Albrecht Glaser, November 10, 2023, Global Minimum Tax

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/135, p. 17103. 

Hearty thanks, Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. 

The progressive coalition discovers a new tax and the CDU naturally joins in. It is to be granted – and therefore also praised – that after lengthy negotiations an agreement has been reached, and also an international law treaty is tucked behind. To the extent one now tries to lead the work to an end. The new tax law has over a hundred paragraphs and a complexity which is as high as our presently existing income tax law. There is however one other thing which stands beside. The experts see it also. The talk is of the greatest tax project in decades. It is for the representatives of German industry and trades a fully new tax law. A citation from the hearings: The tax consulting profession speaks of a “lack of embedding in the German tax system” and of legal insecurities resulting therefrom.   

Besides a minimum tax declaration at the local finance office and a minimum tax report at the Federal Central Office for Taxes, the affected businesses need to develop and operate their own controlling system so as to account for, control and evaluate the tax burdens and effective taxes of all domestic and foreign subsidiaries on the basis of local accounting guidelines, the international IFRS [International Financial Reporting Standards] regulations and the respective national tax guidelines. Moreover, the goal of a higher tax intake – which is now relativized; it was however always a quite important goal – is not achieved. 

            Deborah Düring (Greens): It is certainly not about a higher tax intake!

For that, there is a study of the ifo Institute which demonstrates that nothing in that regard is forthcoming. It is therefore shifted to the aspect of an improvement of competitiveness. 

The bureaucracy in Germany further increases, despite affirmations otherwise by the entire great coalition in this house. Between July 2021 and 2022, the current bureaucracy expenditure was increased by means of a new law from 6.7 billion euros to a total 17.4 billion euros; ergo, around 11 billion euros, as stated by the national norms control council; that is thus not some number from some journalist. The FDP member Herbrand expressly complained of this phenomenon in a guest contribution in the Wirtschafts Woche in these days where he speaks of a fulfillment expenditure of 44 billion euros which still needs to be added to this latest engrossment of bureaucracy.   

            Maximilian Mordhorst (FDP): He is right!

The initiative for a worldwide minimum tax proceeds from the OECD, a union of 38 developed countries which feel themselves obligated to the market economy. There emerges the question whether the U.S.A. or China – this has been indicated, it is much more dramatic than was indicated – thus seriously introduces the minimum tax, as would have gladly Germany the model boy or the EU. 

            Maximilian Mordhorst (FDP): That is the look in the crystal ball!

Add to this that some states even today are considering defensive measures. Thus the Americans will make tax credits. These tax credits will not lead to that they will be accounted for the minimum tax, but that is a trick so as to relativize the effects in a petty cash fund. It will come, as at the Paris climate agreement, to where only Europeans are obligated to something; others however wait awhile, and think of optimizing their individual national interests. 

Right honorable ladies and gentlemen, you are today driving this country against the wall; there, holiday speeches are of little use. If we do not solve the problems of the high taxation of businesses at over 30 percent, of bearable energy costs, the education failures in primary schools to the creation of hazelnut subjects in the universities, the fading work ethic and the lack of identification with the German virtues, a sustained improvement of the situation in Germany will not enter into it. It requires a change of times, ladies and gentlemen, but a right one. 

Hearty thanks. 

 

[trans: tem]

Albrecht Glaser, March 17, 2023, Election Law

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/92, pp. 11018-11019.

Honored Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen. Honored fellow citizens.

We deal with a central theme of our democracy: The election law, the legitimation of the Bundestag as a law-giving power by means of a mandate of the citizenry, from which, according to Article 20, Section 2 of the Basic Law, all power of the state proceeds.

The Ampel wrote in its coalition agreement – I cite with permission of the President:

We will within the first year re-work the election law so as to durably prevent the growth of the Bundestag

It needs to be reduced in line with a statutory control parameter [gesetzliche Regelgrösse]. And further:

A committee will concern itself with a parity representation of women and men in the parliament…We want to alter the Basic Law so as to lower the active voting age…to 16 years.

All of this was more or less intense because the Ampel has also blocked themes debated in a reform committee which up to today still has not concluded its work. The infantilization of the active right to vote, ladies and gentlemen, happily requires a change of the constitution. It can thus be prevented by a qualified minority of the reasonable in this house.

Of interest is which other states lay their fate in the hands of the young. I name for example Cuba, Nicaragua, Sudan and North Korea – thus good models for Ampel regulation.

            Götz Frömming (AfD): Good friends of the Greens!

The presumption may be posited that such countries want to exploit for political propaganda the young’s lack of ability to judge.

            Ralf Stegner (SPD): The people are smarter than you!

