The Greens have made a new attempt at the weekend at their party in Kiel abolish income splitting.
Similar to the care allowance (see Pixel economist post Praise the stove premium) is the Ehegattensplitting a reputation for favoring old role models. That scenario is the sole breadwinner of a family. The man goes to work, the woman is watching the children. Promotes splitting control this form of cohabitation? And it belongs therefore abolished?
The income splitting was introduced 1957th Couples since then have the opportunity “to assess common tax” themselves. Here, the joint taxable income of both spouses is halved (split). For the income halved the income tax is calculated according to the applicable income tax rate; On this basis the income tax will eventually doubled. As a result, through the income tax progression the tax liability of the couple is reduced in comparison with the individual assessment, provided that the income level of the partners differs.
In practice, this means that the transition from the sole earner for More earner household is complicated. Will the wife after childbirth and child-rearing back to work, she gets a tax scale a into professional life, which results from the half income of the husband. This is often unattractive. So you can say, rightly, that the Ehegattensplitting cemented old role models.
On the other hand: The marriage is a living and economic community. That the state refrain from taxing the individual economic agents, but a community, is a progress of civilization, without which it would not exist business enterprises. What’s right for businesses, should be cheap in private life. Namely that people can join together to sharing responsibilities. That they therefore adhere to each other. With all rights and obligations.
That is exactly what the legal form of marriage. For example, by financially must pay the spouse with each other and, eventually, each other in ensuring maintenance. To get people no basic security benefits such as unemployment benefit II or social assistance if the spouse can pay for their care. An abolition of Ehegattensplitting would mean that spouses of earners could still receiving state benefits.
The assessment of Ehegattensplitting thus depends centrally on the question of how one is to liability Communities on a private level. Endorsed If the latter, then the Ehegattensplitting brings more justice. Because it means that the tax burden only depends on the total income of the economic and living community, not of who how much helps. Because when Ehegattensplitting it does not matter whether the career woman through overtime 1000 euros a month to deserve or accepts the Haussmann a cheap job with a monthly salary of 1000 euros. The tax burden is the same at the end.
I support the tax recognition of life and economic communities. Because it follows the federalist principle. Namely to regulate the things of human society best suited to the smallest possible level. An abolition of Ehegattensplitting would pour out my opinion the child with the bathwater. I wish, however, an expansion of the tax splitting in various forms of communal living. After an extension of such a splitting may achieve the opposite of what it is for previously criticized: it would promote the variety of life and work, because tax issues would be less important. The focus then would be the question of who will take responsibility for whom. In good times and bad.