Publication of Tax Records Questioned - FFT bloggers partying as monkeys on bad acid
@ 1:13 pm Evidently Sirkuspelle’s efforts are finally showing some fruits. From the STT
Publishing individuals’ tax records in the media may in future be completely banned, provincial daily Keskisuomalainen reported on Wednesday. The paper added that the Supreme Administrative Court (KHO) had asked the the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a precedent on the issue. The ECJ will hold a discussion on the topic 12 February and the KHO would make its decision based on this precedent. The issue came to the forefront when Veropörssi, a Satakunta-based company that publishes tax information, listed over a million individuals’ tax records and then sold them to directory services firm Fonecta, which in turn sold the information on to customers via text message. According to Keskisuomalainen, Reijo Aarnio, Finland’s data protection ombudsman, took the issue to court as a breach of journalistic integrity.
The Age of Wonders is here.
You may appreciate the irony that the government (= the data protection ombudsman and the Supreme Administrative Court) is protecting us from strictly profit based firms like Veropörssi and Fonecta.
Comment by N. Siinistö — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
I had already published a page of it:
(Finland’s) Taxpayer Data Available Online
Is there anyone interesting to look up?
Comment by Fred Fry — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 2:57 pm
The contact in the European Commission I have been corresponding with said that the European Court of Justice will have an oral court hearing in the middle of February.
Just recently, I came across a crime reporter from a major Finnish newspaper whose name and municipality are there in Veropörssi, even after applying for a “turvakielto” (denial of personal data, for security purposes). Basically, privacy protection does not work in Finland at all on any level. It is a big free-for-all circus. Other “turvakielto” people have ended up in Veropörssi, and ended up in grave personal danger.
I hope this is soon over. This is a shameful thing - personal data turned into a dangerous and foolish form of entertainment without any rights for the data subject.
Finland, a “democracy” that has existed for only 90 years has a lot of people in it that believe that public tax records are necessary for democracy, while the vast majority of democratic countries feel that privacy protection is important for democracy. The right to privacy protection is, after all, in our human rights.
Comment by Sirkuspelle — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 3:34 pm
Agree with you on this one…. this data is private and should not be sold ‘without your express permission’.
A default inclusion is gray legaly FWIU and even more so when people who do ‘opt out’ are included anyway…
Comment by ChrisK — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 3:38 pm
“You may appreciate the irony that the government [...] is protecting us from strictly profit based firms like Veropörssi and Fonecta.”
No irony there, whatsoever. The government illegally leaks the information in the first place.
“a lot of people in it that believe that public tax records are necessary for democracy”
My guess is that many people simply parrot what they’ve heard somewhere. It makes sense considering the communistic ideological influences in the nordic region, over the previous decades. It has an effect, whether people are cognizant of it or not.
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 3:42 pm
The government hardly “illegally leaks” it. Strange method of leaking if you mention about the methods in press releases on your own official website.
In any case, I agree that tax details should not be being sold to commercial entities or handled by them. The freedom of information should be handled by the authorities only, without profit being involved.
Comment by JG — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 3:56 pm
Yes Sirkuspelle, the way things were going Finland’s privacy record could have eventually dropped to the same level with “democratic” countries like the USA or Great Britain. OK, we’ve got still a long way to go to reach such depths but hell, we already dropped to the Swedish and Australian level last year.
http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd347=x-347-559597
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 4:27 pm
“My guess is that many people simply parrot what they’ve heard somewhere.”
This seems to apply for number 6, who believes that he/she should have freedom of information, in this context referring to the freedom to look up the neighbour’s tax records.
The freedom of information and transparency should be regarding how tax decisions are made, so that we know we are paying the right amount of tax and not some arbitrary amount. The personal data directive says the each person has the right to access their own personal data. It does not give anyone a right to access others’ personal data. The only person who has any valid purpose for accessing my tax data is me and the tax collector.
