Mandantenbrief Czech Republic Information on Law, Taxes and Economics in the Czech Republic Issue: September

Transcription

1 Building Foundations Mandantenbrief Czech Republic Information on Law, Taxes and Economics in the Czech Republic Issue: September Content: Law > Statutory minimum wage and sector-specific minimum wages in Germany > Law Briefly > Statutory minimum wage and sectorspecific minimum wages in Germany Thomas Britz, Rödl & Partner Prague Introduction > How will minimum wages change in 2019? Taxes > Legislation > Taxes Briefly > Judicial decisions Economics > New developments in the accounting area Bitcoin and the IFRS conceptual framework Statutory minimum wage in 2019: 9.19 euros As of 1 January 2017, the statutory minimum wage is 8.84 euros per hour. In accordance with the German minimum wage law, the statutory minimum wage is adjusted once every two years. In June 2018, the Minimum Wage Commission issued a proposal to increase the minimum wage in two phases. If the German government approves the proposal, the statutory minimum wage will rise to 9.19 euros on 1 January 2019 and to 9.35 euros on 1 January > The Minimum Wage Commission recommended at its meeting of 26 June 2018 an increase in the minimum wage to 9.19 euros as of 1 January 2019 and to 9.35 euros as of 1 January > The proposal from the Minimum Wage Commission is being submitted to the Federal Government, which will issue a regulation stipulating the new amount of the minimum wage starting from 1 January /1/ /12/ General statutory minimum wage 1/1/ /12/ (presently in effect) 1/1/ /12/ (The relevant Government Regulation has not been issued yet) 1/1/ /12/ (The relevant Government Regulation has not been issued yet) Source: Rödl & Partner Archive 1

2 Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018 Confirmed increases starting from 1 January 2019 For the following sectors, minimum wage increases starting from 1 January 2019 have already been decided on: Source: Rödl & Partner Archive What exemptions from the statutory minimum wage will there be in 2019? As in previous years, the statutory minimum wage will not apply to the following persons: > Persons under 18 that have not completed vocational/ professional training; > Apprentices irrespective of their age when undergoing vocational/professional training; > Persons unemployed for a long period of time, during the first six months after exiting unemployment and starting a job; > Articling persons, trainees and interns, if such period of practice is mandatory in their profession, or if the relevant training consists of a program of studies forming part of an expert education or preparation; > Interns and trainees, if this concerns a voluntary period of practice undertaken with the aim of subsequently obtaining expert qualifications, or if this concerns a program of studies not exceeding 3 months; > Minors undergoing training in order to obtain so-called entry qualifications as the basis for subsequently obtaining expert qualifications, or any other preparatory training undertaken with the aim of subsequently obtaining expert qualifications within the meaning of the German Act on Expert Education; and > Volunteers. Previously, an interim time period was in effect during which it was permissible for collective bargaining agreements to stipulate a minimum wage that was under the statutory minimum wage. Now, however, this interim time period has expired. In 2019, it will not be permissible in any sector (with the exception of the categories of persons described above) to pay a minimum wage that is below the statutory minimum wage. Sector-specific minimum wages in 2019: The minimum wage will increase in several sectors In addition to the statutory minimum wage, there are also sector-specific minimum wages. Sector-specific minimum wages are negotiated between unions and employers within the framework of collective bargaining agreements, and such minimum wages are then declared to be generally binding by the government. Sector-specific minimum wages apply to all companies within the sector involved, i.e. even companies that do not have a collective bargaining agreement in place. The current levels of sector-specific minimum wages are set forth below. Sector Roofing and floorcovering trades Electrical trades (installation) Building janitorial and cleaning work > Interior work and maintenance and janitorial work > Cleaning of glass surfaces and facades Workers provided by agencies Social care work Current sector minimum wage Sector minimum wage starting from 1/1/ (West) 9.55 (East) (West) (East) 9.27 (East incl. Berlin) (West incl. Berlin) (East) Confirmed increases for later part of (West) (East) (West) (East) 9.49 (East incl. Berlin) (West incl. Berlin) (East) For other sectors, the sector-specific minimum wage will not increase immediately in January of 2019, but at a later time during that year: Sector Construction (primary construction work) > Construction laborers > Skilled workers Workers provided by agencies Painting and varnishing trades > workers without trade qualifications > workers with trade qualifications and trade certificate Current sector minimum wage (West, Berlin, east) (West) (Berlin) 9.49 (West) (West, Berlin, east) (East) Sector minimum wage starting from 1/1/ (West, Berlin, east); from March (West); from March (Berlin); from March (West); from April (West, Berlin, east); from May (East); from May

3 Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018 Sectors in which the sector-specific minimum wage will be in effect until the end of 2018 or longer In the following sectors, the existing sector-specific minimum wage continue to be in effect until 31 December 2018 or longer. New sector-specific minimum wages are expected to be introduced in 2019 in the following sectors: > Initial or further vocational or professional education or preparation for a vocation or profession > Meat processing industry > Transportation services for cash and valuables > Scaffolding work > Stone masonry and stone sculpture trades Contact details for further information: JUDr. Thomas Britz Attorney-at-Law Associate Partner Phone: thomas.britz@roedl.com Under current construction regulations for Prague, the only dwelling that fulfills the requirement of having sufficient sunlight exposure is a dwelling into which, on the 1st of March of each year, sunlight falls for a period of at least 90 minutes on a window situated at a height of at least 120 cm above the floor of the living room, under a horizontal angle of at least 25 from the level of the window frame and when the sun s position is at least 5 above the horizon. Any project that could not meet this requirement had no chance of being approved. The sunlight exposure requirement for dwellings is not a usual requirement in the construction regulations of European countries, it is not in line with current trends concerning the quality of residential units. This requirement is one that appears almost exclusively in the construction regulations of post-communist countries. It should also be noted that there are other requirements in place that prevent a lack of daylight exposure and the casting of shadows by other buildings. These include the requirement for daylighting with regard to dwellings and the requirement for a specified minimum distance between buildings. Kontakt: martin.sveda@roedl.com katerina.svecova@roedl.com Law Briefly End of sunlight exposure requirement for dwellings The requirement for sunlight exposure in the case of dwellings will finally disappear from Prague construction regulations. The Prague Municipal Board approved the revocation of this requirement on 17 July It should be pointed out that this was one of the strict technical requirements stipulated in the construction regulations for Prague that hampered, and in many cases prevented, the construction of new buildings in the city. This formal requirement had essentially made it impossible for developers to construct new apartment buildings or to expand existing apartment buildings, which also had the effect of preventing them from using developable sites in an efficient manner. The requirement for sunlight exposure made it practically impossible to build residential buildings other than those oriented eastward or westward, with a maximum deviation of about 15. > Legislation Martina Šotníková, Rödl & Partner Prague VAT changes expected in 2019 We would like to inform you about the additional changes in the VAT area that are likely to come into effect in 2019 as a result of the package of tax amendments presently being debated. Changes to procedure for calculating the VAT-component of a price that already includes VAT A minor change, albeit one with a practical impact, is the change to the procedure for calculating the VAT-component from a price that already includes VAT (i.e. a topdown calculation). This procedure is used, for example, in the case of advance payments or simplified invoices. Presently, the VAT-component is supposed to be calculated from the amount that already includes VAT in the following manner. For example, in a situation where the VAT rate is 21% and the total amount concerned is CZK 1,000,000, 3

4 Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018 Rental of premises designated for long-term residency Due to an abuse of the practice in the past, the amending bill restricts the ability to apply VAT to rentals of real estate, specifically in the case of premises designated for long-term residency, i.e. a family house, residential unit, residential premises etc. the VAT-component is calculated as 1,000, (i.e. 21/121, rounded to four decimal places), which gives us a VAT-component of CZK 173,600. Under the proposed new procedure, the VAT-component would be calculated in the above-described situation as 1,000,000 1,000,000/1.21 = CZK 173,553. Although the proposed change will have an impact on all accounting programs and cash-register software, in our view the change is a positive one, it makes the procedure for calculating VAT more logical. This is the case because now the amount calculated as the VAT-component will be the same whether one uses a top-down calculation or a bottom-up calculation. Aggregate invoice covering several payments Source: Rödl & Partner Archive The amending bill expands the possibilities for issuing an aggregate invoice. Such possibilities are being expanded so as to also include situations where a firm receives several advance payments from the same entity, where there is an obligation to recognize VAT on such advance payments received in a single calendar month from the same entity. At the present time, there are some interpretations according to which an aggregate invoice can only contain, in addition to taxable supply, one payment from which an obligation arises to account for VAT. There are also more lenient interpretations according to which an aggregate invoice may be issued for several payments on the basis of which an obligation arises to account for VAT, but such payments must relate to more than one supply. Taxes Briefly Blanket tax audit of Airbnb The Financial Administration has initiated