Easily manipulated citizens are good citizens.

The manufacture of a parity representation – allow me also to let slip a few words in this regards – of women and men in the Bundestag by means of simple legislation, right honorable ladies and gentlemen, is a usurpation of the pouvoir constitué over the pouvoir constituant, that is, the mastery of parliament over the sovereign.  

The citizenry [Staatsvolk] is as it is: It comprises women, men, old, young, believers, non-believers, intelligent, less intelligent, responsible, irresponsible, crooked and straight, people with and without a migration background. No one has the right to make quotas of this heterogeneity of the citizenry and from that derive proportions by which group rights to organs of the state will be allocated. The citizenry is inseparable and consists of individuals, not of clusters of groups of persons. This proposal of the Ampel is unconstitutional, as has already been declared by the Constitutional Courts in Potsdam and Weimar for their States.

With that, I come to the Bundestag. For the goal of limiting the Bundestag’s excess, the Ampel formulates very defensively; the growth should be prevented. In this question, we were in the last legislative period further along.

One hundred public law scholars in the autumn of 2019 had expressly reported and stated in an open letter to the German Bundestag that a deferral of the reform would “violently shake the people’s trust in our democracy”. They regarded the parties’ particular interests as a hindrance to reaching results after years of discussion. I cite:

In no case may the impression arise that many members would defer the urgently necessary changes because their own shirt was more important to them than the common coat.

The AfD delegation was new in the Bundestag and had a clear charge from its basic program: A Bundestag with 450 members should be strived for. We have worked for that and in September 2020 put forward a formulated draft law which included the fixed mandate number of 598 – 598! – so as to prevent the new arrangement of election constituencies and thereby to attain a quick implementation of the reform in the last legislative period – besides billions in savings for the state in this legislative period. This proposal was rejected under the usual, inclusive din against the AfD from all other delegations.

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Shabby. Yet they learn.

In May of last year, a day before the reform committee occupied itself with the Bundestag’s excess, right honorable ladies and gentlemen, a miracle occurred: The Ampel put before the public a concept for shrinking the Bundestag to 598 mandates, which is nearly identical with the AfD’s concept of 2020,

             Stephan Brandner (AfD): The AfD works! Even the Ampel notices!

which in any case is to be voted on today. The Ampel  thereby knowingly gave rise to the impression its election law proposal may be a product of its own cognitive performance.

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): That, it certainly cannot be!

The media believes it to this day and they write it so. Borrowed wisdom is still wisdom.

Not overtaken were our requests for an open list election which should guarantee a direct influence of the voter on the candidates order on the State lists. That would be an authentic democratic progress; but the Ampel does not want it.

With a motion to amend of three days ago, the Ampel wants the number of future mandates, hitherto disputed by no one,

            Konstantin Kuhle (FDP): Other than by the reality! We have namely 736!

            Christian Dürr (FDP): But with reality the AfD has nothing to do!

of 598 – never disputed, by no one! – to increase to 630, and abolish the basic mandate clause, as already ever in the proposal of the AfD.

Herr Dobrindt, I now tell you a secret.

             Stephan Brandner (AfD): Ui!

This presumption which you have of the effect of this clause on your political fate in Bavaria is false. It is false; the application is not as you believe it to be. This I unfortunately cannot pursue since the President gives me only a few minutes of time.

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): The President shakes her head!

There are no arguments for this latest government sleight of hand, ladies and gentlemen. The Ampel has justified what it otherwise never does. They have thereby determined that, by means of the original reform à la AfD, the SPD alone would lose 38 mandates, according to the election results of 2021. This price was too high for the comrades. First the party, then the public good. By means of the increase of the number of mandates and the elimination of the basic mandate clause, they can halve their loss of mandates. That is the crux of the matter in regards the sleight of hand we experienced three days ago. What – Frau President, if you will permit me this concluding paragraph – would the one hundred public law scholars have said to this sleight of hand?

On account of the self-serving increase of the mandates number in the last seconds, and the lack of direct democracy progress, the AfD does not agree to the Ampel draft. We so far abstain. We will support our own draft on account of its consistent quality of reform.

Hearty thanks.

            Stephan Brandner (AfD): Bravo!

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

 

Albrecht Glaser, October 21, 2022, Energy Stabilization Fund

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/64, pp. 7266-7267.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

This government has discontinued the energy trade with Russia because it holds that to be necessary for the attainment of foreign policy goals.

