Projet de loi modifiant l'article 375 du Code des impôts sur les revenus 1992.
General information ¶
- Authors
- LE Christian Brotcorne, Benoît Dispa
- Submission date
- Sept. 1, 2014
- Official page
- Visit
- Status
- Adopted
- Requirement
- Simple
- Subjects
- tax authorities appeal to an administrative authority direct tax tax inspection tax on income
Voting ¶
- Voted to adopt
- Groen CD&V Vooruit Ecolo LE PS | SP DéFI ∉ Open Vld N-VA LDD MR PVDA | PTB PP 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 ¶
March 29, 2018 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)
Full source
Rapporteur Benoît Piedboeuf ⚙
I am referring to the written report. I specify that this was a recommendation from the Federal Ombudsman, who was heard in the Finance Committee. My colleague Dispa proposed it, the commission adopted it for the first time and, following the comments of the Finance Cabinet, we returned once again to the committee to improve the project, which was finally unanimously adopted by the Finance Committee.
Benoît Dispa LE ⚙
Dear colleagues, it does not happen so often that a bill submitted by members of the opposition arrives in the plenary session with a good chance of being adopted, which well deserves to be raised to the tribune. My excellent colleague, Mr. Christian Brotcorne, claims to be customary of the fact, but he does not prevent that it remains relatively exceptional.
My conviction is that the proposal submitted to your examination is a good proposal. Indeed, its main merit lies in the fact that it introduces flexibility where the functioning of the SPF Finance was quite rigid, it must be acknowledged. When a director had made a decision regarding a complaint, it was considered irreversible – this was the position of the tax administration – except to bring an appeal before the court, which exposed the debtor to significant surcharges and above all, to an unequal treatment since, in other matters, the authorities have the possibility to rectify their own decisions or even withdraw them.
It is this irrevocable nature of the decision that we felt necessary to change. As the rapporteur pointed out, it was in fact on the basis of a proposal from the Federal Ombudsman that this conclusion was imposed on us.
I would therefore like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the teams of the Federal Ombudsman, who regularly make good recommendations for us. I do not find it unlikely to follow their observations. The Ombudsman has been patient. In fact, it was in a 2007 report that it suggested amending this Article 375 of the CIR. It took the Finance Committee ten years to hold an audience with the Ombudsman. The whole committee, with the support of Mr. Mr. Pietro said that the proposal submitted by Mr. Brotcorne and co-signed by myself eventually deserved to be considered. This was stated ten years ago by the Federal Ombudsman.
I would like to thank the majority. I also wish, Mr. Minister, to welcome the relative goodwill of your administration because, at first, it was not quite enthusiastic; it had even raised objections. The second reading allowed us to take into account the amendments drawn up in consultation with your administration. I would also like to thank you, since, thanks to the procedural arrangements now contained in the text, this proposal can now be unanimously adopted.