3 ms·

It certainly shouldn't. It's just public data, that anyone from any nation could both access and provide. I don't mind these services and I think the recent de

It certainly shouldn't. It's just public data, that anyone from any nation could both access and provide. I don't mind these services and I think the recent development where they are blamed for enabling the violence is just a stupid distraction. The domestic terrorists we have would certainly still be a problem and would hardly stop their attacks if we got rid of our very useful public data laws. The current politics are working hard on removing all the fundamental data laws of my country, beginning with making massive energy rebates confidential last spring.

ftrobro 3y ago
Regarding electricity tax returns, not making the names public was a very good idea because of course some newspapers had headlines like "Look at how high tax returns some rich bastards got, it's a scandal, they could never use that much electricity just in their private homes!" the day after the anonymized sums of the tax returns were made public. Which just showed the ignorance of those journalists, because private taxes are much higher than corporate taxes so why would anyone want to pay privately for electricity used by a company? Nobody applied for tax returns, the sums were based on how much they had paid in electricity taxes. And companies got the tax returns too, just a few months later. One of those who got high private tax returns came out publicly and explained that his company was of the type "enskild firma" which means that it uses his person number, it's not a limited company. And apparently Skatteverket had treated all companies of that type as if they were private citizens. But of course most people just remember headlines, so if the headline had been "Look at person XX, that rich bastard got this much in tax returns!" you had probably remembered that but not the later explanation that it was his company that got tax returns.
- actionfromafar 3y ago
  The idea with this temporary relief was to help home-owners keep their homes warm during the first winter of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Many mechanisms could have worked for this purpose. A fixed amount for instance. Or an upper limit on a tax cut. Remember, the idea was to keep a typical home warm. Instead there was a tax cut with no upper limit. So the affluent heating outdoor pools in the middle of winter also got relief, not just home-owners on the brink of ruin trying to heat their old house. In the big scheme of things, probably not a big deal, but interventions by the state should appear (and be) as fair as possible, lest people will loose faith in the system.
  - ftrobro 3y ago
    If the only idea was to help home-owners keep their homes warm then companies would not have gotten the same tax returns. This page lists the reason for the tax returns as "För att stödja elkunderna ekonomiskt och för att mildra effekterna av de höga elpriserna har EU infört en tillfällig möjlighet att använda de så kallade flaskhalsintäkterna för ekonomiska utbetalningar till elkunderna.". So general stimulation of the economy seems to also have been part of the reason for the tax returns. https://www.regeringen.se/regeringens-politik/energikrisen/elstod-hushall/ https://www.regeringen.se/regeringens-politik/energikrisen/e...

ftrobro 3y ago

Regarding electricity tax returns, not making the names public was a very good idea because of course some newspapers had headlines like "Look at how high tax returns some rich bastards got, it's a scandal, they could never use that much electricity just in their private homes!" the day after the anonymized sums of the tax returns were made public. Which just showed the ignorance of those journalists, because private taxes are much higher than corporate taxes so why would anyone want to pay privately for electricity used by a company? Nobody applied for tax returns, the sums were based on how much they had paid in electricity taxes. And companies got the tax returns too, just a few months later. One of those who got high private tax returns came out publicly and explained that his company was of the type "enskild firma" which means that it uses his person number, it's not a limited company. And apparently Skatteverket had treated all companies of that type as if they were private citizens. But of course most people just remember headlines, so if the headline had been "Look at person XX, that rich bastard got this much in tax returns!" you had probably remembered that but not the later explanation that it was his company that got tax returns.

actionfromafar 3y ago
The idea with this temporary relief was to help home-owners keep their homes warm during the first winter of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Many mechanisms could have worked for this purpose. A fixed amount for instance. Or an upper limit on a tax cut. Remember, the idea was to keep a typical home warm. Instead there was a tax cut with no upper limit. So the affluent heating outdoor pools in the middle of winter also got relief, not just home-owners on the brink of ruin trying to heat their old house. In the big scheme of things, probably not a big deal, but interventions by the state should appear (and be) as fair as possible, lest people will loose faith in the system.
- ftrobro 3y ago
  If the only idea was to help home-owners keep their homes warm then companies would not have gotten the same tax returns. This page lists the reason for the tax returns as "För att stödja elkunderna ekonomiskt och för att mildra effekterna av de höga elpriserna har EU infört en tillfällig möjlighet att använda de så kallade flaskhalsintäkterna för ekonomiska utbetalningar till elkunderna.". So general stimulation of the economy seems to also have been part of the reason for the tax returns. https://www.regeringen.se/regeringens-politik/energikrisen/elstod-hushall/ https://www.regeringen.se/regeringens-politik/energikrisen/e...