– The current situation is unfair, as it allows the most wealthy to pay taxes.
A value-added tax or similar tax is in place in almost all Finnish-type countries. Finland must, in this case, be set up with the vast majority of Western European countries on the same line, says Saramo. According to Saramo, the implementation of the value-added tax is urgent, since, nowadays, wealthy people can be released from all their capital gains, gifts and inheritance taxes, using, for example, so-called insurance envelopes. The idea of insurance shells is to transfer taxation to the moment when the proceeds from the shells are lifted out. However, if the proceeds are raised only after the books have been transferred to a tax haven, a wealthy person will be able to avoid income tax altogether. – Insurance shells are the privilege of the rich. Some insurance cover providers require that there should be at least a million revolving amount of assets in the shells. The use of insurance shells will undermine our tax base and contribute to the achievement of fiscal equilibrium. The situation requires urgent interference, Saramo continues. In late 2019, the Parliament adopted an exit tax to prevent corporate tax avoidance. The Board of Directors has agreed to settle the case for private individuals and on Friday 7.2. The Ministry of Finance published the required report. In its report, the Ministry of Finance notes that several aspects advocate the introduction of tax. Yet, the ministry is very gentle. – Nothing new under the sun. For some reason, the Ministry of Finance has not been in favour of anti-tax evasion measures. The basics of the Ministry of Finance to oppose a rise in value tax are almost respectable in their imagination, Saramo says. For example, the Ministry of Finance estimates that the increase in VAT could have a negative impact on Finland's competitiveness and attractiveness as a migration target. – This is typical of the Ministry of Finance's change in vases. The idea that an increase in the value of the tax would reduce immigration, lean into a remarkable reasoning chain. It says that a person who is considering moving from abroad to Finland might be left without changing here because he could no longer move from Finland to a tax-free, without tax consequences. Does someone really believe in such a chain of thought?