on taxes also, unfortunately, the "old acquaintance" is better than "new to know." This is the conclusion which is reached when comparing the new tax system with the old Uruguayan income tax paying individuals between 1960 and 1974.
Contributors old income tax that applied to Uruguay until 1974 could significantly reduce the amounts to be paid to the DGI discounting, among others, rents, interest on loans, losses due to theft, life insurance costs, donations and medical expenses in general. The new tax system, however, only allows individuals to deduct the contributions made and reduced BPS portion of the expenses incurred in the care of minor children.
Professionals, for its part, before they could significantly reduce the tax payable to the Treasury settlement subtracting all the expenses actually incurred in the year, regardless of the concept. The 1960 law only required as a condition that they were related to the professional activity and which were documented in invoices.
Now under the new regime can only deduct a maximum amount of expenditure equal to 30% of your income, nor heavy. " The costs that exceed that percentage, and even those that the professional is obliged to perform due to unforeseen, for example as a result of financial loss or health, are punished by the Reformation and can not be discounted in any way.
The old tax system was more contemplative and supportive and which enabled each individual to calculate the amount of tax based on their actual structure of expenditure and income. Indeed, the 1960 tax paid only on income actually entering into the pockets of taxpayers, ie the amounts which could be used to save. The new tax, however, it also affects those income taxpayers, while seeing, they never receive or enjoy as it's intended to cover expenses. The
structure of the old income tax made by the Uruguayan was a true "partner" of the taxpayer. When the individual income increases, so does your income tax as diminishing the effect of increased expenditure also decreased, as a counterpart, what to pay to the Treasury. Thus, the income tax in 1960 joined a civilized model of taxation on income of individuals, similar to that now in force, for example, in the United States.
Contributors old income tax that applied to Uruguay until 1974 could significantly reduce the amounts to be paid to the DGI discounting, among others, rents, interest on loans, losses due to theft, life insurance costs, donations and medical expenses in general. The new tax system, however, only allows individuals to deduct the contributions made and reduced BPS portion of the expenses incurred in the care of minor children.
Professionals, for its part, before they could significantly reduce the tax payable to the Treasury settlement subtracting all the expenses actually incurred in the year, regardless of the concept. The 1960 law only required as a condition that they were related to the professional activity and which were documented in invoices.
Now under the new regime can only deduct a maximum amount of expenditure equal to 30% of your income, nor heavy. " The costs that exceed that percentage, and even those that the professional is obliged to perform due to unforeseen, for example as a result of financial loss or health, are punished by the Reformation and can not be discounted in any way.
The old tax system was more contemplative and supportive and which enabled each individual to calculate the amount of tax based on their actual structure of expenditure and income. Indeed, the 1960 tax paid only on income actually entering into the pockets of taxpayers, ie the amounts which could be used to save. The new tax, however, it also affects those income taxpayers, while seeing, they never receive or enjoy as it's intended to cover expenses. The
structure of the old income tax made by the Uruguayan was a true "partner" of the taxpayer. When the individual income increases, so does your income tax as diminishing the effect of increased expenditure also decreased, as a counterpart, what to pay to the Treasury. Thus, the income tax in 1960 joined a civilized model of taxation on income of individuals, similar to that now in force, for example, in the United States.
The current system, by contrast, makes the government becomes a "partner to mean" only share gains the taxpayer, not losses or expenses. That is the inevitable consequence of a reform that, far from seeking tax justice, seeks an increase in revenue, mainly through increasing the tax burden on workers. ___________________
Dr. Miguel Angel Gallegos
Beverly Hills
Punta del Este Uruguay
Tel: (598) (42) 49 61 78
Cel: (598) (99 ) 26 93 98
E-mail: mykaelg@gmail.com
