Death threat resulting from public tax records
@ 8:39 am This is a discussion from Parlaiment from beginning of 2005 that I translated into English.
Written question
KK 992/2004 vp - Paula Risikko /National Coalition Party
WRITTEN QUESTION 992/2004 vp
Improvement of the law regarding publicity of tax records.
To the Speaker of Parlaiment
The law regarding the publicity and secrecy of tax records (1346/1999 ) defines that such tax records are to be kept secret, which have information regarding the tax payer’s financial standing, excluding those details, which are defined as public in 5-9 and 21 of this law. The taxpayers income, paid tax, amount of prepaid tax and tax returned or tax to be paid are defined as public tax records.
The previously mentioned procedure is a result of attempting to achieve a fair relation between the tax authority’s transparency and increased trustworthyness by increasing openness and on the other hand protecting the person’s privacy and, among other things, business secrets.
It is correct and worth supporting that the citizens have, for example through the media, a possibility to get information from, for example, officials, business leaders and politicians’ salary levels and the extent of possible side incomes and tax percentages.
In this case, the starting point should be that the tax authority’s information should be as correct as possible. The goal is not completely achieved in the current framework of the legislation regarding the publicity of tax records. Tax records are, in practicality, public only in the stage that the taxation is ready. Taxation is a broad and complicated process, that there will always be a certain number of mistakes. The taxation is fixed and the mistakes are corrected sometimes even years after the taxation is ready.
The probem is that tax records which are cleaned of mistakes and fixed are, in practice, no longer public information. Faulty information has been possibly published when the tax records were ready, but the fixed and correct tax information is no longer public. The corrections remain secret, but the faulty information continues in circulation. Even when someone complains about their own taxation, it is secret information in practice.
There are numerous examples, which have been also publicized, for example, economics reporter Tuomo Pietiläinen presented good arguments regarding this in his column (HS 6.11.2004). The author concludes that in public tax records, there has been anomalies and mistakes nearly every year. A businessman, who was completely broke is in the top for property statistics, or a fireman who has a salary of 16 million Euros.
Another problem with public tax records is shown in another practical example: Underage siblings had recieved corporate stocks as an inheritance and gift. The parents intention was to handle the children’s ownership of the stocks in such a way, that the dividends were reinvested into buying the siblings more stocks. In the familiar way we have seen in the recent years, the regular growth of the stocks increased suddenly in a dramatic way, and this showed later in the children’s tax records. The underage children, because of the way they were raised, didn’t know very much about the nest-egg that would be waiting for them when they are adults. Their names were published together with the other tax records in newspapers, and the result was quite difficult and trying situation to be come the object of publicity. This also included, among other things, a death threat and completely unfounded hinting that the family was practicing tax planning.
It is clear that the legislator did not intend for his law to work in the way presented in the real life examples mentioned previously. Therefore there is reason to clarify the text of the law to better serve the original purpose.
The legislation regarding the publicity of tax records will probably need to be changed in, for example the stopping of wealth tax ….. In conjunction with this is a natural opportunity to change other observed problematic areas.
Based on the previous and according to the Parlaiment Rules of Procedure 27 I present the following question to be answered to the concerned members of the government council:
Is it in the knowledge of the government the practical effects of these certain injustices in the law regarding publicity of tax records and how does the government intend to correct the deficiencies in the legislation regarding the grievances presented here in the previous arguments?
Paula Risikko /National Coalition Party
To the Speaker of Parlaiment
In the Parlaiment Rules of Procedure in the intent of 27 § You, Mr. Chairman, have delivered Representative Paula Risikko’s (National Coalition Party) written question to be ansered by the concered minister. KK 992/2004 vp:
Is it in the knowledge of the government the practical effects of these certain injustices in the law regarding publicity of tax records and how does the government intend to correct the deficiencies in the legislation regarding the grievances presented here in the previous arguments?
As an answer to to the question I present the following:
The publicity of tax records has been, from old times, valid during the whole period of the current tax system. There has often arisen discussion, because tax records do not naturally tell the whole truth about citizens’ wealth and income. In recent times, the situation has emphasized movement of capital because of internationalization. it is a problem of its own, the problems that are created when the occasional mistake pops up in tax records that the asker is referring to, despite the fact that their significance has noticeably decreased as the correctness of the tax records has increased. When we take into consideration that tax events are in the millions, mistakes actually happen surprisingly little. Even one mistake is, of course, too many, and they should not be underestimated.
We last had a broad and lively discussion about the publicity of tax records around half way through the last decade. It was brought forward from the level of the officials the possibility of giving up public tax records, which were considered in modern circumstances to be unnecessarily exposing information that belongs in the sphere of privacy. Using statistical methods, we can get a rather precise picture of society’s structure of income and wealth. In the modern world, tax surveillance methods have become so well developed, that public tax records are no longer necessary for so called neighbour control. The discussion that occurred at that time however received the same blunt verdict from many different politicians: there is not one party in Parliament that is prepared to support even partially limiting public tax records. It was generally held from the viewpoint of societal morals to be important, that also singular persons’ income and wealth information be made public. Something that certainly affected this was pure human curiosity. For the media, it is also a question of money. We can return to this discussion at any time, when the time seems right. Since there are really no grounds for this system, there would probably be no opposition from the Ministry of Finance government. So the question is a purely political matter.
Helsinki 5 January 2005, Vice Minister of Finance, Ulla-Maj Wideroos
societal morals? Does privacy equal greed in this model of “old” thinking?
Comment by Annoyed Finn — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 10:02 am
Bearing in mind that death threats result from all kinds of public information for example the publishing of criminal charges, or court verdicts both innocent and guilty (the defendants are frequently threatened), or of business details (foreign business owners are frequently threatened) or the publishing of the publishing of marriages (couples in inter-racial or inter-religious relationships are frequently threatenend) can one of you zealots please explain either why tax records are *different* or why we should restrict *all* public information which leads to a few death threats and the like?
And if the difference with tax stuff is that “its private”, then it proves you’re just begging the question - and all this smokescreen about threats is shown to be irrelevant.
Comment by Rich — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 11:17 am
Rich, even one death threat resulting from this outweighs the supposed benefits of the system. And for a smokescreen refer to the “supposed benefits” touted all over this site. If you can’t find them go outside and look for a drunken bum on a binge; he can tell you the exact same reasoning that the supporters of this system seem to rely on.
Comment by Biff Loman — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 1:23 pm
Biff,
So the one death threat is presumably enough to mean we shouldn’t publish court proceedings, business details and marriages as well (indeed any information which led to even one death threat)?
That would seem odd.
Comment by Rich — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 2:01 pm
This kind of stuff seems dangerous for people who come from other countries to work in Finland. Once they go back, all their private information is ‘on display’ for acquaintances, creditors and lawyers—imagine getting into a car accident and the prosecuting attorney just calls Finland and gets your financial summary!
I say, this needs to keep being mentioned. The world should be informed about the unprofessional behavior of the Finnish government. For people and companies considering doing business with- or in- Finland, this could be a very relevant topic.
And by all means, if you feel that your rights have been violated, then here’s a great website which details what you can do about it.
http://www.verosirkus.net
Comment by Kristian — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
Rich,
Where did I say so? My remark was intended to point out how futile I think the system is and to answer your question why tax records are different. So to clarify: the system has no real benefits and the tax issue is different from those you mentioned because the trumped up benefits of it can’t outweigh even one dead threat.
Publishing court proceedings and business details has tremendous use and that information has an important role; unlike publishing tax records. I don’t really know the particulars of publishing marriages so I wouldn’t know what the benefits are. Who’re you married to is quite a bit different from financial information though and from what I’ve seen married couples can’t wait to announce their union. As for any possible information that could lead to a dead threat, the answer is clearly no; there could be a nut out there who is sending dead threats to an editor because a newspaper had a misspelling.
It’s a mistake to draw from my previous comment that I think every bit of info resulting in even one dead threat should not be published.
Comment by Biff Loman — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
Biff,
Your post underlies my point. This really isn’t about the death threat, its that you all think there’s little or no benefit from publishing tax records. Its just some semi-righteous mumbling on Sirkupelle’s part to hide the fact its the same old moribund argument he’s making.
On the point of benefits. What are the benefits of the state registrar publishing marriages? Or indeed details about the court system? My response to both would be so that people were that the systems were working, and how. And i’d say exactly the same applies to tax records, if not more-so.
Comment by Rich — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
#7 Should say “were aware that” in the second paragraph.
Comment by Rich — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 4:53 pm
The last paragraph says it all (based on Sirkuspelle’s translation) - Everyone feels that there is no real need for this system anymore. But no one has the balls to pass legislation to fix it.
And the Vice Minister of Finance claims that it has to do with human curiosity and money for media companies! What a reason to keep such a system
Comment by Nomad — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
“Your post underlies my point. This really isn’t about the death threat, its that you all think there’s little or no benefit from publishing tax records. Its just some semi-righteous mumbling on Sirkupelle’s part to hide the fact its the same old moribund argument he’s making.”