Comment by Sirkuspelle — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 4:31 pm
Sirkuspelle thinks that Finland is not a democracy and don’t have a democratic tradition. If he’s a Finn, I just have to say to the school system: shame on you, what do you teach to the kids these days? Not history or politics/government anyway.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
@7 The USA does not sell its tax records to newspapers. However, the USA has problems with privacy.
The surveillance is referring to government monitoring of things like airline manifestos, Visa card transactions, SWIFT account transfers and stuff like that, which is serious.
After Finland stops selling and leaking personal data to the press, maybe it’s color will change to something better.
It is interesting that Greece is one of the only countries in the world with adequate privacy protection measures.
Comment by Sirkuspelle — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 4:38 pm
The surveillance is referring to government monitoring of things like airline manifestos, Visa card transactions, SWIFT account transfers and stuff like that, which is serious.
Yes it is, but perhaps you should read the USA section at the bottom of the page. Here are some issues:
-No right to privacy in constitution
-Extensive data-sharing programs across federal government and with private sector
-Weak protections of financial and medical privacy
Well, what can expect, the USA is still quite young “democracy” compared to Finland.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 4:54 pm
The personal data directive says the each person has the right to access their own personal data. It does not give anyone a right to access others’ personal data.
Yes, but in the Nordic tradition, tax data is not personal data. It’s public data. Taxation is a mechanism of the state which is meant to be open. That’s where the cultural misunderstanding lies. Essentially, unless it’s distribution would endanger national security, you can access so good as anything from the government here. A few times foreign governments have been caught out in not realising their letters to the Finnish government will become public documents. It’s just a more open public administration than is the custom in some other countries.
Of course though, we have had this debate X-hundred times on here. So, maybe it’s easier just to look back in the FfT archives that to repeat it all over again.
Comment by JG — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 5:22 pm
Sirkuspelle: “The personal data directive says the each person has the right to access their own personal data. It does not give anyone a right to access others’ personal data.”
That’s exactly right. I predict the upcoming court procedure will be one step in the right direction. More procedures will be needed though, like examining the use of people’s tax information by police. That’s another issue covered by international human rights legislation.
Interestingly, despite these improprieties, certain other parts of Finland’s data protection procedures are actually pretty good. That’s mainly due to pressure from the EU. Once these current issues are resolved, Finland could be a model for the world—and for the US, for that matter.
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 5:28 pm
I think I should be paid to reveal my tax info. So if someone really wants to know about my tax then they should have to pay me (unless they have an official position or reason of course).
This way people can either opt-in or opt-out of having their tax records available to all.
Comment by Andy Campbell — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 6:36 pm
@12 look at the definition of “personal data” in the European Union personal data directive. It includes personal taxation data and any data identifiable to a person. Whatever the Nordic tradition may be, or however entertaining looking up peoples’ incomes may be, Finland is in the EU. Finland must abide by the directives of the European Union, which it democratically joined. Other Nordic countries have already taken steps to get its personal data practices in line with the EU legislation. In 1999 Finland made some steps to ratify its own personal data law. However, the tax authority continued to sell tax information to the press. Following the example of the tax authority, in 2003, Veropörssi popped into the scene and started selling tax records it collected from tax offices around the country. The data protection ombudsman made a move to stop it but he was undermined by his own data protection board and the Finnish court. If the central government can sell tax records, why shouldn’t Veropörssi be allowed to, after all. Now finally it is in the European Court of Justice. All this selling and publishing of tax records is done without the consent and even against the objection of the data subject when an objection has been raised.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 6:43 pm
Nr 15, as I said in nr 6, I don’t agree with the selling of tax data. I assume you are referring to Sweden in your “other Nordic countries” reference, Sweden recently enacted a law to restrict private companies selling tax data there - however, in keeping with the open democracy ethos, (as before) such information is still public. That would seem a good move for Finland to take.
That said, private companies are still engaging in selling such data in Sweden. The main difference is that now they must inform the person whose data is released that this has been done and tell them who the enquiry was was made by.
Comment by JG — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 6:53 pm
Unfortunately, regarding public tax records, once the information is released (even if the subject is informed, as in Sweden’s case) it becomes available for broadcast publication and profiteering.
