Home / Business and Politics / Voice of Entrepreneurs: Fiscalization 2.0 is a Tool for Punishing Entrepreneurs

Voice of Entrepreneurs: Fiscalization 2.0 is a Tool for Punishing Entrepreneurs

Image by: foto Shutterstock

The Association Voice of Entrepreneurs has requested the Government for an urgent extension of the adjustment period to the new Law on Fiscalization, which came into effect on September 1. Croatia, they remind from UGP, is the first European country to introduce mandatory transition to electronic invoices in all segments. However, entrepreneurs have not been provided with nearly enough time or support to adopt the system without serious financial consequences. Additionally, the application MikroEračun, which they are forced to use, is free only for users outside the VAT system, which they consider discriminatory.

From UGP, they state that the Government has introduced an obligation that it was not prepared to implement itself. There is no guaranteed functionality of the system, and there is no appropriate training, which is unacceptable. Therefore, they are requesting that the adjustment period be extended until January 1, 2027, so that all categories of entrepreneurs enter the system simultaneously and that monetary fines are not charged until then. They also believe that the MikroEračun application should be free for everyone or that the state should co-finance the imposed costs.

– Although the digitalization of business can be a good step forward, it must not serve as an alibi for filling the state budget with monetary fines, which, for example, for incorrect classification of products or services, can exceed 66 thousand euros. Therefore, we demand that the Government show responsibility and understanding of the reality in which they operate, because without that, fiscalization does not lead to any development or improvement, but serves exclusively to them – emphasized a member of the Supervisory Board of UGP, entrepreneur Ivana Ožegović.

Unfair Practice

In addition, UGP warns of unfair trading practices, namely unfair competition from state companies and agencies. Some companies are trying to create a monopoly or duopoly by preventing other information intermediaries, who offer more favorable services to entrepreneurs, from accessing necessary systems. These systems, as they state, operate based on questionable agreements with a single information intermediary, causing direct harm to entrepreneurs, and they are seeking a response from the Competition Protection Agency and State Inspectorate.

They are particularly concerned that the state agency FINA is entering this market, which, thanks to access to all databases and state capital, has an automatic advantage over private entities. The same goes for Hrvatska pošta, which, despite its primary activity of parcel delivery, wants to take a share of the market where there are already enough quality private companies.

Tagged: