Modern technologies change economic relations in society and gradually transform the legislative framework. Blockchain-based cryptocurrencies are probably one of the most striking examples. Although they increase in value and are widely accepted as means of payment by major corporations, many EU member states are just starting to implement solutions to regulate their use, including in terms of taxation. At the same time, the EU fails to introduce a unified approach to the taxation of cryptocurrency transactions in its common economic area. Accordingly, the question arises as to whether the unified approach is justified, given the example of individual member states. The analysis of German, French, and Italian legislation showed that each state has a different approach to understanding the essence of cryptocurrencies. For example, Germany and France rely on the definition of “virtual currency” set forth in EU Directive 2015/849. However, while Germany uses the “cryptoassets” term, France uses the more general “digital assets” concept. In turn, Italy hasn’t enshrined yet any clear definition of cryptocurrencies in its legislation. This may lead to contradictions when considering international cases in the EU. Differences in understanding the essence of cryptocurrencies inevitably lead to differences in taxation approaches. On the one hand, Germany, France, and Italy recognise the validity of ECJ judgment in case C-264/14, exempting cryptocurrency transactions from VAT. On the other hand, while in Germany the profit from cryptocurrency trading is included in total personal income, thus, changing the progressive tax rate, this option is not possible for occasional transactions in France and is wholly excluded in Italy. Moreover, French law provides tax exemption for crypto-to-crypto exchange transactions. In Italy, this approach is accepted in practice, although not covered by the law. In turn, in Germany, taxes are levied on any transactions, which complicates the process of calculating the tax and creates uncertainty in specific issues, such as staking. Differences in the taxation of cryptocurrency transactions pose a question of the possibility of legal harmonisation, which is justified due to the underdevelopment of the principles of taxation of cryptocurrency transactions at the level of individual EU members. However, as a more correct solution, it is proposed to take measures to harmonise legislation based on directives, as this will allow avoiding an adverse impact on the fiscal sovereignty of the EU members.

The purpose of this research was to determine whether horizontal equity in the taxation of individuals in South Africa improved after the legislative changes from 1984 to 1995 and the Katz Commission recommendations. After an extensive literature study, horizontal equity in the taxation of individuals in South Africa was defined as the equivalent tax treatment in equivalent economic circumstances for the same economic units. The household as the economic unit, is the unit to be considered when evaluating horizontal equity. The study also reviewed the solutions found in other countries for the dilemma of the one-breadwinner versus the two-breadwinner married couple. It was found that the tax systems of most countries provide relief to the one-breadwinner couple while the working wife was taxed separately from her husband or had the option to be taxed separately. An important part of this study compared the tax of the unmarried taxpayer and the married couple as the units for horizontal equity. It was found that, although two-breadwinner married couples were discriminated against until the separate taxation of married couples was introduced, the one-breadwinner couple and single taxpayers with dependants now suffer more horizontal inequity than was previously the case. The research indicated that to attain greater horizontal equity provision should also be made for families and households with only one breadwinner (breadwinner being defined as the provider in a one-breadwinner couple or a ·taxpayer with dependents). Recommendations made to alleviate this inequity are transferable allowances for spouses, or, without ~ontravening the Constitution's demands for equality, a separate rate schedule for breadwinners, a fixed allowance or rebate for breadwinners, or a proportional allo~ance depending on the breadwinner's income. The study also addressed the financial and administrative implications and political acceptability of these recommendations and concluded that the proportional allowance, although expensive, would come the closest to providing the greatest horizontal equity. The research into the international tax measures to promote equity revealed that horizontal equity could be further promoted by providing tax relief for child-care and day-care facilities. This would benefit both the two-breadwinner married couple and the single parent with dependent children. / Financail accounting / D.Com. (Applied Accountancy)

The purpose of this research was to determine whether horizontal equity in the taxation of individuals in South Africa improved after the legislative changes from 1984 to 1995 and the Katz Commission recommendations. After an extensive literature study, horizontal equity in the taxation of individuals in South Africa was defined as the equivalent tax treatment in equivalent economic circumstances for the same economic units. The household as the economic unit, is the unit to be considered when evaluating horizontal equity. The study also reviewed the solutions found in other countries for the dilemma of the one-breadwinner versus the two-breadwinner married couple. It was found that the tax systems of most countries provide relief to the one-breadwinner couple while the working wife was taxed separately from her husband or had the option to be taxed separately. An important part of this study compared the tax of the unmarried taxpayer and the married couple as the units for horizontal equity. It was found that, although two-breadwinner married couples were discriminated against until the separate taxation of married couples was introduced, the one-breadwinner couple and single taxpayers with dependants now suffer more horizontal inequity than was previously the case. The research indicated that to attain greater horizontal equity provision should also be made for families and households with only one breadwinner (breadwinner being defined as the provider in a one-breadwinner couple or a ·taxpayer with dependents). Recommendations made to alleviate this inequity are transferable allowances for spouses, or, without ~ontravening the Constitution's demands for equality, a separate rate schedule for breadwinners, a fixed allowance or rebate for breadwinners, or a proportional allo~ance depending on the breadwinner's income. The study also addressed the financial and administrative implications and political acceptability of these recommendations and concluded that the proportional allowance, although expensive, would come the closest to providing the greatest horizontal equity. The research into the international tax measures to promote equity revealed that horizontal equity could be further promoted by providing tax relief for child-care and day-care facilities. This would benefit both the two-breadwinner married couple and the single parent with dependent children. / Financail accounting / D.Com. (Applied Accountancy)