Gilles Vanden Burre (Ecolo): “People can own a car, it’s their choice. The problem is that they are subsidised by the government”
Gilles Vanden Burre (Ecolo): “People can own a car, it’s their choice. The problem is that they are subsidised by the government”
18 comments
Ecolo MP Gilles Vanden Burre wants the tax reform to be completed by the end of 2022.
Tax reform’. A mantra that has been on the lips of almost all politicians, especially since the publication of the expert report presented on Tuesday. But for Ecolo group leader Gilles Vanden Burre, not everyone is as motivated and committed to achieving it. Interview.
**What do you think of the report on tax reform?**
We share most of the findings of the experts. The Belgian system is unfair, complex and not clear enough. Most of our fellow citizens, who make their tax returns, are aware of this complexity. It is also unfair because we can see that taxation on labour is too high, especially for low and medium salaries. This is a real problem. And it is not high enough on other types of income, such as wealth.
**Time for action?**
Yes. The time for experts and consultations has passed. The time for reports has passed, now it’s time for political action, we want to see an ambitious tax reform. We hear other parties, including within the federal majority, who no longer want or expect an ambitious tax reform. This is not the case for us.
**What avenues do you favour?**
There is the possibility of doing so by means of a tax credit, degressive up to the average wage (to reduce taxation on the lowest incomes, editor’s note). The report also talks about the possibility of widening the tax brackets, i.e. staying longer in the same bracket before moving up to a higher bracket when your gross salary increases.
**How can this be financed?**
The experts suggest ways to target income from assets, which they say is clearly too little taxed, too little present in the overall tax base. To make a real tax shift in this country, to reduce the tax burden on labour, we need to make wealth income contribute more. This includes capital gains on shares and bonds, which are already taxed in almost all neighbouring countries. Even the United States does it, even though it is not a country known for its tax rage.
**Are you talking about partners who are less inclined to do this at federal level?**
Thomas Dermine recently said that he no longer believed in tax reform. Yet that is where there is the most scope for change.
**He was talking about large-scale reform, but he was still in favour of reform, wasn’t he?**
Let’s say that I have the impression that the motivation to carry out tax reform is a little less present among some. In Ecolo, it is extremely present and it is very important. It is necessary for tax justice and purchasing power. We are not going to change everything in a few weeks but the time for procrastination is over. Even if we are from different parties, I hope that we will be able to make progress on this by the end of the year. There is too little contribution from capital and still too many subsidies to fossil fuels.
**Are you thinking about the company car?**
We want to gradually replace very expensive systems, such as the “salary car”. It costs between 1.5 and 2 billion euros per year. It no longer makes sense in terms of our climate objectives, and what’s more, it’s unfair. 15% of workers benefit from it and it’s the whole of society that finances it. We need to replace this system and discuss it so as not to penalise those who benefit from it.
**How do you respond to David Clarinval (MR) who believes that the abolition of the petrol card is going in the wrong direction for purchasing power?**
We need structural reforms, whether it’s the petrol card or salary cars, these are systems that we need to get out of.
**Are you completely against company cars? Even electric cars, for example?**
No… not at all. We’re not against cars, by the way. If people want to have a car, that’s their choice. Some people need them. The problem is that it is subsidised by the state. And I’m not talking about the company cars of technicians, workers who have to travel to several sites, etc. We are not attacking this system. It is a work tool. But we are attacking the salary car, as a complement to the salary. For people who don’t necessarily need them.
**MR is blocking?**
The MR vetoed the governmental discussions on this issue in 2020. Today, I think that the world has changed dramatically in two years, as we can see in relation to our dependence on Russian fossil fuels. I do think that such mechanisms should be discussed. Even Georges-Louis Bouchez (president of the MR, editor’s note) says that it can be discussed from now on, if the workers lose nothing. It’s no longer a veto. So I think that things can move forward. Minds are changing, so much the better.
**Some people think that the experts’ report contains too many clichés and not enough figures. What do you think?**
Not everything has been quantified to the last carat, but it is up to the politicians to decide. So that’s normal. But the report gives figures, on labour taxation and so on. It is a good basis for work. The findings are objective. I don’t like everything in the report either, but it’s going in the right direction.
**What don’t you like?**
There are some things I would like to look into, such as the change in alimony payments and the tax benefits associated with being single or in a couple. We also want to introduce environmental taxation, get rid of subsidies for fossil fuels, do reduced VAT rates on coal or firewood still make sense?
**Are there any blockages within Vivaldi?**
Let’s just say that this reform must be done quickly, before the next elections. The time for action has arrived and it is feasible.
**So why wait until September to take political decisions?**
There are still 35 bills to be voted on and there is the August recess. So we have to be realistic, there won’t be any concrete projects with figures before September, but it is quite possible by the end of the year. It is necessary to change society and protect purchasing power.
Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Oei, nu gaat 90% van de IT juniors met hun BMW X3 weer boos worden hoe ze dan niet goed verloond worden en wat krijgen ze er dan voor in de plaats! Ze hebben nu al maar een brutoloon van 2000 en al hun ander loon zijn fiscale foefelarij dat ze nog niet zo goed snappen dat dat hun op de long-term gewoon benadeeld.
If they get rid of salary cars, expect a brain drain, as well as people starting to “roll coal”
Tant de vérités en si peu de mots…
People who think cars are the future, are delusional.
