Proposition 54K2576

Projet de loi visant la mise en place d'un système d'avances permanent sur le produit de la taxe communale additionnelle à l'impôt des personnes physiques.

General information ¶

Submitted by

MR Swedish coalition

Submission date

June 29, 2017

Official page

Visit

Status

Adopted

Requirement

Simple

Subjects

personal income tax financing municipality local authority finances

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 ¶

July 19, 2017 | Plenary session (Chamber of representatives)

Full source

Mr. Speaker, for the most part I can refer to the written report, but I had asked the committee to provide a schedule so that the municipalities can prepare themselves as much as possible for the advance system. I understand that the Minister brought the schedule to the meeting, as he had promised. So I suggest sharing it around so that we are fully informed.

The scheme will be copied and rounded, Mr. Deseyn.

I would like to refer to the written report.

The floor is yielded to Mr Laaouej who is the only registered speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak in order to welcome this remarkable progress.

I think of all our colleagues who, on a daily basis, manage their municipality. There are a number of people among us that I greet. We know how much, in recent years, if not in recent decades, the municipal finances have been undermined. And, of course, I can’t stop saying that this government has not arranged things.

The latest reform of the tax on natural persons has direct impacts on the municipal finances, not to mention a whole series of other measures you are taking and which increase the burden suffered by local entities, municipalities in particular.

Nevertheless, let us welcome this measure, which is a new model, a new solution that succeeds other solutions. I also welcome the work of my colleague, Benoît Dispa, who took a number of initiatives and who, without doubt, inspired the government.

But, Mr. Minister of Finance, I would like to invite you to think about abandoning the 1% of expenses that remains to be borne by the municipalities, that is to say, the retention of 1% that you do. My plea obviously does not deny that an administrative burden is related to the collection of the tax. In doing so, it is logical to address the invoice to the municipalities. However, from memory, it is 30 million euros. I think you gave me the number. This amount only imperfectly compensates for the general lack of income of the municipalities related to the tax on natural persons. Returning those 30 million to the municipalities would be just justice. I am sure that many of my colleagues will applaud this request.

Finally, I welcome, once again, the work of the mayors of Flanders, Brussels and Wallonia.

I would like to express our appreciation for this bill and the work that the Minister has done.

For some time, for years actually, the local governments and our group have been asking for the introduction of a structural advance system with a view to a structural and stable system of reimbursement of the additional personal tax to the local governments.

As you know, stability in the outflow to local governments is very important in their own multiannual planning in terms of financing and budgeting. If we expect local governments to be good housekeepers in terms of budget and accounting, then we must also be, as a federal government. We need to ensure a very stable advance deposit system. This bill addresses a great deal of this.

In the past, attempts have been made to provide a solution to the liquidity and solvency problems of municipalities through temporary advances plus ad hoc advances from 2013 to 2016, with an annual advance paid in December, but that system never provided an adequate response, given the necessary security of a stable advance system. This bill can effectively address these concerns and questions. We therefore fully support it.

Thank you, Mrs Smaers.

The floor is yielded to Mr. Dispa.

Mr. President, I thank you.

Contrary to what our colleague, Mr. Laaouej, suggests, I am not naive to think that I can inspire government policy. If it is true that I was able, a little or a little, to contribute to put some pressure like many others on this matter, I am delighted. I had done so, in particular, by submitting a bill on behalf of the CDH group, aimed at establishing an automatic advance system, and I had also done so by repeatedly appealing to the Minister of Finance. As I did in the committee, I want to thank in the plenary session this latter and its teams for the work carried out because, in fact, it is a beautiful advance grabbed by the local authorities.

In my opinion, this is just justice: when you look at the evolution of municipal finances over the past few years, you see a real control of municipal spending. In all sectors, caution is placed and is to be put to the active of municipal managers. On the other hand, when it comes to revenue, the situation is more difficult because the control of these recipes is not always total. The latter will be affected by the effects of the tax shift, without wanting to resume the debate on the subject. But it is true that a priori, the municipalities may fear, to believe the forecasts of the SPF Finance, a reduction, all things being equal elsewhere, of the additional to the IPP of the order of 10%, and it is therefore a real threat weighing on the local finances.