When the government does this, then it needs to have a plan for the consequences arising therefrom. They must know that Germany until now obtains 46 percent of its oil imports and 55 percent of its gas imports from Russia. They must know that neither the amounts of energy therein nor the necessary logistics thereof are in the near term replaceable. The government must also know that the energy sources of petroleum and gas represent 60 percent of the energy consumed here in this country. Electricity makes up 20 percent and the renewables 8.8 percent of the end energy. From these few although fundamental correlations is yielded that the energy imports from Russia make up almost a third of the energy basis of this country.

The sudden termination of these energy imports must thus lead to an even so sudden energy crisis in Germany. It means exorbitant prices increases for all customers, supply shortages and supply interruptions. Since energy is the life’s blood of a modern economy and a civilized society, what we are presently experiencing is a matter of an attack upon this state and which has been conducted by this government.

A government which incessantly mouths the term of responsibility needs also bear this in regards such an extraordinary government failure. Instead, it puts before us for the second time this year a resolution for a breach of the debts brake. In June, you in addition demanded 116 billion euros on account of the pandemic and a Russian war of aggression, as you there wrote. Today, you want a further 200 billion euros and refer again to the Russian war of aggression and the termination of gas deliveries and – as related to the sum of credits – that it is therein a clear sign to Russia. That may be understood by who wants to.  In that regard, it is not at all stated who shall receive what and when. And Russia shows you that we need to make mighty debts for the overcoming of a crisis. An extraordinary sign of strength!

The credits shall be immediately borrowed for a re-purposed special fund, stored there for 2023 and 2024, and amortized until 2058 by our grandchildren.

            Matthias W. Birkwald (Linke): There, I’m already dead seven years!

That all does not go so well has been declared to you by the Federal Audit Authority with whom you however certainly do not speak. We therefore will also reject the resolution to breach. You treat the debts brake exactly as do the EU states the stability and growth pact.

There must be a temporary support of citizens and businesses. Yet it is no solution for the German energy problem and soon becomes unaffordable. It is only tenable if you immediately begin with a new energy policy, an energy policy in which nuclear energy comes to the fore. Besides, Greta welcomes nuclear energy, if that is of further assistance to you.  

Who supports an energy supply on wind and sun alone has not understood the trivial physics. He thereby produces the next energy catastrophe. The rest of the world beyond Germany knows this and acts accordingly. We steer ourselves into Dreamland and think we circumvent the next crisis. We notify you: It will take place and you will pay politically for it.

 

[trans: tem]

 

 

Albrecht Glaser, September 30, 2022, The Germans’ Atom Bomb

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/58, p. 6461.

 Frau President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

The EU states are indebted far beyond the Maastricht criteria. This was in the year 2019, well before Corona. The numbers: Over 10 trillion euros, which corresponds to a debt ratio of 84 percent, instead of the required 60 percent consistent with the treaty.

In 1997, the stability and growth pact was decided on in the EU. Parallel to this, the manipulation of Greece’s debts situation, which was to make the country capable of accession, was known. The corresponding dossier on this manipulation still lies under lock and key at the ECB, although complaints were made; that has come out. The contradiction between treaty obligations on one side and the action of governments and states on the other side is since then the red thread of debts policy, and this benevolent consideration which we have just heard is an irony.

The 2008 financial crisis in the EU was principally a state debts crisis. Thus in 2012 a fiscal pact was concluded which obligated all treaty partners to create domestic regulations to prevent overflowing debts. Since then, the legal framework of debts policy is screwed around with until it is past recognition.

The consequences of that: France has debts of 113 percent, Spain of 118 percent, Portugal of 127 percent, Italy of 150 percent and Greece of 193 percent of gross domestic product. Wise heads in the Center for European Policy and at the Bundesbank state: Many members have never made the debts rule their own. Hundreds of violations have been committed by the states. That is around half of all possible treaty violations. The organs of the EU have imposed not one sanction – in regards this number of violations, ladies and gentlemen.

The CDU motion describes in numeral 1, letter a, a correct goal and it names many correct specific requirements, possibly in letters b to f. Yet it will surely find no majority in this house; it does not concern us. If it were found, it would not be enforceable in the EU. If it were enforceable in the EU, a majority of the member states would not adhere to it. That is your problem.

France, Italy and their retinue in southern Europe, which have a broad majority in all organs of the EU, from the Commission through the ECB to the EuGH [European High Court], because for example Cyprus and Malta have the same vote weight as Germany and the Netherlands, want the opposite of what the CDU motion wants. All of the “Club Med” states want the debts union and we are thereby at the crux of the matter.