There are plenty of web servers around the world which are located outside of EU jurisdiction—perhaps in Africa. The hosting and selling of everyone’s private info continues, without restrictions.
This carelessness is an embarrassment to the nordics. Sweden needs to conform with EU law.
Comment by Kristian — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 7:19 pm
In a sense - if that is the case - the best thing would be to make the freedom of access more practical, and thus accessible to all without having to make so much effort. Then there would be no point in companies selling it, as the demand would be gone. This seems to be the approach Norway has taken. You can just go to the Norwegian tax agency’s website and look it up yourself. No need to ring them up or send them a letter, or go to one of their offices. I personally prefer the idea of a stronger version of the Swedish system (without the loophole allowing private companies to get around it).
This carelessness is an embarrassment to the nordics.
That’s a very subjective statement. It’s embarrassing if you come from a culture where the idea of such a level of freedom of information makes you uncomfortable. Some people may take it as a source of pride that the government functions in such a relatively open manor (although far from perfect!). What one gets embarrassed about depends on one’s own viewpoint.
Comment by JG — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 7:30 pm
You can just go to the Norwegian tax agency’s website and look it up yourself.
Norway is not in the EU.
Some people may take it as a source of pride
I’m sure there will never be a law which prevents you from volunteering your own information, so your pride should not be affected. Maybe Phil will even supply a page for you on his server.
Comment by Anonymous — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 10:16 pm
JG - Out of curiosity, where does a sense of pride stem from in having your income data published? In a country that brags about its lack of conversation skills or bothering to say hello to neighbours for decades as ‘being an intensely private people’ how does that jive with a nation that likes to tell the world how much they’re (not) making? I’ve always thought this to be a very odd non sequitur.
Comment by hfb — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 10:57 pm
Number 19, you have quoted me and then commented on these quotes in a very out of context way. Please re-read my entry. I am perfectly aware of Norway’s status. And if you read again, you will see that your suggestion that I said that people are proud of their income being public for some kind of ego reasons (as you seem to presenting my comments as meaning) is not what I said at all. I was talking about pride in an open government system - as opposed to an illiberal, less democratic closed system.
Norway being in or out of the EU has nothing to do with what I wrote, which was entirely about arrangements surrounding the way the data is accessed. In both Finland and Sweden (who are EU members), you can just ring the tax agency and get the same information. It’s just that Norway’s tax agency has made it easier (as from only last year). The point I was trying to make was access based, the Norwegian move effectively means that it is pointless for a commercial organisation to make the data available and charge for this, thus killing such profit-making activities. Therefore, you could argue that Norway’s system effectively addresses the profiteering from the system that does occur in Sweden and Finland.
Comment by JG — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 11:01 pm
JG - Out of curiosity, where does a sense of pride stem from in having your income data published?
Hfb, I didn’t say that. I said:
Some people may take it as a source of pride that the government functions in such a relatively open manor (although far from perfect!)
Comment by JG — Wed, Jan 23rd, 2008 @ 11:05 pm
What do you think about this stereotyping: the confusion between process and outcome is typically Finnish, while the typically US (maybe all anglo-saxon) tradition acknowledges a clear and honoured distinction between the two. For instance, if there is a discussion about fairness of any type of allocation, a typical Finn would determine the fairness of that allocation by the projected end distribution, while a typical anglo-saxon would also look at the process of allocation.
Therefore, a typical Finn would agree with poetic justice more willingly than a typical American. Americans do lament often about some crime cases ending in an unfair outcome because of “mere technicalitiesâ€Â, but there is a wide understanding of the “due processâ€Â. The Finnish way would be to devise a “special case exception†to accommodate the process to match the “fair outcomeâ€Â. (Take the Sipoo-procedure as an example).
This same cultural difference shows also in the publicity of personal tax data. I’m pretty sure quite many Finns do not quite see the idea of honouring public procedure but private data. After all, the resulting distribution is what is fair or unfair, and therefore the fairness can be checked by publishing the outcome, i.e. personal data.