a blanket tax audit of the tax compliance of taxpayers that rent their properties through Airbnb. The Financial Administration obtained the relevant information on the providers of such accommodation services directly from the Airbnb website. Amending bill to the Act on Payment Transactions The Coordination Committee of the Chamber of Tax Advisors addressed the issue of whether electronic food vouchers constitute non-monetary performance that is exempted from personal income tax. The concern with regard to this issue stemmed from the amending bill to the Act on Payment Transactions, according to which certain electronic food vouchers could be classified as electronic money. The Financial Administration confirmed that in the case of food vouchers or other vouchers, it does not matter whether such vouchers are in electronic or paper form, and that the exemption from personal income tax applies irrespective of how electronic food vouchers are classified in the Act on Payment Transactions.For such late payments occurring in the second half of 2018, the interest rate will now be 15 % (up until now, it had been 14.5 %). Contact details for further information: The foregoing indicates that the amending bill regulates the above-described procedure in a manner that makes it the same as the procedure that is already being used in practice. It should be pointed out that it will be possible to issue aggregate invoices only for taxable supply, i.e. only in respect of domestic taxable supply, and not in situations where place of supply of the services being provided is in another EU member state or situations where goods are being delivered into another EU member state. Such a restriction, however, is not stated in a directive. Ing. Martina Šotníková Tax Advisor Associate Partner Phone: martina.sotnikova@roedl.com 4

5 Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018 > Judicial decisions Jakub Šotník, Rödl & Partner Prague Does the Tax Authority have an obligation to take depreciation into account during a tax audit? In the reviewed case, a taxpayer claimed costs incurred on repairs to a real estate property, but during a tax audit the taxpayer was unable to prove that such costs were tax deductible. The Tax Authority in fact reclassified the costs as technical improvements and decided not to take into account the depreciation of such technical improvements. The Supreme Administrative Court addressed the issue of whether the Tax Authority had an obligation to take such tax depreciation into account during the tax audit. The Supreme Administrative Court began by pointing out its earlier case law. In such earlier case law, the Supreme Administrative Court adopted the interpretation that the legal and economic basis for the depreciation of technical improvements consists of spreading out tax deductible costs expended on the improvement of an asset over time, into several fiscal years. The court also made reference to its decisions relating to how the burden of proof should be borne, specifically that a taxpayer has an obligation to prove all facts stated by such taxpayer in their tax claims. So if a taxpayer is unable to bear the burden of proof, the consequence is that the claimed costs cannot be treated as tax deductible, which, according to the Supreme Administrative Court, is a result of not having prevailed in the relevant procedure. In the reviewed case, the Supreme Administrative Court stated that the depreciation of technical improvements were not part of the subject matter of the tax audit, and from a logical point of view, they could not have been part of the subject matter of the tax audit, because the taxpayer had not claimed such depreciation of technical improvements in its original tax return. The Supreme Administrative Court also emphasized that the claiming of tax depreciation is optional and it is solely up to the taxpayer to decide whether and how much tax depreciation the taxpayer wishes to claim. The Supreme Administrative Court therefore concluded that the Tax Authority is not officially obligated to address or review potentially tax deductible depreciation of technical improvements in the course of a tax audit. The Supreme Administrative Court nevertheless added that the taxpayer could claim the depreciation on the technical improvements in the subsequent appeal proceedings and that the Tax Authority had a duty to take such depreciation into account and to reflect the depreciation. According to the Supreme Administrative Court, it is not possible to argue that tax depreciation cannot be claimed merely because the taxpayer had claimed the relevant costs incorrectly, since there is no doubt that the taxpayer had indeed acquired the relevant assets, that the assets were fit for use and were properly accounted for by the taxpayer. If it were to the contrary, then any mistake on the part of the taxpayer in terms of an incorrect classification of costs (i.e. direct cost vs depreciation of technical improvements) would mean that the taxpayer would be permanently ineligible to claim such costs as tax deductible costs. As was fittingly pointed out by the Supreme Administrative Court, this would have the effect of making such costs permanently ineligible for deduction, which is unacceptable from a constitutional point of view because for many types of costs it is not entirely clear whether such costs should be claimed as lump-sum costs or whether they should be claimed via depreciation. Contact details for further information: Mgr. Jakub Šotník Attorney-at-Law Associate Partner Phone: jakub.sotnik@roedl.com > New developments in the accounting area Bitcoin and the IFRS conceptual framework Ladislav Čížek, Radim Botek, Rödl & Partner Prague Introduction > Although accounting legislation does not change nearly as frequently as tax legislation, this does not mean that accountants and auditors do not have to regularly monitor new developments that reflect a rapidly evolving economic environment. Familiarizing oneself with new accounting methodologies is essential in order to ensure correct reporting of accounting information and in order to ensure that financial departments are well prepared for changes occurring at the local and international levels. For this article, we have selected two interesting topics from recent months. 5

