Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
ChapterII
Sourcesoflawandprerogative
Whendeterminingthelegalbasisfortheinstitutionoftaxcancellation,itisfun-
damentaltoexplainthenatureofthisinstitution.FromtheperspectiveofPolish
law,particularlyinlightofArticle87point1oftheConstitutionoftheRepublic
ofPoland,1itseemsobviousthattheanswertothatquestionisaparliamentary
statute.Nonetheless,thefollowinganalysisofsourcesoflawindicatesthat,in
contrasttoArticle87above,therearenocorrespondingarticlesinthecompared
legalsystems.Teabsenceofsuchprovisionsmakesitlikelythattaxliabilities
willbecancelledonalegalbasisotherthanastatute,e.g.basedonapreroga-
tive.Hence,itisjustifiedtoprovideanoverviewofthesourcesoflawinthe
comparedcountries,aswellastheinstitutionofprerogative,whichisnotwell-
knowninPoland,Germany,ortheCzechRepublic.
1.Righttoimposetaxliabilities
Beforeanalysingthesourcesoflawandtheinstitutionofprerogative,itseems
justifiedtoconsiderthelegalbasisfortheimposingoftaxliabilities.Unlikethe
legalbasisfortaxcancellation,thelegalbasisforimposingtaxobligationsiscur-
rentlyonlyaparliamentarystatute.Tereisarelationshipbetweentaxcancel-
lationandimpositionoftaxliabilities.Tisrelationshipisnotonlylogical(the
impositionoftaxliabilitiesisaprerequisitefortheircancellation)butalsohis-
torical.Terelationshipisparticularlynoticeablewhenweanalysetheevolution
oftherighttoimposetaxliabilities.
Taxliabilitiesareacompulsorytransferoftaxpayer’sassetstoaruler(cur-
rentlyastate).Teconditionsofthistransferareunilaterallydeterminedby
therulerormorebroadlybystateinstitutions.Intheeventofnon-compliance
1KonstytucjaRzeczpospolitejPolskiej[ConstitutionoftheRepublicofPoland]of2April
1997,JournalofLaw1997,No.78,item483,hereinaferreferredtoasCPolishConstitution.
’
21