At the beginning of the 90s, Mitterand spoke of the D-Mark as the Germans’ atom bomb. He said to Margaret Thatcher, I cite: Without a common currency, we are all, you and I, subject to the will of the Germans. – Therefore were Lagarde, who was a French minister prior to her ECB office, and Trichet, who previously was counselor to Giscard d’Estaing, sent into the running – we have left our candidates standing in the rain – and Draghi manages a limitless and illegal state financing of Italy by means of the ECB. That is the neutrality of the ECB for which you of the Union strongly stand, as you to this day write.   

We thus have in Germany not only a migration policy, a foreign and defense policy, an energy policy and a debts policy bankruptcy but also a euro policy one. That is the result of the years-long policy of all parties in this house. We therefore require a new one.

 

[trans: tem] 

Albrecht Glaser, October 13, 2022, Tax Fraud and Cultural Identity

German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 20/60, pp. 6713-6714.

Frau President. Ladies and gentlemen.

Herr Chancellor speaks of “unsupported horror stories”. Essentially, it is about the Cum-Ex scandal, apparently the largest tax fraud in history. A high two-figure sum in the billions was thereby embezzled in Germany. Commerzbank, the WestLB, the HSH Nordbank, the Deutsche Post, the KfW, Volkswagen and other businesses with public shares are under suspicion of having participated therein. The state prosecutors office in Cologne with 19 prosecutorial teams investigates around 1,000 suspects. The central point in the fraudulent manipulations lies in the years 2009 to 2011.

It is about the manipulations of so-called Cum-Ex business. What is that? Capital gains taxes will be automatically detained in regards dividend payments. Specific recipients of these dividends are released from this tax and can therefore take back the tax amount from the Finance Office. This opportunity of a tax refund was with high cunning abused and the treasury defrauded.  

The banking house of Warburg in Hamburg was very active in this business field between 2007 and 2011. It “surreptitiously obtained” [„erschlichen“], as formulated by one business accountant, 169 million euros for this; meantime, a greater part of the tax requirements expired. In the year 2016, an additional sum of 47 million euros threatened to expire. The mysterious circumstances in this regard have to do with the First Bürgermeister of that time, subsequently Finance Minister and today‘s Chancellor.

All of the sudden an accountant at the responsible Finance Office began to reconsider the return, writes the author Huld who for years occupies herself with the Scholz affair. She contacted the bank shareholder Olearius who implicated Alfons Pawelczyk, the former Second Bürgermeister, on account of his contacts with Scholz. Both are members of the Hansestadt’s polite society.

Parallel to this, the Federal budget politician Kahrs was authorized as a lobbyist in Berlin. He is the one who in red woolen socks incessantly attacked the AfD with invective in the German Bundestag; it could also be said, so as to remain au milieu – with dirt and rubbish – and in whose safe deposit box was later found 200,000 euros of an origin unclarified to this day. Since we strongly believe in the independence of the Hamburg Justice, the proceeding will surely be rapidly clarified.  Also at this time, a party contribution in the sum of 45,000 euros was made by this same perplexed bank to the SPD.  

In the year 2017, one of the leading officials of the Federal Finance Ministry took notice of the not yet expired tax requirement of the sum of 47 million euros against the Warburg Bank. This co-worker insisted that the Hamburg authorities needed to prevent the expiration with a formal permission – a relatively uncommon procedure. Acknowledgement of this was yielded by means of investigations of the Cologne state prosecutor’s office. In Hamburg, nothing at all was criminally investigated.

In Cologne emerged the diary of Olearius in which there is talk of meetings with Scholz and the activities of Kahrs and Pawelczyk. Two conversations of Scholz with Olearius ensued in the offices of the First Bürgermeister – without witnesses and without result in the documentation. This was therefore ticklish because the Finance Minister previously denied any meeting with Olearius. I myself was witness to such a denial in the Finance Committee.

The capable official who wanted to avert harm from the country, was, following the assumption of office by Scholz, surprisingly early pensioned and the requirement of the sum of 47 million expired. That is no unsupported horror story but describes, right honorable ladies and gentlemen, the state of the nation.

It is exactly so the case with the domestic security, with defense against mass immigration and the resulting situation in the housing market, state finances, the education system, the energy supply, the booty system in public service opposed to the performance principle according to Article 33 of the Basic Law, especially so in Justice, and with the distressed freedom of opinion.

Appreciation of this state and of democracy as a whole, ladies and gentlemen, measurably withers for years – for that, there are endlessly many opinion surveys – not because the citizens are bad democrats but because the political class does not fulfill its duties. This state is not delegitimized by villains – my last sentence –

            Vice-president Wolfgang Kubicki: Herr colleague, please come to a conclusion.

as the Interior Minister asserts, no, it delegitimizes itself by means of failures of agency and the knowingly induced renunciation of the cultural identity in this country, right honorable ladies and gentlemen.

 

[trans: tem]