6 Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018 Reporting digital currencies Digital currencies (also called cryptocurrencies), the main one among them being Bitcoin, are no longer the domain of a small group of enthusiasts and are gradually becoming a part of our everyday lives. As an example of how quickly this technology is expanding, Subway fast food restaurants now accept payments in Bitcoins. But how should digital currencies be treated from an accounting point of view? Already in 2014, the Czech National Bank issued a general opinion in respect of Bitcoins and other digital currencies, stating that Bitcoins and other digital currencies do not represent cashless money or other electronic money pursuant to Act No. 284/2009 Sb., on payment transactions. In other words, digital currencies do not represent money and therefore should not be reported under the balance sheet item titled C.IV. Cash. So, under what balance sheet item should we report digital currencies as the intangible assets discussed earlier (albeit assets that it would not make sense to depreciate)? It was only recently that the Ministry of Finance published a statement on the matter of how to account for and report digital currencies. Such statement recommended accounting for and reporting digital currencies as a type of stock (i.e. inventory). The Ministry of Finance recommends reporting digital currencies under Item C.I.2. Work in Process, Item C.I Products, or Item C.I Goods. In this regard, it should be pointed out that it is also possible to report digital currencies as a special, separate line in financial statements, a separate line within the framework of stock pursuant to Section 4 (1) of the Decree. Naturally, in each case there should be a corresponding comment in notes to the financial statements. We always need to keep in mind the materiality (and not only qualitative materiality) of individual items within the framework of the balance sheet as a whole. The recommended manner of reporting digital currencies will ensure comparability across different enterprises but does not properly show the purposes for which such digital currencies were purchased or held. By contrast, it is beyond doubt that all other assets are shown in financial statements in accordance with the purpose for which such assets are held (for example, real estate fixed assets / inventory etc.). Companies tend to hold digital currencies also for a number of various reasons as a speculative investment, as an instrument of exchange or for the purpose of exchanging such digital currencies for conventional currencies. The valuation of digital currencies is based on the manner in which such currencies were obtained. If they were obtained by digital currency mining, the prevailing view is that the digital currencies so obtained are a product. In such case, the valuation would be based on own production costs (a costing), where probably the most significant item would be electricity, and, if applicable, the depreciation expense on computing equipment and the cost of a data connection. If a company obtains digital currencies by purchasing them, the valuation would be based on the cost of purchase. In both cases, there would be a need to consider the creation of a provision in respect of the value of such digital currencies. Such provision would be as at the balance sheet date and would be based on the then-current market price of the relevant digital currency. It should be kept in mind that the price volatility of digital currencies is relatively high. Such uniform reporting of digital currencies under the item called stock is only a temporary solution. Long-term, it is expected that Czech legislation will incorporate specific rules for accounting for and reporting digital currencies. The final form of such rules will depend on the future development of digital currencies and on how the European Union decides to tackle this area. Revised conceptual framework of IFRS Another interesting new development in the world of accounting is the recent revision of the conceptual framework of IFRS. This revision modifies a number of widelyused definitions. For example, the definition of assets and liabilities has also been modified. 1 Asset Liability Definitions in the conceptual framework Situation in 2010 Situation in 2018 An economic resource controlled by the entity as a result of past events which is expected to produce an inflow of future economic benefits for the entity. A present obligation of the entity as a result of past events the settlement of which produces an outflow of resources representing an economic benefit for the entity. A present economic resource controlled by the entity as a result of past events. A present obligation of the entity to transfer an economic resource as a result of past events. In respect of the above table, it should be noted that the term economic resource means a right that has the potential to produce economic benefits. The key change in the definitions consists of the deletion of the requirement of an expected inflow of economic benefits. The new definition of an asset focuses only on 1 Assets: A present economic resource controlled by the entity as a result of past events. Liabilities: A present obligation of the entity to transfer an economic resource as a result of past events. (An economic resource is a right that has the potential to produce economic benefits.) 6

