on an obligation for taxpayers to provide accurate and complete information to the tax authorities for the purpose of the calculation and assessment of taxes. This obligation may be enforced by the means of a disciplinary fine.

In the process of reviewing tax returns to ensure that information has been reported correctly, the tax authorities may find that there is reason to suspect that the taxpayer has provided incorrect information. As the authorities may use information provided by the taxpayer during an audit to levy additional taxes and tax surcharges as well as to prosecute him for tax evasion there is an obvious conflict between the taxpayer’s duty to provide information and his interest of not... (More)
The Swedish tax system is based on an obligation for taxpayers to provide accurate and complete information to the tax authorities for the purpose of the calculation and assessment of taxes. This obligation may be enforced by the means of a disciplinary fine.

In the process of reviewing tax returns to ensure that information has been reported correctly, the tax authorities may find that there is reason to suspect that the taxpayer has provided incorrect information. As the authorities may use information provided by the taxpayer during an audit to levy additional taxes and tax surcharges as well as to prosecute him for tax evasion there is an obvious conflict between the taxpayer’s duty to provide information and his interest of not incriminating himself.

According to the European Court of Human Rights’ case law concerning article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the Convention) there is a right for everyone who is charged with a criminal offence to remain silent and not to incriminate oneself. As a result of the court’s case law there is also a corresponding right for taxpayers according to Swedish tax law.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself, its relevance in the Swedish tax examination process and the specific problems related to these rights in the tax field. One aspect of this is to study the source, purpose and rationale of these rights. Another important aspect is to determine the content and scope of these rights in the Convention and in Swedish tax law.

In this paper it is argued that while the Convention contains a right not to answer incriminating questions it is questionable whether there is a right not to produce and provide potentially incriminating documents. In this regard Swedish tax law offers a more extensive protection. Moreover, it is also likely that the taxpayer can invoke his right to silence and not to incriminate himself at an earlier point in time according to Swedish tax law.

In this paper it is also argued that while a right not to answer incriminating questions contributes to the avoidance of miscarriages of justice this cannot be said about a right not to provide incriminating documents. The latter right can on the other hand be justified with respect to privacy, human autonomy and dignity for example. These interests are not absolute however and needs to be balanced against other interests such as the interest of ensuring compliance with the tax laws and pursuing lawbreakers. In view of this, it is argued that there is reason to further examine and consider a removal of the right not to provide potentially incriminating documents in Swedish tax law, taking into consideration the restrictions that the Convention imposes. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Schmidt, Henrik LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The right to silence and the privilege against self-incrimination in the Swedish tax examination process
course
JURM02 20121
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Skatterätt, Straffrätt, Processrätt, Passivitetsrätten, Rätten till tystnad, Rätten att inte behöva belasta sig själv
language
Swedish
id
2542418
date added to LUP
2012-08-31 15:35:47
date last changed
2012-08-31 15:35:47
@misc{2542418,
  abstract     = {The Swedish tax system is based on an obligation for taxpayers to provide accurate and complete information to the tax authorities for the purpose of the calculation and assessment of taxes. This obligation may be enforced by the means of a disciplinary fine. 

In the process of reviewing tax returns to ensure that information has been reported correctly, the tax authorities may find that there is reason to suspect that the taxpayer has provided incorrect information. As the authorities may use information provided by the taxpayer during an audit to levy additional taxes and tax surcharges as well as to prosecute him for tax evasion there is an obvious conflict between the taxpayer’s duty to provide information and his interest of not incriminating himself.

According to the European Court of Human Rights’ case law concerning article 6 of the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the Convention) there is a right for everyone who is charged with a criminal offence to remain silent and not to incriminate oneself. As a result of the court’s case law there is also a corresponding right for taxpayers according to Swedish tax law.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself, its relevance in the Swedish tax examination process and the specific problems related to these rights in the tax field. One aspect of this is to study the source, purpose and rationale of these rights. Another important aspect is to determine the content and scope of these rights in the Convention and in Swedish tax law.

In this paper it is argued that while the Convention contains a right not to answer incriminating questions it is questionable whether there is a right not to produce and provide potentially incriminating documents. In this regard Swedish tax law offers a more extensive protection. Moreover, it is also likely that the taxpayer can invoke his right to silence and not to incriminate himself at an earlier point in time according to Swedish tax law.

In this paper it is also argued that while a right not to answer incriminating questions contributes to the avoidance of miscarriages of justice this cannot be said about a right not to provide incriminating documents. The latter right can on the other hand be justified with respect to privacy, human autonomy and dignity for example. These interests are not absolute however and needs to be balanced against other interests such as the interest of ensuring compliance with the tax laws and pursuing lawbreakers. In view of this, it is argued that there is reason to further examine and consider a removal of the right not to provide potentially incriminating documents in Swedish tax law, taking into consideration the restrictions that the Convention imposes.},
  author       = {Schmidt, Henrik},
  keyword      = {Skatterätt,Straffrätt,Processrätt,Passivitetsrätten,Rätten till tystnad,Rätten att inte behöva belasta sig själv},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Passivitetsrätten i skatteutredningar},
  year         = {2012},
}