Proposition 51K1141

Projet de loi modifiant l'article 138 du Code des impôts sur les revenus 1992 pour tenir compte des enfants mort-nés pour la détermination des personnes à charge.

General information ¶

Submitted by

PS | SP MR Open Vld Vooruit Purple Ⅰ

Submission date

May 18, 2004

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

direct tax tax on income child tax-free allowance

Voting ¶

Voted to adopt

CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP Open Vld N-VA MR FN VB

Contact form ¶

Do you have a question or request regarding this proposition? Select the most appropriate option for your request and I will get back to you shortly.

Discussion ¶

June 17, 2004 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, Colleagues, I would like to present a very brief report on the discussion of a draft law and a draft law that aims to amend the Code of Income Taxation and this according to the determination of the number of persons in charge of deadborn children or children who died immediately after birth.

The Minister of Finance has argued that Article 138 of the Income Tax Code currently makes a distinction according to whether the child is still alive or dead at birth. This distinction determines whether or not the child is in charge of the parents and whether or not the taxable person is entitled to an increase in the tax-free amount for children in charge.

This draft aims to eliminate that distinction in the fiscal system. From now on, it would be assumed that, on 1 January of the tax year, a child born dead or a child lost by miscarriage after at least 180 days of pregnancy also forms part of the taxpayer’s family. The condition is that the event occurred during the taxable period.

Regarding the budgetary impact requested, the Minister noted that, according to the Finance Inspectorate, it will be small.

After another interesting discussion, which you can find in the report carefully prepared by the services, this draft was unanimously approved.

Mrs Van der Auwera was registered in the general discussion. Who wants to sign up?

CD&V will approve this bill. Parents who, because of the loss of a child, have to go through a heavy process of mourning, faced with profound sorrow, countless questions and doubts, often even with feelings of guilt and anger, must indeed, in our opinion, be able to count on a gesture of the government which shows the recognition for the parents that their child, even if it is not alive, in mind will still be part of the family.

We regret that the Committee on Finance, for regulatory reasons, was unable or unwilling to add our own draft law amending the regulation on unborn children, which was referred to the Committee on Justice, to the draft law now under voting.

Parents of an unborn child are now facing numerous differences in legislation. They can bury their child from a full pregnancy period of 12 weeks or 82 days. They can give it a first name if the duration of pregnancy is at least 180 days, but can not give a surname. Furthermore, an unmarried father cannot recognize his unborn child. Legislation and implementing decisions on maternity allowance also use different concepts, but as a rule the 180-day limit always applies.

The bill now adds a tax reduction for children born without life. Parents who may be overwhelmed by feelings of sadness do not understand that they may bury their deadborn child, but they must not give a name or recognition, while they receive maternity pay and two years later receive a tax reduction. It is important that there is clarity in this area. People do not understand such differences in legislation. Our bill addresses this and ensures the alignment of the various applicable legislation. In addition, it takes into account the evolution in neonatology, making the viability limit now at 20 weeks of pregnancy duration, which is equivalent to 140 days post conception.

Finally, our proposal provides for the possibility to give the name to the child born without life in addition to the first name and to have the child recognized by the unmarried father. Mr. Speaker, I therefore urge you to insist on the presidents of the Committee on Justice, respectively the Subcommittee on Family Law, to put the Bill No. 879 on the agenda with the utmost urgency.

We talked about it last week, I think. I think you are right. I will contact for this. Is this issue not discussed by Mr. Borginon’s committee?

I would like to replicate to Mrs. Van der Auwera’s presentation. The same arguments and elements were discussed during the discussion in the Committee on Finance. The aspects cited there were not the subject of the Committee on Finance. It is also logical for me that they will be discussed in another committee. I feel a little sorry that these things are mixed up here.