Edis Felić: The Tax Authority Almost Seized His Account Because It Did Not Calculate Deductions

A friend of mine who works as a freelancer tells me how the Tax Authority almost seized his account without reason. He paid his taxes for the previous year, and based on that, the tax advance for this year was determined in his tax return (where it is automatically calculated). He says he has been regularly paying money to the Tax Authority. Recently, he happened to be near his tax officer for work, and since he had some debts in previous years that he settled, he stopped by to check if everything was alright. And it was a good thing he did. The officer told him that he already owed about eight thousand kuna with interest for the previous year, to which my friend bulged his big eyes in disbelief at what he heard. He asked how that was possible, and the officer replied that the tax card says it all and that he was supposed to send a request to Fina for the blocking of my friend’s account in just a few days.

Missing Deductions

My friend took the tax card, asked the officer to wait with the seizure of his account, and went to his accountant, who was also surprised when he heard why he came. The accountant looked at the tax card, reviewed my friend’s business records, and discovered what the problem was. Although everything was in the tax return submitted in February, the tax officer did not take into account the deductions my friend was entitled to, and by ignoring them, he concluded that in addition to the already paid tax, about eight thousand kuna needed to be paid additionally. Upon discovering where the mistake was made, my friend rushed back to the tax officer in leaps and bounds, who reviewed all the papers and confirmed that he had indeed made a mistake. The officer apologized to him, it was visibly uncomfortable for him, my friend says, and he immediately got to work to correct it. Thus, by sheer coincidence, the tax officer’s mistake, which could have had fatal consequences, was rectified. It would probably have been resolved at the beginning of the enforcement procedure since Fina would have had to inform the person being enforced that they would be left without money. However, that would have been much more complicated and much more stressful.

Modern Technology

If the tax officer had sent the tax obligation decision to my friend, he would have seen that something was wrong and would have complained, and the second-instance body for complaints of the Ministry of Finance would certainly have accepted his complaint. What is the problem? The Tax Authority has stopped sending decisions on tax obligations for the previous year. The reason is the high postage costs, which is understandable. However, as we can see from this example, the state’s savings could have caused harm to one taxpayer if he had not happened to knock on the door of his tax officer. Therefore, the issuance of decisions that have been abolished should be reinstated and sent to taxpayers to correct any mistakes. After all, it is the legal right of taxpayers to appeal administrative acts, and how will they do that if they have no idea that the state has done something regarding them, especially if the officials make mistakes. That is why the Tax Authority had to find an alternative way to send decisions, which could also be done via email. It would have been enough to just ask the taxpayer to accept this method of sending documents. Of course, for older people who are not adept with modern technology, they would still have to use postal services, but there is no other option.