Fyra procent-spärren - Ett försök att skapa legitimitet i 3:12-systemet
(2014) LAGF03 20142Faculty of Law
Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Uppsatsen har behandlat den så kallade fyra procent-spärren som trädde i kraft 1 januari 2014. Regeln innebär att en delägare som arbetar aktiv i ett fåmansbolag, måste inneha en kapitalandel motsvarande fyra procent av bolaget för att få utnyttja det lönebaserade utrymmet vid beräkning av dennes gränsbelopp. Innan regeln infördes fick den utstå massiv kritik från remissinstanserna. Remissinstanserna uppmärksammade regeringen om att regeln kunde medföra oönskade bieffekter. De menade bland annat att regeln dels kunde skapa incitament till att dela upp välfungerande bolag i mindre enheter, dels motverka sammanslagningar av bolag till större bolag, samt snedvrida konkurrens och tillväxt. Regeringen ansåg det dock nödvändigt att införa regeln... (More)
- Uppsatsen har behandlat den så kallade fyra procent-spärren som trädde i kraft 1 januari 2014. Regeln innebär att en delägare som arbetar aktiv i ett fåmansbolag, måste inneha en kapitalandel motsvarande fyra procent av bolaget för att få utnyttja det lönebaserade utrymmet vid beräkning av dennes gränsbelopp. Innan regeln infördes fick den utstå massiv kritik från remissinstanserna. Remissinstanserna uppmärksammade regeringen om att regeln kunde medföra oönskade bieffekter. De menade bland annat att regeln dels kunde skapa incitament till att dela upp välfungerande bolag i mindre enheter, dels motverka sammanslagningar av bolag till större bolag, samt snedvrida konkurrens och tillväxt. Regeringen ansåg det dock nödvändigt att införa regeln för att bringa legitimitet till 3:12-reglena. Som reglerna var utformade tidigare var det möjligt för delägare med mycket små aktieinnehav att plocka ut stora summor som utdelning i det lägre beskattade inkomstslaget kapital istället för inkomstslaget tjänst. Detta ansågs av regeringen som ej legitimt då de små aktieinnehaven inte motsvarade den risk som den lägre utdelningsskatten skulle kompensera för. Uppsatsen har haft som syfte att, genom analys av regeringens och remissinstansernas argumentation, avgöra huruvida vi kan förvänta oss att regeln kan uppfylla sitt syfte eller om de befarade bieffekterna kan få den följd att syftet ej uppnås. Efter att argumentationsanalysen genomförts kan vi se att det finns risker för att regeln medför sådana bieffekter som kan inverka negativt på regelns syfte. Remissinstansernas argumentation är till stor del väl underbyggd medan regering har vissa problem med att rättfärdiga införandet av regeln. (Less)
- Abstract
- The essay has dealt with the so-called four percents-latch, which came into force on January 1, 2014. The rule means that a partner who works active in a closely held company must hold an equity equivalent to four percents of the company to be able to use the wage based dividend allowance when calculating its dividend allowance. Before the rule was introduced it endured a massive criticism from the consulting bodies. The consultation bodies drew attention to the government that the rule could lead to unwanted side effects. It could, among other things, provide incentives to divide large and well functioning companies into smaller units, as well as counteract mergers of small companies into larger companies and may distort competition and... (More)
- The essay has dealt with the so-called four percents-latch, which came into force on January 1, 2014. The rule means that a partner who works active in a closely held company must hold an equity equivalent to four percents of the company to be able to use the wage based dividend allowance when calculating its dividend allowance. Before the rule was introduced it endured a massive criticism from the consulting bodies. The consultation bodies drew attention to the government that the rule could lead to unwanted side effects. It could, among other things, provide incentives to divide large and well functioning companies into smaller units, as well as counteract mergers of small companies into larger companies and may distort competition and growth. The Government considered it necessary to introduce the rule to bring legitimacy to 3:12-rules. As the rules were designed before it was possible for a partner with very small holdings to pick out large sums of less taxed income from capital rather than income from service. This was considered by the government as not legitimate though the small shareholdings did not reflect the risk that the reduced dividend tax was designed to compensate for. This essay had to, by analysing the governments and the consulting bodies arguments, determine whether we can expect that the rule can fulfil its purpose, or if the expected side effects can have the outcome that the purpose is not achieved. After the argumentation analysis I came to the conclusion that there are some risks due to the rule that might cause such side effects that would harm the rules purpose. The consultation bodies’ arguments are largely substantiated while the government has some trouble justifying the introduction of the rule. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4925048
- author
- Askow, Martin LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20142
- year
- 2014
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Skatterätt, Fåmansbolag, Utdelning i Fåmansbolag
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4925048
- date added to LUP
- 2015-02-02 14:18:10
- date last changed
- 2015-02-02 14:18:10
@misc{4925048,
abstract = {{The essay has dealt with the so-called four percents-latch, which came into force on January 1, 2014. The rule means that a partner who works active in a closely held company must hold an equity equivalent to four percents of the company to be able to use the wage based dividend allowance when calculating its dividend allowance. Before the rule was introduced it endured a massive criticism from the consulting bodies. The consultation bodies drew attention to the government that the rule could lead to unwanted side effects. It could, among other things, provide incentives to divide large and well functioning companies into smaller units, as well as counteract mergers of small companies into larger companies and may distort competition and growth. The Government considered it necessary to introduce the rule to bring legitimacy to 3:12-rules. As the rules were designed before it was possible for a partner with very small holdings to pick out large sums of less taxed income from capital rather than income from service. This was considered by the government as not legitimate though the small shareholdings did not reflect the risk that the reduced dividend tax was designed to compensate for. This essay had to, by analysing the governments and the consulting bodies arguments, determine whether we can expect that the rule can fulfil its purpose, or if the expected side effects can have the outcome that the purpose is not achieved. After the argumentation analysis I came to the conclusion that there are some risks due to the rule that might cause such side effects that would harm the rules purpose. The consultation bodies’ arguments are largely substantiated while the government has some trouble justifying the introduction of the rule.}},
author = {{Askow, Martin}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Fyra procent-spärren - Ett försök att skapa legitimitet i 3:12-systemet}},
year = {{2014}},
}