Cat tax

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The cat tax is a taxation of the owners of house cats similar to the dog tax or horse tax . Historical cases of such a tax are known, but there is no cat tax in German-speaking countries, despite controversial discussions.

Situation by country

Germany

The collection of cat taxes is only known for individual municipalities in the German Reich :

  • The municipality of Emmerzhausen levied a cat tax from 1894 to 1902. The first cat was free, the second was taxed at 1 mark , the third at 3 marks.
  • In the Kingdom of Saxony , several municipalities levied cat taxes before the First World War , the background being efforts to protect birds: From 1902, Sebnitz and Augustusburg levied a cat tax of 3 marks (according to today's value (2018): 20 euros) for the first, 6 marks for each additional one Cat. The cat population is said to have shrunk there "considerably". The municipality of Niederlößnitz also levied a cat tax from 1912 based on the Sebnitz model.
  • The introduction of a cat tax, also in 1912, met with opposition from the responsible administration in Coswig's case , which ultimately approved the tax on January 30, 1913, retrospectively from January 1, 1913 (in Coswig the tax was also 3 marks for the first and 6 marks for each additional cat).
  • Blasewitz , then an independent community and only part of Dresden since 1921 , introduced a cat tax on October 13, 1916: as a measure to combat undesirable blackheads in times of need of war . The fee for the first cat was 5 marks (according to today's value (2018): 12 euros), the second 10 marks, each additional cat 15 marks. This tax did not last long (with no known exact date of its abolition).
  • With effect from April 1, 1930, a cat tax was introduced for the entire city of Dresden, again due to the unfavorable economic situation . The tax amounted to 12  marks (according to today's value (2018): 43 euros) annual tax for the first and 24 marks for each additional cat and, in the year of its introduction (1930), generated an actual income of 86,116 marks (according to today's value (2018) ): 310,923 euros). The date when the tax was abolished in 1930 is unknown.
  • Pirna also introduced a cat tax in 1930.

No cat tax has been levied there since the Federal Republic of Germany was founded . Nevertheless, it was occasionally discussed, in serious proposals mostly as an expense tax at the municipal level . Municipalities in Germany have the right to levy such expense taxes, provided the taxes are covered by state legal regulations - with the hypothetical cat tax, this basis does not exist and would first have to be created by state parliaments . Corresponding submissions from different interest groups have always been rejected, for example in 2011 in North Rhine-Westphalia and 2013 in Bavaria .

Austria

There is currently no cat tax in Austria.

Switzerland

There is currently no cat tax in Switzerland either, even if there are suggestions.

In the ornithological observer of the Swiss Society for Ornithology and Bird Conservation , the subject of cat tax was discussed seven times from the establishment of the specialist journal until 1928; after 1934 the journal did not deal with the subject until 2003.

False reports in German-speaking countries

In addition, the imminent introduction of cat taxes is a popular April Fool's joke in the media. False reports about the supposed nationwide introduction found widespread use in the German-speaking Internet in May 2016.

Other countries

In English-speaking countries such as the USA, Canada or Australia, municipalities may declare certain animals to be subject to registration. Pet owners can purchase a so-called pet license there, which has to be renewed annually in some cases and which may be combined with vaccinations (e.g. against rabies). From a tax ( tax ) is explicitly not spoken. The license model applies to dogs and cats in Toronto , Winnipeg and Houston, for example , and even to all pets in Manteca . In Los Angeles only dogs and horses, specifically no cats, are licensed. The willingness of the population to comply with this registration requirement is proving to be rather low in America, for example only 10% of all cats in Toronto are licensed.

Motivation and Discourse on the Cat Tax

The taxation of domestic cats is mostly discussed in connection with one or more goals.

Equal treatment for cat and dog owners

Dog owners declare that it is unfair to tax their animals, but not the cats that are also kept in large numbers. According to estimates from 2011 and 2016, there were around 10 to 12 million cats in Germany, around 2 million of which were free-range or ownerless; for Switzerland, a total of around 1 to 1.3 million cats was assumed in 2000. As a debilitating argument it is put forward that the cat as a pure house animal does not represent a burden to the public, in contrast to dogs that need exercise. According to this, only free-range cats should be taxed; Detection and assignment of free-range cats to their owner turn out to be problematic.

Financial improvement of the municipal budget

Charging a further expense tax can relieve public coffers. As a counter-argument it is put forward that a cat tax would entail too high an administrative and control effort; here, too, the allocation of animals to owners is seen as the main problem. In the event that the funds were earmarked for a specific purpose (for example to operate the animal shelters, which are much more heavily burdened ), this budget relief would also be completely eliminated.