You may think, on the side of the majority, that there will be a return effect. We will see what will happen. In any case, this is a real difficulty. But another major difficulty, and this is the one that the bill responds to, is the high volatility of the additional, especially to the IPP. This creates problems of budgetary and cash predictability. The proposal that the Minister has developed with his services, however, allows to remedy this problem.

I would like to welcome the struggle carried out by the teams of the Unions of cities and municipalities throughout the country. I think that their expertise added to that of the SPF Finance team to eventually imagine a device that has, I think, its quality. I especially welcome, Mr. Minister, that you have agreed to increase the percentage of the advance by increasing it from 70 to 80 percent on the basis, in particular, of the consultation that you have had with the Union of Cities and Municipalities. This is undoubtedly a good news, an advance. I look forward to this and thank you. I confirm the support of my group, the CDH, to this bill.

I agree with all my colleagues, including those of my own group.

This is a question that has been asked for years in both the Federal and Flemish Parliament. The Association of Cities and Municipalities has asked us this question often, like a lot of mayors. I myself have been ships of Finance in Zaventem.

Mr. Minister, I must thank you for being the first to carry out what has been promised many times. I would also like to thank Mr. Dispa, who, however, has strongly insisted on this with his bill.

I disagree with Mr. Laaouej when he says that the municipalities should be compensated. If the increase or decrease of taxes has incidences, it also has to do with the legislation. This is also the case with the Finance Act. When it comes to opcenties and the municipal finances, if the personal tax is reduced globally, it also has consequences for the municipalities. Some municipalities think there is less money in the municipal treasury if citizens enjoy a global tax reduction. It is a two-sided sword.

I do not think that one should change that system to ensure that when the federal government reduces taxes, it should compensate the municipalities to limit that loss. The system is what it is. The same goes for increasing taxes. That is a point that I do not think should be addressed, otherwise the whole philosophy of how the personal tax in this country functions at the local and regional level will be challenged.

Mr. Minister, I find it a very good proposal, which answers many questions that have been formulated by the municipal governments for years. I am pleased that it was unanimously approved in the committee.

As colleagues Deseyn and Smaers have said, I can say that our group fully supports the proposal.

I have no intention of speaking in particular, since this is an absolutely consensual proposal. However, some elements question me, in particular in the statements of Mr. Laaouej.

I was delighted to see that Mr. Laaouej was pleased with a proposal submitted by a parliamentary and relayed by the majority. Well, no, because in the end, he can’t stop it! It is the most delicious parliamentary that can exist outside parliament or television channels. But as soon as a media is present or the debate is public, it must necessarily hit the government.

I will tell you one thing. I have been in the municipal council of my town for 35 years; I will soon begin my thirty-sixth year of office. I was also the mayor, the chief of finance, etc. Well, the finance ministers who succeeded each other during those thirty-six years – I still remember Philippe Maystadt – had all promised that we would go in the direction ...

I even had, dear PTB comrades, another life, as a member of another party, from which came the Minister of Finance Philippe Maystadt, who promised this kind of reform.

Here, we must really be happy with this reform, without reluctance, Mr. Laaouej.

I also recall that in some way, this non-performance of a promise made was clearly due to the fact that the money of the municipalities was used as treasury by the federal. In this case, the more we move towards improving the budget deficit – which, I hope, will one day become a budget balance – the more we will ensure that the use of municipal money by the federal state will be less and less frequent.

I will come to the reservation expressed by Mr. Laaouej. We have, in Wallonia, a folklore group called "Les mô contints". It’s a pity because I like it so much, but Mr. Laaouej makes me think a little about it. The tax shift, which he criticizes, may contain a negative element for municipalities in the first jet; but let us never forget that this tax shift benefits our fellow citizens, since they are less taxed.

As Van Rompuy said, “too much tax kills tax.” In this case, this measure will contribute, in the long run – and I think the Minister of Finance shares this feeling – to the development of economic activity and bring as much by taxing less. We take that direction.

When it comes to society, one can always defend a conservative or pastoral conception. I prefer the reformist approach.