The parties benefiting from this confusion (= our politbureau) are not going to clarify it unless forced by EU. So I see this news changing Finnish cultural mores towards the western ones. Which is great.
Today brought another western wind to Finland. It may have slipped under the dramatic stock exchange news for you all, but at least Kristian should rejoice.
Kauppalehti published an article http://www.kauppalehti.fi/4/i/uutiset/etusivu/uutinen.jsp?oid=9272 (no english version available) about Finnish state’s decision to terminate all “state commercial authorities†(= valtion liikelaitos, don’t know how to translate this organizational form) due to the negative statement the EU Commission gave about Destia, formerly known as the “production part†of the Finnish Highway Administration. The Commission gave two reasons for not allowing such organizations: the state organizations enjoy a tax free status and infinite protection from bankruptcy due to taxpayer backup. These characteristics keep the competition skewed or effectively prevent it. So now we should have hopes for more competitive market for all the sectors where “valtion liikelaitos” exists. Antti, this wind may blow hard at VTT structures, too.
The leverage of the EU statement does not stop there: the interpretation is also applied to local government “commercial authoritiesâ€Â. They have to convert to true commercial organizations with risk or they have to be broken up. This means major shifts in the market structure and competition of many services, most likely for the good of the consumer
. And also for the good of the voter-tax payer, because the change forces municipalities to tax openly and not through service fees. This pushes the municipalities towards tax competition, even though initially the local taxes are likely to increase, as the hidden tax income channels of the municipalities are shut down.
All in all, I expect these interpretations of the Commission statements to bring the Finnish price levels closer to the European ones. Not quite there, but closer.
Comment by Mara — Thu, Jan 24th, 2008 @ 12:12 am
@23
“After all, the resulting distribution is what is fair or unfair, and therefore the fairness can be checked by publishing the outcome, i.e. personal data.”
Unfortunately nothing in this world is fair and trying to inject an artificial means of fairness by publishing tax records just flies against the face of logic.
It is in human nature to abuse priviledges. Someone will always be there to take advantage of the situation, so it baflles me as to why Finns still think that this is somehow a good idea
Comment by unlce sam — Thu, Jan 24th, 2008 @ 7:12 am
@23 All in all, I expect these interpretations of the Commission statements to bring the Finnish price levels closer to the European ones.
I expect everything to cost double, and we get shit.
Comment by Hank W. — Thu, Jan 24th, 2008 @ 8:58 am
Strangely, in a “normal” democratic society, like Germany, Austria, Hungary, Portugal, Italy, New Zealand, etc. the concept of transparency and openness is in the procedures, laws, and guidelines used to make decisions. It does not mean openness and transparency with private personal data.
What Finland does with income personal data from the tax authority has its roots in the Swedish monarchy. It was a taxation system where neighbours were policing each other’s tax paying. It was also based on tattling on people who “look” suspicions, like they are not paying enough or like they are doing too well. And it was also based on guilty until proven innocent. So it has its roots in something very far from democracy. It was there to serve the crown. It dates back to probably the 1500s when we see the first public tax records. In the 1500s, there was not much resembling democracy here in this part of Sweden called Finland.
Comment by Sirkuspelle — Thu, Jan 24th, 2008 @ 10:29 am
@23 That is some good news as well. There are many challenges ahead for the Finnish government.
Comment by Sirkuspelle — Thu, Jan 24th, 2008 @ 11:24 am
@23 Excellent points Mara. I can’t wait to see the outcome.
Comment by Kristian — Thu, Jan 24th, 2008 @ 6:49 pm
#26
Yes, those are all countries that in their cultural history (or the cultural history of the ruling population) have gone through a period of “might makes right†-kind of governance. But at some point in history the majority of the population has started to believe that the people are not for the king as much as the king for the people. Eventually those countries transformed into effective democracies, whether they kept the monarchy for symbolic/decorative/entertainment purposes or not.
Part and parcel of a functioning “might makes rightâ€Â-governance is the feudal system, where the mightier one has the property rights by default. Only through his benevolence are the lesser ones allowed to have some, until the next taxing need of the mightier one.
In those circumstances it is natural that the taxing authority encourages an interpretation of fairness to concern the allocation of tax outcomes, not the procedure. And one way of showing that the taxing was “fair†is to tell each and every subject how much each had to give. Besides, that shifts the discussion towards allocation of tax burden between subjects, away from the more flammable topics of tax/benefit-ratios and fairness of the process.
One defining person in the Finnish history was Mauri Kustaa Armfeldt. He was best pals with his king (“Kustaa IIIâ€Â, a great admirer of the Sun king of France). Armfelt got into trouble when he tried to preserve monarchy and the throne for the king’s son, while Swedes in Stockholm got enthusiastic about Napoleonic ideals of democracy.
Armfelt sought refuge from the Russia, and later helped Finland secede from the democratically inclined Sweden and to become part of tsarist Russia. Thus saving Finland for another hundred years from democratic traditions. Finland had its own take on the revolution late, in 1918, and preserved the ruling class (= white) rule, so that we still have remains of the ideal of “might makes rightâ€Â.
Finnish political right has never wholeheartedly embraced the idea of a fair process (be it market process, respecting property rights, criminal justice, or taxing). It actually prefers security and estimable good outcomes for its mightier supporters. So it only supports the idea of a fair process if it can estimate that the said process is going to deliver it’s mightier supporters a sizable share of the good outcomes (and only a small share of the burdens). Otherwise it resorts to the rhetorics of “reasonablenessâ€Â, “caring†, and “fairness†as equality of final outcome distributions. And laments the risk-aversiveness of Finns and their lack of entrepreneurial spirit, without acknowledging any contradiction.
As far as I can see, the Finnish political right (as well as everybody else) appreciates “strong leaders†and “less talk, more action†-kind of management, and proudly brings that up in contrast to the Swedish nanny “discussion cultureâ€Â.
Comment by Mara — Fri, Jan 25th, 2008 @ 2:39 pm
Now folks, which country is the most democratic in the world? Surely it’s not Finland, a country that according to that clown is not democracy at all but just “democracy”. And even if it was a democracy it surely wasn’t a normal democracy.
Don’t peek but the rankings are here:
http://www.worldaudit.org/democracy.htm
It’s almost sad how stupid these clowns are.
Comment by Anonymous — Sun, Jan 27th, 2008 @ 1:31 pm
@30 Finland is pretty good in other respects democratically speaking, but I have been deeply offended by coming to work one day and finding my name and income in a magazine on the coffee table in the break room, and then someone telling me it is part of democracy. Bull.
At that very same coffee table, I made a prediction that in five years, Finnish people won’t be buying lists of each others’ incomes from the kiosk any longer. It hasn’t even been 2 years since then. It is pretty clear some very nasty things have happened to people because of the published tax records.
Have a look at the Verosirkus website to see how successful the public tax records have been in lowering grey economic activity and corruption which people brainlessly parrot to me as being their purpose. Corruption, in reality, is the government doing legally questionable things for money. (like perhaps selling private personal data to the press)
Comment by Sirkuspelle — Sun, Jan 27th, 2008 @ 7:31 pm
#30 Anonymous,
About the link you provided: could you elaborate on the rating methods of the different dimensions of democracy? Why do you refer to that site as giving such an absolute truth on the discussion topic of this thread that it not only solves the case, but proves that everybody taking part in this discussion (except you) is stupid?
To remind you, the discussion on this thread has been about the peculiar custom of the Finnish state to publish personal financial data that most people elsewhere in the western world would probably categorize as private, if such a survey were ever conducted. I would also like to know why you seem to take that rating as evidence supporting the idea that respecting privacy is not part of functioning democracy.
Comment by Mara — Mon, Jan 28th, 2008 @ 12:57 am
Good post. You make some great points that most people
do not fully understand.
“Publishing individuals’ tax records in the media may in future be completely banned, provincial daily Keskisuomalainen reported on Wednesday.”
I like how you explained that. Very helpful. Thanks.
Comment by chiz — Wed, Feb 13th, 2008 @ 8:40 pm