Levy (municipal law)
In municipal law , levies are payments from municipalities to other municipalities ( intermunicipal financial equalization ), to the respective federal state or to the federal government within the framework of financial equalization .
General
In the context of vertical financial equalization, there are not only payment flows from "top to bottom" (ie from the federal government in the distribution of federal taxes ), but also from "bottom to top". As part of the “redistributive function”, only the abundant municipalities - depending on the regulations in the respective federal state - are obliged to transfer income from municipal taxes ( trade tax and property tax ) that they are not entitled to. There is also a so-called district levy for municipalities belonging to the district. The primary financial equalization is too wide-meshed, so that the financial strength of individual municipalities can only be taken into greater account within the framework of the inter-municipal or redistributive allocation procedure.
Allocation types
A distinction is made between the following surcharges between the regional authorities :
- Levies between municipalities ( special-purpose association levies, levies for central institutions),
- Levies between municipalities and municipal associations (district levies , association levies ),
- Allocations between municipalities or municipal associations and federal states (different in the individual federal states, e.g. financial equalization contributions),
- Contributions to the federal government : In addition to the trade tax contribution , payments under the German Unity Fund should be mentioned here.
Abundance levies
On the one hand, abundant municipalities do not receive any income from key allocations ; on the other hand, in some federal states, as with horizontal financial equalization , they have to make inter-municipal transfers to financially weak municipalities (“redistributive function”), just because they are abundant. The tax power of a municipality is thus reduced through these inter-municipal levies ("abundance levy"). Under constitutional law, there are no concerns about a levy obligation for abundant municipalities. In Article 106, Paragraph 5, Clause 6 of the Basic Law, allocations based on real taxes are permitted. The municipalities are entitled to the revenue from property tax and trade tax with the restriction that, in accordance with state legislation, property tax and trade tax in particular can be used as a basis for assessment ( Article 106, Paragraph 6, Sentence 6, Basic Law). Against this background, a number of federal states have introduced financial equalization levies in the form of the abundance levy, such as Baden-Württemberg , Brandenburg , Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania , Lower Saxony , Rhineland-Palatinate , Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein . Abundance levies must not, however, cause the municipalities obliged to pay into a financial emergency or exacerbate an existing one.
County levies
The municipalities belonging to a district , i.e. a district assigned, submit, as members of the superordinate regional authority, to the right of elevation exercised by it. The district levy is raised in particular because districts usually do not generate any significant tax revenues of their own. District levies also weaken the tax power of a municipality. According to Section 8 of the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania Financial Equalization Act, municipalities whose tax power exceeds their financial needs as measured by municipal financial equalization by more than 15% are charged a financial equalization charge that is distributed between municipalities. According to the state constitutional court of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, this does not restrict the right to local self-government.
Horizontal allocations
According to the Solidarity Contribution Act NRW, financially strong municipalities that do not receive any key allocations according to the Municipal Financing Act must make a contribution that is passed on by the state of NRW to the financially weaker municipalities. Some financially strong municipalities had brought an action against this. The Federal Administrative Court regards the levying of the communal solidarity contribution as a so-called “horizontal levy” provided for in Art. 106 of the Basic Law. Such intermunicipal surcharges are permissible if they strive for a supra-communal financial equalization and their revenue remains in the communal area. In the opinion of the Federal Administrative Court, they are not in contradiction to the guarantee of municipal funding under Article 106 of the Basic Law or the guarantee of municipal financial sovereignty in Article 28 of the Basic Law. In the present case, the levy does not lead to an illegal leveling of the municipalities.
Demarcation
These surcharges represent a flat-rate replacement service that puts a burden on the financially strong communities and relieves the burden on financially weak communities accordingly. In the case of concrete replacement of certain items of expenditure, however, there is talk of reimbursement (e.g. municipal personnel costs for Hartz 4 processing are offset within the framework of the reimbursement ). It is often argued that one of the causes of the dramatic municipal debt can be seen in the fact that tasks are transferred to the municipalities without reimbursement of costs.
Individual evidence
- ^ Günter Püttner, Handbook of Municipal Science and Practice , 1985, p. 320 f.
- ↑ LVerfG Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, judgments of October 26, 2012, Az .: 18/10 and 33/10 ( Memento of the original of April 14, 2015 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. (PDF; 223 kB)
- ↑ BVerwG, judgment of March 25, 1998, Az. 8 C 11.97
- ↑ René Geißler, Municipal budget consolidation , 2010, p. 67