7 Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018 the existence of a right that has the potential to produce economic benefits. The main difference, therefore, consists of the fact that the new definition does not require there to be an expected inflow of economic benefits, it suffices if the relevant asset has the potential to produce economic benefits. IASB amended the definitions because some people took the word expected to mean a certain probability. The new definition shows that this was not the meaning that the previous definition had been intended to convey, and accordingly, the word expected does not appear in the new definition, which merely identifies an asset as something that has the potential to produce economic benefits. In other words, for an economic resource to have the potential to produce economic benefits, it does not need to be certain, or even likely, that the right concerned will produce economic benefits. In the materials issued by IASB together with the revised Conceptual Framework, it is stated that IASB s intent was to develop a more integrated set of concepts, not to increase or decrease the scope of assets and liabilities. Another major change consists of the introduction of a second measurement basis (i.e. basis for the valuation of an item) directly into the conceptual framework. In addition to historical costs, the revised version of the conceptual framework also describes the concept of current costs (and current value). Previously, this method of measurement had appeared only in selected accounting standards. In the revised conceptual framework, current value means the following: > fair value, > value in use (assets) and fulfillment value (liabilities), and > current cost. In connection with this, it should be stated that these definitions merely aim to emphasize the importance of such measurement basis for situations where it is permissible to select from among several measurement methods. The measurement of individual assets and liabilities continues to be governed primarily by the requirements set forth in individual accounting standards. The conceptual framework does not give detailed instructions (criteria) describing when a particular measurement basis should be used. The suitability of individual measurement bases is to be decided on in accordance with the situation that a reporting entity finds itself in at the relevant time. The main benefit of the revised conceptual framework in this regard is that it provides a description and explanation of the factors that need to be taken into consideration for measurement purposes. These factors are summarized in the following table: Relevance Character of asset or liability > variability of cash flows > sensitivity of value to market factors or other risks > complexity of the assets (for example, historical cost cannot provide relevant information on derivatives) Impact on future cash flows > whether the cash flows from the asset (or liability) are generated directly or indirectly in combination with other resources > character of business activity > quantification of the margin (for example, historical cost provides more relevant information on margins in the period concerned) Faithful representation Inconsistency of the valuation basis > it is not permissible to arbitrarily combine measurement bases in the fin. statements Valuation uncertainty > a certain degree of uncertainty need not necessarily preclude the use of the measurement basis being considered. However, the uncertainty must not be inordinately high. The conceptual framework also contains a completely new chapter dealing with the preparation and publication of financial statements. The new chapter addresses primarily the issue of the so-called other comprehensive income. It states that the primary item of information about an entity s financial performance is the profit or loss, and that only in extraordinary circumstances is it appropriate to use the so-called other comprehensive income. Other comprehensive income is used to report solely and exclusively such income or costs as ensue from a change in the current value of assets and liabilities. Overall, the revised conceptual framework for IFRS is about three times longer than the previous version and contains a number of definitions that have been specified more precisely. In addition to the aforementioned definitions, the revised conceptual framework also introduces the term unconsolidated financial statements, which applies to separate financial statements prepared for a parent company. It also introduces the concept of combined financial statements. The concepts of financial statements and reporting entities can be illustrated by the following table: Source: Rödl & Partner Archive 7

