Home / Comments and Opinions / Certificates for VAT Form and Fiscalization are Para-fiscal Levies

Certificates for VAT Form and Fiscalization are Para-fiscal Levies

A craftsman with nearly 20 years of experience contacted us, stating that he has timely settled all obligations to both suppliers and the state. However, he is now facing a problem related to certificates for the e-VAT form and fiscalization.

Thus, he, who is engaged in seasonal work and has been in the VAT system since January 1, must submit all forms to the Tax Administration via the internet (journalists in the RPO and VAT system had to do this since April 1). Although he himself welcomes online VAT payment, his previous short experience shows that the Tax Administration has not taken into account many illogicalities that are a result of specific activities.

Undefined Certificate What primarily troubles our craftsman is that something must be paid in advance even though his business fate, like life, is logically uncertain, meaning that even assuming he operates in the best times and the best environment, he can never be sure whether he will do well. Thus, the certificate for the VAT form, which is valid for two years, must be paid for more than a thousand kuna. Therefore, he wonders why the certificate, if it is acceptable to pay registration immediately, should not be paid for every month.
Well, therein lies the catch, as it is about a certificate, a document that must be used during the period in which it is valid. For example, a certificate is obtained for organic agricultural production, which is fine, regardless of the fact that the company can shut down before the expiration date. However, with the tax certificate, it is something else. It has nothing to do with the activity, and it is not entirely clear why this certificate was necessary, except for the state to gain an additional source of income (since the certificate and the accompanying sticker can only be issued by Fina).
It is actually a new para-fiscal levy whose number, by the way, the Government is supposedly trying to reduce, as exemplified by our craftsman who works seasonally, only 3.5 months a year. Previously, he had a quarterly obligation to submit VAT forms, which he would nicely take to the Tax Administration and it would cost him nothing. Now, each such visit to the Tax Administration costs him about 150 kuna, whether he worked or not. Indeed, in such cases, the Government had to think of them, not to mention that issuing a certificate for tax payment is quite strange, especially since its validity must be paid for.

Paper Costs as Much as a Roll The second problem is with fiscalization, and it has nothing to do with whether market vendors will introduce those cash registers. For fiscalization, a five-year certificate is also required, but the additional problem is that for an alternative to fiscalization, one must have a book of accounts certified by the Tax Administration if the internet ‘dies’. Our craftsman points out that there is only an A4 format on the market that holds 50 invoices, costing 75 kuna. Let’s take, for example, a bakery whose internet connection fails for several hours. In such a situation, the seller must use an entire A4 sheet for most customers who buy only one loaf of bread or one pastry to write down just one product. In no time, without a block, he must open a new one – and each such invoice on which the word ‘roll’ is written and which the seller charged two kuna costs 1.5 kuna.
It would be better if the Tax Administration offered several formats of these books of accounts. Until now, our craftsman printed invoices on a receipt block that contained 50 invoices and cost five kuna, and now he pays 1.5 kuna for just one invoice. The Tax Administration should understand that some things are illogical and that these are new, ‘invisible’ para-fiscal levies.

The State Discriminates Journalists The problem with paying obligations to the state, although it does not concern certificates, also affects journalists who are in the so-called register of taxpayers (RPO). Regardless of the fact that due to a potential loss of engagement in the media house (practically a dismissal or if the media house goes into bankruptcy or liquidation), they would have to stop paying contributions and taxes because they no longer have income, the Tax Administration constantly bothers them that, although they have no income based on the RPO, they must pay taxes and contributions that are determined for that year.

This is absurd because the state thereby places part of the citizens in an unequal position with other unemployed individuals, which is unconstitutional. The state should immediately cease such practices and allow every journalist or anyone in the RPO to exit it whenever they wish, regardless of the reason.

We invite entrepreneurs to present their problems. Following your writings, by pointing out the absurdities in individual cases, we will highlight the shortcomings of the system as a whole and thus support the readers of Lider as individuals in their unequal disputes with the cumbersome state administration.