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Minister, colleagues, today we approve an important bill. Already in several legislatures, this issue has been discussed repeatedly in the Committee on Finance and in the plenary session. We now come to a fixed system for the flow of income to the municipalities. That is the essence of the story, so that municipalities do not, for example, have to quickly withdraw money for a certain deposit for a few weeks in order to make certain payments. It is very important that a fixed income stream is finally properly regulated. That is the essence of the present design and most cities and municipalities are very happy with it. It is a big step forward.

However, contrary to what others sometimes say here, this does not mean that local authorities are therefore exempted from their duty to also ensure basic budgetary balances and adequate incomes in comparison with municipal spending. Too often the municipalities come up with additional questions – we stand a year before the municipal council elections – about the income flows ahead of their spending. At that level – the Minister of Finance will not contradict me – there is still a shortage in the area of local governments. This deficit must also be addressed in some way. The present draft law does not release them from the task they have. The same effort that the VVSG and other institutions have made regarding this bill, a fair and good draft, I would also like to see in reaching a balance between the municipal income and expenditure. It is time to work on this as well, so that a few small percentages of the total reporting to Europe can be corrected.

This can be perfectly done and can be done in many areas, but for this the supervisory authority, both the Flemish and the French Community, must take responsibility. A number of financial operations are underway, such as municipal mergers, but there are other possibilities for certain services to collaborate so that the costs of the municipalities can be reduced. It is basically a second task. It has little to do with the present draft, which ensures the flow of income, but we must also look at the flow of spending. This is the task I want to give to the local authorities.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by responding to Luk Van Biesen.

I speak out of experience, and not only of myself. Most, if not all, local governments have tried to balance everything within the framework of budgetary ordering their accounts especially on the spending side. I think the local governments really do not need a finger from the Chamber to say what they should do. They have a huge financial responsibility that they fully assume.

We have repeatedly discussed this bill in the committee. This is a common concern. If it is good, I would like to say it. This is not the first time we approve something that you bring to Parliament. Today we will support this 100%.

This is a good thing for municipal governments who are not financially easy. If this also comes back to the fact that the transfer of personal tax is uncertain, then it really becomes difficult. You solve that today with this scheme, which is a good thing. Congratulations to!

We will support this.

Mr. Speaker, without removing anything from the positive statements I have made about the bill, I would still like to allow myself, as Mr. Vanvelthoven has just done, to nuance somewhat the enthusiasm of our colleagues of the majority.

As Mr Vanvelthoven said, local authorities are well aware of the obligation of budgetary balance. They are so aware of this, Mr. Van Biesen, that the latest analyses of municipal accounts and municipal budgets reveal that, contrary to what happened in previous legislatures, there is currently no increase in investment power, usually attributed to the electoral cycle.

Although the municipal election deadline is approaching, the municipalities demonstrate extreme caution in their investments. This shows that they are aware of their obligations. It is also evidence that they anticipate a negative effect of the tax shift. I do not want to fuel the controversy. We can discuss positive effects for the citizen. However, only for municipal managers, the tax shift inevitably causes a prospect of decreasing revenues from the additional to the IPP by about 10%. These are the figures of the SPF Finance.

I would like to say, in conclusion, that it is not because Mr. Flahaux is celebrating his birthday today – and I congratulate him – that the local authorities are still at the feast!

I also welcome this progress.

I would just like to answer this to my colleague Dispa.

One reason why municipalities are cautious and no longer invest is also the blocking of the investment capacity as established in the Walloon Region, as part of a misinterpretation of the SEC standards. These are the brakes that hinder the investment of the municipalities. I know in fact some municipalities that have no loan at all, who are willing to invest and who cannot do so because of these badges. In statistics, it seems to be cautious. This is not at all of caution; it is a wallon blockage to the investment of municipalities who know yet what they are doing.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank everyone for their statements of support for this bill that has indeed been waiting too long.

There are related discussions about the effects of tax shift. I totally agree with Mr Van Rompuy. You can’t change the law every time something changes.

In addition, there is a positive effect of the tax shift for municipalities, in particular in terms of job creation.

For the rest, the debate about public finances and the role of each remains eternal. The federal, regions and municipalities have a role to play, but the debate will first take place between us.