German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 19/233, pp.
30042-30043.
Right honorable Frau President. Esteemed colleagues.
Esteemed citizens.
The Federal Fiscal Court has now written in the register to
the Federal government that it needs to improve the taxation of pensions. Only
so can a double taxation be avoided in the future. The decision of May 19 of
this year comes late but is not surprising. Already 17 years ago, in January
2004, the Pension Insurance had expressly warned: The personal tax exemption cannot
be evaluated as a tax-exempt pension benefit. – That is also still to be read
after 17 years in the 30 page opinion on the old-age income law of the
Association of German Pension Insurance Underwriters. Despite clear references
to the constitutional problems, the old-age income law was then rammed through.
That is not only bad form but is also on the border of legality.
In the year 2019 alone have 140,000 protests on pension
taxation been entered at the Finance offices. This protest avalanche was
however for the Federal government no cause for activity. Here also the
disengagement and inactivity of the Federal government has deposited itself
over the country like mildew.
Our delegation’s motion of May 31, 2019, for the abolition
of pension double taxation laid the finger in the wound. That was nevertheless
for this Federal government no reason for action. Rather it was rejected without
reflection in committee in April of this year. The coalition wanted to await
the Federal Fiscal Court’s decision. Waiting is apparently the central formula
of this Federal government.
The Federal Fiscal Court has now in its equality
calculations also incorporated one, if occasion arises, for paying widows’
pensions. Only on that account does the Federal Fiscal Court come to the
conclusion that the double taxation is not now already present. Whether and how
a possible widows pension will be incorporated into equality calculations
appears to us at least worthy of discussion. Not every pensioner has a marriage
partner.
In any case, there now needs quickly be a new statutory
regulation which is then comprehensible and resilient. Otherwise the pensioner
will continue uninsured, and there will be additional untold thousands of
protest procedures and complaints. The pensioners’ trust should not be further
exhausted.
We have the formula of inactive waiting not only in regards
the pension double taxation. We also have it in regards a problem which
unfortunately is much greater than the two-time taxation of pensions. We have
in the coming years a demographic problem in regards the statutory pension. The
government indeed has so far in some way scraped by; but when the cohort from
the birth-rich 60s goes into retirement, then it will be really tight in
regards the pensions. All that is not surprising; since for decades is known
the population development. We here straightaway lack the children as new
contributors to the Pension Insurance.
Matthias W. Birkwald (Linke): Children pay no pension contribution! Children should go to school! Since when do children pay contributions?
The present concept of the Federal government’s council
foresees a lengthening of the working lifetime. The prescription of the council
is the pension at 68. The pension at 68 tells many of those who do manual labor
to work until the doctor comes, or is a pension with deductions.
I ask myself what the Pension Commission, convened in 2018
specifically for the further development of the pension system, has actually
done in three long years.The long-term development of the relations of pensions
claims and contribution income has been known for decades. What now threatens
is a disaster with notification. To be arguing here with the increasing life
expectancy is insincere. The central point nevertheless is whether someone can
still work and how many years he has already worked. It is nevertheless plain:
Who begins early to work should also be able to go early into retirement. It is
simply insincere to speak of shocking finance problems so as to palm off onto
the citizens a working lifetime of 50 years.
We of the AfD want freedom of pension entry and no fixed age
of pension entry. Certainly he who has performed 45 years of contributory time
should go into retirement without deductions, when and where he wants.
The hallmark of 16 years of Merkel government for the statutory
pension: A gigantic demographic problem without the beginning of a solution. For
that, the non-insurance benefits in 16 Merkel years have drastically increased
by means of election gifts. The uncovered deficit regarding non-insurance
benefits is at 35 billion euros, year for year. We thus have in regards the
statutory pension a greater reform backlog at the cost of future generations.
If we look at the total balance of the Merkel government for
old-age provision, then it becomes still worse. The Riester pension is at hand,
to be pulped. The company pensions and life insurances struggle with the
long-term zero interest. And the pensioners receive for their savings at the
savings accounts not only no interest but also must come up with negative
interest.
Our country is strong and sustains much. But a 16 year
reform backlog in the statutory pension and 16 years of false switchings in the
economic, social and European policy weigh heavily. In September we must reset
the switches and in common set about the reforms in all areas – for a Germany
with a future.
Many thanks.
[trans: tem]