They are such a massive waste of money and resources.
I wouldn’t mind giving in my car as long as I can work from home most of the time. Taking the train from my place to Antwerp, Gent and Brussels is a hassle though. Missing my connection strands me easily 30-60 mins depending on the time of day.
Ah yes, the liberal in sheep’s clothing.
They can take away all the extra-legal benefits, but they better replace them with a clear tax bracket like in the US. If there is no net improvement due to the simplification, I’m definitely looking across the border.
I really wonder how they are going to define what is a salary car and what not?
I work in IT (small company), I have a company car.
When I first started out, I didn’t have a car. This brought all kinds of problems.
* “Hey, can you go to Brussels for xxx? and take equipment XYZ with you” “How? There is no decent public transportation in that area? Or should I take it all by bus?” “OK, take my car (private car of boss) for this one time”. (ofc, multiple similar situations followed)
* 3AM call: “Hey we have a problem with X, how can we fix it?” “You go on location, call me and I’ll provide instructions over the phone, I have no way of getting there.”
* “Can you go do X Y Z at a customers site?” “How do I get there?”
* …
So finally the company bought a van, and I was the only one using it. Very sporadic, it could be unneeded for months, but I was to take it home “just in case it was needed” (and the company has no parking space).
Things changed over time, I got a family now, the van got replaced by a family car (because we don’t actually need a van, it was just cheaper at the time). And since the car is always with me, it was decided this would be my company car. Which makes things easier for everybody.
Bare in mind, I still don’t need it all the time for work. Most of the rides are private at this moment.
In mean time this company car made me lose my benefits for woon-werkverkeer, as I should just take the car. In practice I drive it to the park and ride now, and take public transportation from there (paid with my own money, because company car).
Having the car also means that unless I have a good reason, when trouble occurs, I can be called to go on-site. (But I get a car in return, so seeing how this is rare, I don’t mind.)
So recently I got scolded for having a “salary car”. (yay)
Do I have a salary car? Probably I guess? But I can’t fully do my job without it, will Mr Gilles see it that way? I guess not because company cars are bad.
“People can own a home, it’s their choice. The problem is that they are subsidised by the government”
Same logic, different item. The problem is who gets to decide what gets subsidised and what doesn’t.
For all the focus on the company car: isn’t that what the “mobiliteitsbudget” ([https://mobiliteitsbudget.be/](https://mobiliteitsbudget.be/)) is for? Replacing the option “only a car” with “public transport + budget for rental car during holidays” or “part of rent when living near workplace + deelwagen abo” or other variations? It’s also a system that would benefit even those that currently don’t have access to a salarycar while still including public transport costs.
I’m totally open to discussion, I don’t have either a car, or this mobility budget, so I don’t know personally how either works.
There are about a billion things subsidized by the government. Most of them are not strictly necessary, but used to help people out.
They do realize they also gain money from cars, do they? Not saying it’s offsetting the money they pour into (company) cars but it’s still an income.
The point of having a company car is that it allows to keep salaries low. If we get rid of this system, a lot of people are going to pay a ton of extra taxes, especially since you don’t need to be making a lot of money to be in the upper tax bracket. I think this needs to be addressed.
“Le système belge est injuste, complexe, trop peu lisible.”
Vou parlez du système politique?
Totalement d’accord il faut réformer ce bazar!
Right. For my partner who is a consultant and needs to go to another country a few times a month, it’s a ‘choice’ to own a car. Totally not needed work equipment. 🙃
We live in the city so we use OV and bike mostly for personal transport either way. But the arrogant attitude of people claiming that having a car is always a luxury, clearly weren’t raised in the middle of bumfuck nowhere nor do they have a job which is physically impossible without a car. Oh, not to mention people like who have health problems and cannot simply take OV to the hospital nor carry the heavy bag of groceries. There are good reasons to have a car. It’s not the working class/middle class that has a car ‘because they can’. It’s because they cannot manage otherwise.
I literally know no one who takes out their personal car just for something silly or fun. It’s expensive. And in my social network the few company cars are often used to share a day out with friends because it would be too expensive for everyone to pay for the OV and let’s say the Zoo or something. Is that an unnecessary added bonus? Yes. Is it being used by a generation that sees no other way to have a break in between work and flexijob in an unmanageable economical situation? Also yes.
I honestly think this “Company/salary car war is costing us 2billion/y” is a bit short sighted.
1. If i didn’t have to pay almost 40% (yearly) of my wage in taxes, plus my employer another 28% on top of that wage in costs, then it would be interesting not to take a car that is financially interesting.
2. It’s not “costing” money, the goverment just makes more on you if you get the same amount in wage instead of in value of a car. Most employees are NOT going to get the same value of that car in wage. This is how they end up with “costing us 2billion”, they should write “not making 2 billion” instead.
3. All these cars also make money, the leasing firm that hires a ton of people, maintanence contracts that put people to work. Taxes payed on these cars, parts, insurance…. All these things contribute to the tax-war-chest.
Take these things out of the equation and lets talk about a fair taxation system on wages, maybe then we can talk about losing these company/salary-cars.
The solution is simple boys.
Just remove all our benefits and give us the same rules and contract as civil servants that works for the goverment.
No stress,
Early on pension,
A lot of holidays,
A much better pension,
Work certainties,
….
You can keep my damn car.
Most important, politicians have to do the same. That way it’s fair for everyone.