Transcript Slide 1

BIOF-lunchdebat 18-12-2009
Evaluatie van de hervorming van
de schenkingsrechten op roerende
goederen in het Vlaams Gewest
Dr. C. Smolders
1
outline
1.
Steunpunt fiscaliteit &
begroting: research plan
2.
The Flemish reform of the gift tax
on movables
The research question
The results of the different projects
General conclusions
3.
4.
5.
2
1. Steunpunt f&b: research plan
A1
A2
A3
Evaluation of Flemish tax reforms
The budget of the Flemish Region
2007-2030: Threats and
opportunities
The impact of taxes on economic
growth and employment
3
1. Steunpunt f&b: research plan
A1
Evaluation of Flemish tax reforms
2007
2010
Evaluation of the Flemish
reform of the gift tax on
movables
Prediction of regional tax
revenues
2008
2011
4
Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Steunpunt fiscaliteit &
begroting: research plan
The Flemish reform of the gift
tax on movables
The research question
The results of the different projects
General conclusions
5
2.The Flemish reform of the gift tax on
movables
(art.131 §2 W. Reg) :
-
Since 1.1.2004 separate tax rates for registered gifts of property
and movables
-
Substantial decrease in tax rates for gifts of movables :
3% -> gifts to children, parents, grandparents, spouses and
partners
7% -> gifts to all other beneficiaries
- Registered gifts are permanently removed from the heritance
(suppresion of the so called ‘progressievoorbehoud’)
6
Evolutie van de ontvangsten 2004-2007
ja
n/
0
fe 4
b/
04
m
rt/
04
ap
r/0
4
m
ei
/0
ju 4
n/
04
ju
l/0
au 4
g/
0
se 4
p/
04
ok
t/0
no 4
v/
0
de 4
c/
04
ja
n/
0
fe 5
b/
05
m
rt/
0
ap 5
r/0
5
m
ei
/0
ju 5
n/
05
ju
l/0
au 5
g/
0
se 5
p/
05
ok
t/0
no 5
v/
0
de 5
c/
05
ja
n/
0
fe 6
b/
06
m
rt/
0
ap 6
r/0
6
m
ei
/0
6
ju
n/
06
ju
l/0
au 6
g/
0
se 6
p/
06
ok
t/0
no 6
v/
0
de 6
c/
06
ja
n/
0
fe 7
b/
07
m
rt/
07
16000000,00
15000000,00
14000000,00
13000000,00
12000000,00
11000000,00
10000000,00
9000000,00
8000000,00
7000000,00
6000000,00
5000000,00
4000000,00
3000000,00
2000000,00
1000000,00
0,00
Schenking onder levenden van roerende goederen (in rechte lijn en tussen echtgenoten - 3%-)
Schenking onder levenden van roerende goederen (aan andere personen - 7%-)
7
Evolutie van het aantal dossiers 2004-2007
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
07
m
r t/
7
/0
jan
v/0
6
no
/0
6
se
p
/0
6
jul
/0
6
m
ei
06
m
r t/
6
/0
jan
v/0
5
no
/0
5
se
p
/0
5
jul
/0
5
m
ei
05
m
r t/
5
/0
jan
v/0
4
no
/0
4
se
p
/0
4
jul
/0
4
m
ei
04
m
r t/
jan
/0
4
0
Schenking onder levenden van roerende goederen (in rechte lijn en tussen echtgenoten - 3%-)
Schenking onder levenden van roerende goederen (aan andere personen - 7%-)
8

Gifts at 3%-rate:
 Tax
income increases with 74% (2004-2006)
 Number of files increases with 135% (2004-2006)

Gifts at 7%-rate:
 Tax
income increases with 32% (2004-2006)
 Number of files increases with 84% (2004-2006)
9
Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Steunpunt fiscaliteit &
begroting: research plan
The Flemish reform of the gift
tax on movables
The research question
The results of the different projects
General conclusions
10
3. The research question
1.
Did the reform result in an increase in the
number of gifts, did it change the timing of
gifts, did it change the average amount
given?
2. Are there significant differences concerning
the profile of donors and beneficiaries
before and after the reform?
3. What do tax payers know about the
reform? Are they for or against the reform?
Did the reform change their attitude?
11
3. The research question
4 constituent projects:
1.
Estate planning experts: text analysis of the in-depth
interviews with 22 experts
2.
HORIZON-fair Ghent: logit-analysis on the data obtained
from face-to-face interviews with 247 donors/potential
donors
3.
IVOX-panel: logit-analysis and OLS-regression analysis
on the data obtained from an on-line survey (n=1050
potential beneficiaries)
4.
Register offices: Logit-analysis & OLS-regression analysis
on the data collected in 9 register offices (n=2686
registered gifts)
12
Outline
4.
Steunpunt fiscaliteit & begroting:
research plan
The Flemish reform of the gift tax
on movables
The research question
The results of the different projects
5.
General conclusions
1.
2.
3.
13
4.1. listening to experts…
Considering
 The donor:
age 60-65, healthy, relatively wealthy, male,
better educated, meant to support children when
they start their professional careers or plan to
build a house, 80% of the gifts in direct line,
most of them are equally divided over the
beneficiaries

The gift:
intentional gifts: at advanced age, larger average
amounts, registered gifts
occasional gifts: in the earlier stages of life,
smaller amounts, mostly non-registered
14
4.1. talking with experts…
Considering the effects of the reform:

Clients sooner aware of the benefits of
inter vivos gifts

Shift in the type of gift: more registered
gifts, less other types of gifts (hansels)

Significantly more gifts of movables

More transfers accompanied by conditions

Wealthy clients are well informed about the
reform<>others!
15
4.2. talking to (potential)donors…
Aim
Evaluation of the reform by (potential) donors from
low to middle class income groups
Face-to-face
interviews with 247 visitors at the
HORIZON-fair in Ghent, October 2007
Analysis
Chi²-testen
Logit-regression:
GIFT = 1
GIFT = 0
in case of a donor (n=66)
else (n=142)
16
4.2. talking to (potential) donors…
Model
GIFT=f(KIND25D,HEALTH,GENDER,EDUCATION,
JOB,AGE,HOUSE,STATUS,INCOME,HEAD,
MOTIVES,BENEFICIARY,APPREC,KNOWL,
PLANNING,INHERIT,FISCAL)
KIND25D: the number of children age 25-45
HEALTH: the donor’s health
GENDER: the donor’s gender
EDUCATION: the donor’s educational degrees
JOB: the donor’s job
AGE:the donors’ age group
HOUSE:house ownership
17
4.2.
talking to (potential) donors…
Model
GIFT=f(KIND25D,HEALTH,GENDER,EDUCATION,JOB,A
GE,HOUSE,CSTATUS,INCOME,HEAD, MOTIVES,
BENEFICIARY,APPREC,KNOWL,PLANNING,
INHERIT,FISCAL)






CSTATUS: civil status
INCOME: household income level
HEAD: the number of contributors to the household’s income
MOTIVES: motives to give (marriage,birth,
illness/accident,altruïsm, children’s housing)
BENEFICIARY: have been the beneficiary of a gift
APPREC: the appreciation of the tax rates on gifts of
movables
18
4.2.
Model
talking to (potential) donors…
GIFT=f(KIND25D,HEALTH,GENDER,EDUCATION,JOB,A
GE,HOUSE,CSTATUS,INCOME,HEAD,MOTIVES,
BENEFICIARY,APPREC,KNOWL,PLANNING,
INHERIT,FISCAL)




KNOWL:the knowledge concerning inheritance tax law
PLANNING: being involved in estate planning
INHERIT: whether the subject has been involved in an
inheritance procedure lately
FISCAL: fiscal considerations
19
4.2. talking to (potential)donors…
Results:
-
The probability to give is significantly larger in case of women, age
70+, monthly family income >5000 €, 1 or 2 children age 25- 50,
consciously involved in estate planning, altruistic nature
-
The probability to give is independent of:
education, job, tax resistance, knowledge concerning estate
planning, health, civil status
-
The reform is strongly appreciated, but the communication to a
much lesser extent
-
Knowledge of respondents concerning estate planning in general is
disappointing
20
Outline
4.
Steunpunt fiscaliteit & begroting:
research plan
The Flemish reform of the gift tax
on movables
The research question
The results of the different projects
5.
General conclusions
1.
2.
3.
21
4.3. Talking to (potential) beneficiaries…
Aim
? knowledge, impact, appreciation of the reform
when potential beneficiaries are asked
(representative panel, age 25-50)
Method & response rate
On-line questionnaire with cooperation of
iVOX/Indigov (on line from 14/3/08 to 9/4/08)
Response rate= 1050 respondents
22
4.3. Talking to (potential) beneficiaries…
Results







19% of the respondents received one or more gifts
donor? 76% parents, 13% grandparents, 10% others
type? 50% hansels, 29% deeds, 15% bank gift, 6% not
registered
nature? 63% movables, 30% estate property, 7% building
lots
amount? 15% < 2.000€, 31% between 2.000 and 10.000€,
25% between 10.000 and 25.000€, 29% > 25.000€
conditions: 25% of the deeds
Self reported effects on behavior=negligible; the only
important effect is on investment in estate property
23
4.3. Talking to (potential)
beneficiaries…

In 35% of the cases the gift tax was paid because:
24
4.3. Talking to (potential) beneficiaries…

in 29% of the cases the reform affected
the giving:
25
4.3. Talking to (potential) beneficiaries…
Results

beneficiary=
mostly men, married, owner of a home, healthy, double
income family, income superior to 2500 euro, age 45 or
older, higher education degree, at least a 4/5 FTE job

Larger gifts to:
owners of a home, beneficiaries with larger incomes, better
educated, age 40 & older, married, registered deeds

In the post-reform period more gifts to younger beneficiaries
and to one-income families

Significant higher amount of conditional gifts in case the
beneficiaries are feminine, less educated, less active, living
from one income and in the case of larger amounts given
26
4.3. Talking to (potential) beneficiaries…
Results
Knowledge concerning inheritance taxes
and gift taxes = disappointing
 Knowledge concerning the reform: 67%
never heard of it
 The reform is appreciated by a majority of
the respondents

27
Outline
4.
Steunpunt fiscaliteit & begroting:
research plan
The Flemish reform of the gift tax
on movables
The research question
The results of the different projects
5.
General conclusions
1.
2.
3.
28
4.4. studying deeds…
Purpose
To obtain an objective view of the profile
shifts since the 2004 reform
Method
Screening of 3100 deeds available in 9
registration offices, period 2000-2007
After merging the cases in which one
donor registered several gifts, 2686 gifts
remained
29
4.4. studying deeds…
Data
30
4.4. studying deeds…
Data
31
4.4. studying deeds…
The profile of the gifts
-
In 69% of the cases: only one registered donor
in 50% of the cases only 1 beneficiary
larger number of beneficiaries in case of gifts to others
(=‘in zijlijn’)
70% of the gifts = in direct line
The average amount received= 195 197 euro
The average amount given=344 754 euro
The gift in DL > the gift to others
In 50% of the cases, the gift =money
Shares or other financial assets =22%
In 2 out of 10 cases the deed mentions conditions
32
4.4. studying deeds…
The profile of the donors
-
On average age 76; only 2% younger then 50
Donors in direct line are younger (age 74,6
DL<> age 81,5 others)
In case of just one donor: mostly women
The profile of the beneficiaries
-
On average age 46;only 20% younger than 36
beneficiaries in direct line are younger (age 44
DL<> age 53 others)
33
4.4. studying deeds…
OLS-regressie; dep.var.= totaal geschonken bedrag
34
4.4. studying deeds…
35
4.4. studying deeds…
Before and after the reform
-Larger
gifts
-Significantly
more registered deeds (!)
-More
conditions attached
-Gifts
of financial assets increased
-Gifts
to others increased
-Gifts
on later moments in life time
36
Outline
4.
Steunpunt fiscaliteit & begroting:
research plan
The Flemish reform of the gift tax
on movables
The research question
The results of the different projects
5.
General conclusions
1.
2.
3.
37
5.General conclusions
1.
Concerning the reform
-
Significant increase in tax revenues
-
Significant increase in the number of registered deeds
-
Significant increase in conditional deeds
-
Significant increase in the number of gifts to others
-
Significant increase of the amount given
-
Donors still rather old (average> 70)
-
Registration of gifts is postponed
-
Gifts increase savings and moderately stimulate investment
in real estate
38
5.General conclusions
2. Considering the knowledge about inheritance tax
-
Knowledge in general is very disappointing, except for the
wealthy group
3. Appreciation of the reform
- Donors and beneficiaries are happy with the reform, but not
with the official communication considering the reform
-
Gift taxes on gifts to partners are contested
-
A majority of the respondents prefers lower tax rates for the
highest tax breaks of the inheritance tax
39
Contact

Steunpunt fiscaliteit & begroting
Algemeen secretariaat
Hogeschool Gent
Campus Schoonmeersen
Gebouw C
Voskenslaan 270
B-9000 Gent

09 248 88 35

[email protected]
40