German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll
19/201, pp. 25263-25265.
Herr
President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.
That sure was
great cinema, Herr Binding. You had spoken little of tax law. I can also
understand why, in that regard, you must be blushing in the face. I will
similarly go into that. You said, yes: Those who receive state aid shall gladly
pay more taxes. That particularly concerns the employees; that I will similarly
make plain in regards the theme of the progression proviso. That was clearly a
K.O. count for the SPD.
But before I
come to terms with the draft law, I might want to for once express my
fundamental criticism in the direction
of the coalition: It is really going too far to present to us, five days before
the Finance Committee’s concluding session, 42 re-prints of the coalition
delegations
Fritz Güntzler (CDU/CSU): We are fluent!
which shall
partially amend highly complex matters of fact.
I do not
consider that to be to the point and I also consider that to be bad dealing
with the opposition and wish for a better treatment in the future. That really
has something of ESM light, ladies and gentlemen.
Constructive
work also naturally presupposes that the opposition can adequately come to
terms with the intentions and alterations of your laws. That was for us – apart
from the fact that that occurred in a budget week – really going too far. So again:
I here wish for a more reasonable treatment in the future.
That we have
so little time, only half an hour, for debate on the annual tax law with so
many extensive amendments, – that also is a point of criticism, if it is
considered on what points we here often speak for hours – I find that in this
place to be somewhat inappropriate.
But now I really
do come in this brief time to the amendments. There are a couple of good
motions from the AfD. Dear employees, prick up the ears so that at the Bundestag
election you really know who is concerned for your interests.
Heike Brehmer (CDU/CSU): Oye!
Alexander Ulrich (Linke): Oye!
I may for
once name your draft law, very catchy, a “Corona Tax Case Law”. Why is that so
in regards this draft law, ladies and gentlemen? What is interesting is what unfortunately
is not in this draft law. The Soli remains at the top. Let us look for once at
what that now comes to for us in the way of the costs of Corona.
I come to the
AfD”s motion [Drucksache 19/25304]
and before all to the theme of the progression proviso. You have plainly and
clearly said, Herr Binding: He who receives help shall quietly pay. – That pertains
especially to more than 4 million employees. Ladies and gentlemen, you of
course know all that: The part-time employment funding is indeed tax-free; yet
plainly not entirely. It is subject to the so-called progression proviso.
I can cite
the DGB [German Trades Union Confederation] – which might be known to the SPD – :
It is incomprehensible why the
coalition in this situation leaves standing in the rain millions of employees
who are receiving part-time employment funds. He who, with the part-time
employment funds, has to submit to considerable income loss, should not also
have to struggle with additional tax payments.
No less than
Stefan Körzell
says this, a board member of the DGB.
Ladies and
gentlemen of the sovereign house, we, the AfD, have brought in a corresponding
resolution motion so as to solve this problem for over 4 million part-time
workers in Germany for the years 2020 and 2021. What do we want to change?
First. We do not want the part-time employment funds for these years to be
subject to the progression proviso. According to the income tax law, there are
then of course supplementary payments to be reckoned with. I could now
rejoice; for these will of course likely come into the hands of the people in
August, shortly before the Bundestag election. Second: For the purpose of a
simultaneous deconstruction of bureaucracy. And now in the Finance offices the champagne
corks must be popping; since, beginning at 410 euros of part-time employments
funds, income tax declarations are required. Long live this government’s
bureaucracy, ladies and gentlemen.
A further
fantastic motion of my delegation has been entered. All of you here speak of a
Digitalization 4.0. The FDP is the service opposition for that. The CDU says: “We
must bring forward the digitalization”, and you bring forward a lot of money.
In the time of Corona, all speak of the home office. Only, what you all here
are planning, Herr Binding – on which account you have likely spoken not so
directly – those are alms. 5 euros per
day, a maximum of 600 euros, is what you want to grant to the people out there,
who now sit in a home office, and then against the whole even reckon up the
advertising costs.
Ladies and
gentlemen, be guided here by the AfD’s motion [Drucksache 19/23725] in which is stated: Allow us to re-construct
the situation which we had at the beginning of the 2000’s. A glance backwards
often helps. Away with core theory and other things by which each man at home works
or has a workroom and can counter-balance the real costs.That would be sozial, that would be fair, and that
would also convey a digital future in so far as accounting is concerned, ladies
and gentlemen.
Vice-president Hans-Peter Friedrich: Done?
I come to a conclusion.
Vice-president Hans-Peter Friedrich:
You are already at a conclusion
It is a
somewhat middling draft law of this government, because many good amendments
are also in there.
Vice-president Hans-Peter Friedrich: Herr Gottschalk!
On that
account, we will abstain.
Many thanks.
[trans: tem]