Your point is that we zealots now tout this death threat aspect supposedly just to advance the stance that tax records shouldn’t be published. I get your point but I never touted death threat as a reason to not publish tax records. That’s exactly why I explained my remark, so you would see that’s not why I brought up the dead threat. This is the second time you’re putting words in my mouth. It’s frustrating so could you please try to not do that again.
“On the point of benefits. What are the benefits of the state registrar publishing marriages? Or indeed details about the court system? My response to both would be so that people were that the systems were working, and how. And i’d say exactly the same applies to tax records, if not more-so.”
The benefit of publishing court proceedings is that we don’t have a secret court. I’m inclined to call that a benefit. As are you I’m sure. I don’t know what are the benefits of publishing marriages, as I already stated. And then there’s your trumped up benefit of publishing tax records which sadly is a misconception.
If you still believe publish tax records help us catch those who are evading taxes or engaging in criminal activity then there’s nothing I can say to you. It’s ironic how you call Sirkuspelle’s argument moribund though. At least from where I’m standing
Comment by Biff Loman — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
Rich, it sounds like you are having some sort of moral crisis, The last three documents I posted were not any of my opinions, just a press release, a parlaiment discussion, and another person’s post all translated from Finnish.
Does it bother you now to know that which you entertain yourself with actually hurts people? In this case translated here, it was underage people that were hurt. I don’t really know how old they are.
Comment by sirkuspelle — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 6:18 pm
Rich, it sounds like you are having some sort of moral crisisi>
It’s not just a moral crisis he’s having. “Rick” is also lacking in common sense. In these days of international criminal gangs and very sophisticated organized crime, financial privacy is one of the most important issues being addressed in every country. In every country except Finland, that is.
The Finnish system is just plain stupid and defies all logic. I’m seriously amazed by it. As a previous person commented, foreigners working in Finland should worry.
Comment by privacy zealot — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
(sorry, let’s try that again)
Rich, it sounds like you are having some sort of moral crisis
It’s not just a moral crisis he’s having. “Rich†is also lacking in common sense. In these days of international criminal gangs and very sophisticated organized crime, financial privacy is one of the most important issues being addressed in every country. In every country except Finland, that is.
The Finnish system is just plain stupid and defies all logic. I’m seriously amazed by it. As a previous person commented, foreigners working in Finland should worry.
Comment by privacy zealot — Thu, Nov 15th, 2007 @ 6:57 pm
So let me get this straight: the privacy of financial information is paramount, because then the organized criminals won’t have access to your info?
In other words, the criminals have nothing to gain from private financial information? Let’s see: credit card fraud, mail fraud, fraudulent money collection, loan sharking, racketeering, robbery, identity theft, hostage taking, smuggling, drug trafficking, prostitution and let’s not forget to mention money laundering through private bank accounts. Hmm… I guess you’re right - there’s really nothing the criminals can do without public tax records.
I think you have proven your point most effectively, sir.
Comment by Fat Bastard — Fri, Nov 16th, 2007 @ 11:35 am
Biff, i take your point - i assumed you were seconding what the original post said. Fine if not. I still think my point stands though - there’s lots of information that gets published which can lead to rare problems. But we do it anyway to contribute to a culture of openness. I’d argue we publish all kinds of tiny and irrelivant detail about the law, not to avoid secret courts (we could publish a lot less info and still not have secret courts) but so people get a sense that the legal system is working, and a decent idea of how, so when they come to use or need it they can feel confident it will treat them fairly. I think exactly the same applies to the tax system.
sirkuspelle, I really couldn’t be having less of a moral crisis if i were a psychopath on lithium. Whether you’re posting your own info or not, you clearly have an agenda. And for the record i don’t find tax records at all entertaining (does anyone?!). Perhaps you refer to the tabloid headlines about them? I find these utterly sad and tawdry. Any claims about openness i make pertain to a societal level, rather than the sales of Iltalehti. And as for ‘hurting people’ i ask again - what about all the other everyday information which ends up hurting people? If you’re consistent then that should be banned too. If not then it just brings us back to the fact your problem is that you don’t like the records, rather than any stuff about people getting hurt.
privacy zealot - that’s the closest thing to a good point that’s been posted yet. If there were real fraud and identity crime concerns that would be a big argument against public tax records. Sadly, for the reasons fat bastard listed above, and because fraud is incredibly low in Finland, especially relative to countries which don’t publish tax records (like the UK and US), then it seems reality is rather not on your side.
Comment by Rich — Fri, Nov 16th, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
Since there are really no grounds for this system, there would probably be no opposition from the Ministry of Finance government. So the question is a purely political matter.
That’s a misleading translation of UMW’s response. She says there would probably be little opposition from the Tax Administration/Agency (verohallinto/skatteförvaltningen , i.e. because they would be unlikely to lose any efficiency in administration of the tax system, for the reasons she mentions earlier in her reply), not the “Ministry of Finance government”. In fact, as she suggests in the reply, Finance Ministry (i.e. government) response would likely be against changing the system (as she highlights that no political parties support doing so.)
The Finance Ministry and Tax Administration are not the same thing (although of course the Tax Administration/Agency reports to the Finance Ministry).
Comment by JG — Fri, Nov 16th, 2007 @ 5:01 pm
“That’s a misleading translation of UMW’s response.”
Really - so we’re being given distorted translations too? Things must be getting really desperate at Verosirkus HQ
Comment by Rich — Fri, Nov 16th, 2007 @ 5:05 pm
I am sure it is not deliberate. Actually, from the Finnish name for the tax authority it is an understandable error in someways. I only point it out because it does make a significant difference to what UMW writes! (Although that said, my viewpoint on this matter is obvious from the many previous discussions we’ve had on this topic)
You have an interesting blog Rich. Interesting to see about Helsinki university’s debating society too. I noted the previous subjects “This House Would Require Finlandssvenska Citizens to Pay a Higher Rate of Tax” and “THW Create ‘Crack-ko’ (Think Alko, but different)”. I would have loved to have been there to hear those debates!
Comment by JG — Fri, Nov 16th, 2007 @ 6:37 pm
Rich said “But we do it anyway to contribute to a culture of openness”
Oh my god, are you serious? You need a reality check or something. You are playing with people’s finance information for the benefit of your weird concept of “open society”. Get a life you idiot.
Comment by expat nate — Tue, Nov 20th, 2007 @ 9:57 pm
Other poorly-managed dipshit countries like Norway do the same thing! It’s either This or Communism, you choose! Nobody in their right mind should tolerate unapproved publication of personal details. And neither should you (the person reading this) unless you’re some kind of a mentally unstable sadistic stalker.
But whatever you do/don’t do, please never fall for the laughable delusions of some politically mixed middle-ground or other alternatives, it will only allow this to go on, start/expand in other countries and get worse! Most political parties, such as (examples): “Very-greedy party”, “Not-so-greedy party”, “Spiritual Soapbox party”, “some other non-communist party”, “Neutral but really not party”, “Cave people supremacy party”, “That other party” and “Anarchy party” can claim all they want that they are different than the others, but that doesn’t change what they really stand for: CRAPitalism!
Communism is the closest to a cure we have to heal these life-scarring wounds of CRAPitalism! Let the reactionary petite bourgeois enemies of the people who put these kind of orders in effect in a attempt to control the masses eat lead! What they have done has had no positive effect on anyone, in fact it has hurt many, many for life!
Another interesting note: The Soviet union might have fallen because of the traitor Gorbachev (Gorblimey), but the soviet setup had no defense against treason from the Premier him/herself. Doesn’t mean a more flawless setup can’t be put in place. Just about anything will do after witnessing how more & more ridiculous and dangerous CRAPitalism becomes with it’s more & more ridiculous and dangerous ideas such as publishing people’s tax records and pretty much only trilateral commission knows what other supposedly-confidential personal information is being published and will be.
I know this reality is hard for people to stomach, but it’s the sad reality of CRAPitalism!
But a reality I am having a hard time to stomach myself is how people can just go on live their lives letting this happen like nothing happened, this shows severe lack of initiative!!! Or is this the sad result of the perverted “disarm the public to use them as cattle” method? As Mao stated: “without a People’s Army the people have nothing”! So read & listen up, people!
Do the right thing!: Buy a unregistered piece at your local black-market as a (just in case) insurance, and go with Communism!
Also it could be a good idea to exchange all your surplus money in something valuable like gold bars or jewelry just in case the banks decide to minimize the value of money to force co-operation & start another depression.
Don’t even get me started on the CRAPitalist-approved fluoridating of tap water & gen-tampering of food supplies parts! They speak wonderfully for themselves!
With CRAPitalism in effect this world is getting fucked more & more with every second!
Comment by anon — Sat, Jun 14th, 2008 @ 1:05 am