Tredjemanskontroll - Säker rätt är säkert rättssäker : En studie med utgångspunkt i betänkandet Förbudet mot dubbla förfaranden och andra rättssäkerhetsfrågor i skatteförfarandet (SOU 2013:62)

Sammanfattning:

SKV and Tullverket have several important tools and methods available in each activity to ensure that taxes and fees are paid and charged rightfully. Among other things they use tax or customs surcharges, targeted and general third party injunctions or targeted and general third party audits. The targeted controls, ergo targeted injunctions and audits, are targeted towards specific persons or documents while during the general controls these are not specified. The methods have repeatedly been the subject of discussions and attempts to simplify the tax procedure and increase the Rule of Law for the individual.

The government appointed a commission on March 8 of the year 2012 with the assignment to prepare proposals to increase the Rule of Law in the tax procedure. The assignment was therefore to analyze the areas of tax and customs injunctions, reimbursement because of expenses and agents and also third party controls. This study was delimited, partly due to space considerations, to examine the commission's proposals to increase the Rule of Law regarding third party controls as well as to SKV as the investigating authority. Consideration will therefore not be given to Tullverket as the investigating authority. The system concerning third party controls has repeatedly over the years been the subject of criticism and debate. Not least because of that the general third party controls are indistinct due to the fact that the person who is the subject of the control is not aware of the control and that the procedure is considered to contravene the protection of privacy in the RF and the right to private and family life of the ECHR. It has hence been considered that there is a need for change. The commission would thus investigate and make proposals to increase the Rule of Law but given the precondition that third party control, including general controls, would still remain as control methods. Therefore the commission had to consider a proportionality assessment between the protection of individual privacy and SKV:s control effectiveness.

In this study focus was on SOU 2013:62 and the consultation bodies’ responses received on account of the proposals. The commission proposed that the decision making on general third party controls will stay with SKV as the decision making authority and that it should be clarified in the legislative text that SKV has to relate to the principle of proportionality when deciding on general third party controls. The commission also proposed that it should be clarified in the legislative text that SKV only may search for documents and information covered by the decision but that surplus information that was discovered spontaneously also may be used. The commission held that there is no need for clarification of the legislative texts regarding that SKV shall take into account the proportionality principle in the choice of method and choice of control object. The commission also held that there is no need to legislate any imposes for SKV towards the subject of control to inform about the control if the information gathered nevertheless is intended to be the basis for decisions on taxation. Furthermore it was proposed an imposition of legislative texts regarding that the controlled, in connection with the information about the control, should be given the opportunity to request documents and information excluded from the basis for decisions on taxation. That is, after the control is carried out and provided that the information will be added basis for decisions on taxation. The majority of the consultation bodies felt that the commission was inadequate, that the proposals did not add anything new on the merits and that a new commission should be appointed with the mission to increase the Rule of Law in the tax procedure.

The studies’ concluding parts contain a pro et contra analysis of the proposals on the basis of the consultation bodies’ responses, my own conclusions and general concluding comments. In these parts my own proposals are submitted for improvement to further enhance the Rule of Law in tax procedures. My own proposals are due to that the commission in my opinion may be deemed deficient in several aspects.