8 Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018 Reporting entity > an entity which decides or is obligated to prepare financial statements > an entity does not have to be a legal entity may be part of an entity or include more than one entity Separate financial statements > a specific form of a financial report providing information on assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses of an entity Unconsolidated financial statements > provide information on assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses in respect of a parent company only Consolidated financial statements > provide information on assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses in respect of a parent company and its subsidiaries as one entity Combined financial statements > provide information on assets, liabilities, equity, revenues and expenses in respect of two or more entities that are not all interconnected by a relation parent company subsidiary Example Mr. Novák owns three companies A, B and C. Company B is a subsidiary of Company A. Company C does not have any ownership ties to Companies A and B. In the case of financial statements according to IFRS, Companies B and C would each prepare their separate financial statements. Company A would prepare its own unconsolidated financial statements and would additionally prepare consolidated financial statements in respect of Companies A and B. Mr. Novák would prepare (for example, if his bank requires it) combined financial statements in respect of all of his companies (A, B and C). The new conceptual framework entered into effect on the date it was published. The changes it brings apply to the accounting period starting from 1 January 2020 and any later accounting periods. It is permissible to apply the new rules earlier, if a reporting entity wishes to do so. It should be emphasized that the revised conceptual framework does not replace any specific IFRS accounting standard. In cases where there is a conflict or difference between the new conceptual framework and a specific IFRS accounting standard, the requirements stipulated in the specific accounting standard take precedence. Conclusion The accounting profession continues to develop and the two topics described above are further evidence of this. We realize that in day-to-day accounting work, where in addition to the accounting tasks themselves, one also has to continually fill out various reports and statements, prepare monthly financial statements and so forth, it is very difficult to find the time to keep track of all new developments and changes affecting the accounting area. Our accounting experts do regularly monitor such changes and are of course always prepared to assist you with the proper terminology for IFRS-compliant financial statements as well as with any other accounting issues you may have! Contact details for further information: Ing. Radim Botek Auditor Associate Partner Phone: radim.botek@roedl.com Building Foundations Our experise and experience lay the foundations for our advisory services. On those foundations we build, together with our clients. Rödl & Partner Our unique human towers needs a strong and solid foundation Castellers de Barcelona Each and every person counts to the Castellers and to us. Human towers symbolise in a unique way the Rödl & Partner corporate culture. They personify our philosophy of solidarity, balance, courage and team spirit. They stand for the growth that is based on own resources, the growth which has made Rödl & Partner the company we are today. Força, Equilibri, Valor i Seny (strength, equilibrium, valour and common sense) is the Catalan motto of all Castellers, describing their fundamental values very accurately. It is to our liking and also reflects our mentality. Therefore Rödl & Partner embarked on a collaborative journey with the representatives of this long-standing tradition of human towers Castellers de Barcelona in May The association from Barcelona stands, among many other things, for this intangible cultural heritage. Imprint: Published by: Editorial Board: Translation: Layout/Typeset: Mandantenbrief Czech Republic September 2018, MK ČR E Rödl & Partner Consulting, s.r.o. Platnéřská 2, Prague 1 Phone: Ing. Jana Švédová jana.svedova@roedl.com Mgr. Martin Mikolajek martin.mikolajek@roedl.com Rödl & Partner publikace@roedl.com This newsletter is an information booklet intended for general informative purposes. The information is not advice, should not be treated as such, and you should not rely on the information in the newsletter as an alternative to legal, taxation, financial, accountancy or corporate advice. Although we prepare the information for the newsletter with utmost care, we do not represent, warrant, undertake or guarantee that the information in the newsletter is correct, accurate, complete, non-misleading or up-to-date. Since the information presented here do not discuss specific cases of particular individuals or corporations, you should always verify the information applicable to your circumstances by consulting an appropriately qualified professional. We disclaim liability for any decisions made by readers based on information in our newsletters. Our advisors will gladly assist you with any questions on topics presented here or with any other matters. The entire contents of our newsletters as published on the internet, including the information presented here, represent the intellectual property of Rödl & Partner and are protected by copyright laws. Users may download, print or copy the contents of the newsletters for their own needs only. Any modification, reproduction, distribution or publication of the contents of the newsletter, in whole or in part, whether online or offline, is subject to a prior written consent of Rödl & Partner.