Elimination of pest control tasks

The task of the cat as a pest- devourer has been seen as secondary in Europe since the end of the 20th century. Cats are mainly kept as companions of humans and not as farm animals.

In house cats today the function for humans is seen as "a social point of reference".

Population control for the purpose of species protection

Proponents of the cat tax also see it as a means of population control ( steering tax ), alongside other measures such as animal identification (chipping) and castration . In doing so, they hope to solve nature conservation problems that arise from keeping cats:

An increased cat population due to anthropogenic impact can pose a significant threat to protected wildlife, especially birds. A study from 2011 considers free-roaming cats to be causal or involved in the extermination of 33 animal species on islands worldwide. A hunting cat prey on an average of about 40 birds, 200 small mammals and a considerable number of reptiles, amphibians and insects each year. According to stomach examinations of cats found dead, mammals are a major prey, followed by birds. Excessive cat populations on islands are blamed for the collapse of bird populations there, which has not yet been established on the mainland. Worldwide, it is estimated that cats kill 1 to 4 billion birds each year. Domesticated cats in particular do not eat their prey, but merely satisfy a hunting instinct.

A counter-argument against the introduction of a cat tax for the purpose of species protection is that, through this measure, numerous cat owners would simply release their animals to relieve their own financial burden, which would lead to a dramatic increase and uncontrolled reproduction of wild cats; that would only exacerbate the problem. Scientists saw other measures as more promising for bird protection, such as room arrest in the breeding months, castration and, earlier, claw clipping.

Rationing of feed

Too large populations, so that feed became scarce in times of need and had to be rationed , was last perceived as a problem in the First World War . The taxation of cats led not only to the fiscal income but also to the killing or chasing away of the unwanted animals (see also: badger rabbit ). An increase in pests such as mice and rats was foreseeable as a result, as the most important natural enemy disappeared.

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b Welt.de on August 9, 2006: On cats
  2. ↑ a b c Ornithological monthly publication, Magdeburg 1913, p. 78. Digitized
  3. ^ Report in the Dresden press review from January 31, 1913 ( Memento from February 12, 2013 in the web archive archive.today )
  4. ↑ a b c d e f WDR 5 : ZeitZeichen on October 13, 2016: October 13, 1916 - Dresden introduces a cat tax
  5. ^ Statistical Office of the City of Dresden (Ed.): The Administration of the City of Dresden 1930 . Dr. Güntzschen Foundation, Dresden 1931. pp. 10, 76, 83 and others.
  6. ↑ DerWesten.de on October 24, 2011: Cat tax is a topic in the NRW state parliament and October 25, 2011: Cat tax - absolute nonsense
  7. ↑ a b c RN on October 25, 2011: Some NRW municipalities want to levy cat tax ( memento of the original from December 13, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ruhrnachrichten.de
  8. ↑ Focus on November 13, 2013: No to bell duty and cat tax
  9. ↑ a b c ORF on May 25, 2016: Nature conservationist demands 400 francs cat tax
  10. ↑ a b c d e f g Peter Lüps: Domestic cats and bird life, a constant topic about biology, emotions and money . In: Ornithological Observer (Volume 100, 2003)
  11. ↑ April Fool's joke reports from Bolken (Solothurn) , Leisel (Hunsrück) , Schwerin
  12. ↑ False report on Husse-blog.de ( memento of the original from December 13, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , Correction on Katzenblog.de @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / husse-blog.de
  13. ↑ Pet License using the example of Houston , Toronto ( Memento of the original from December 14, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , Manteca , Los Angeles , Queensland @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www1.toronto.ca
  14. Jump up ↑ The Globe and Mail on January 12, 2011: City of Toronto Considering Crashing Licensing Program
  15. ↑ Media report: Greens want to tax 13 million cats in Germany - Video. In: Focus Online . January 22, 2017. Retrieved October 14, 2018 .
  16. ↑ a b c Focus on April 25, 2013: Cat owners should pay bird protection tax
  17. ^ Félix M. Medina, Elsa Bonnaud, Eric Vidal et. el: A global review of the impacts of invasive cats on island endangered vertebrates , Global Change Biol. 17, 3503-3510 (2011); according to: Scott R. Loss, Tom Will, Peter P. Marra: The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States in: Nature Communications , online publication
  18. ^ A b S. R. Loss, T. Will, PP Marra: The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States. In: Nature Communications . Volume 4, 2013, p. 1396, doi : 10.1038 / ncomms2380 , PMID 23360987 (review).