Federal Finance Court has taken on work

Since January 1, 2014, - as part of the Administrative jurisdiction-Novel 2012 decided - that Federal Fiscal Court (BFG) the agendas of the Independent Finance Senate (UFS) has been taken over. The BFG, based in Vienna and with 6 branches in the federal states, is primarily responsible for complaints against decisions of the federal tax and financial penalty authorities (tax offices, customs offices, BMF), as well as for action complaints against AuvBZ (immediate administrative orders and coercive measures) by tax offices and the BMF (e.g., measures by the financial police). Furthermore, the BFG is responsible for complaints against decisions concerning local and municipal taxes in Vienna (e.g., in connection with the Parking meter paymentThe previous UFS representatives were appointed to Judges at the BFG and benefit, for example, from the associated transfer protection.

The Transition From UFS to BFG, this has not led to any fundamental changes in the course of a legal appeal procedure, but has led to some conceptual New features. Now, approximately one Complaint Instead of an appeal, e.g. against a tax assessment, it is possible and the decision on the appeal was superseded by the decision of the administrative court (formerly the second-instance tax authority). While previously, in the absence of action by the authority, a motion for deferral and subsequently a motion for default could be directed to the VwGH, now it is now possible to first file a motion for deferral and then a motion for setting a time limit with the VwGH. Finally, since January 2014, the appeal before the VwGH is called Revision.

The (new) two-stage Instance management generally provides that an appeal against a tax assessment may be lodged with the Complaint At Tax office The complaint can be submitted to the tax authority that issued the notice. Alternatively, the complaint can also be submitted to the BFG, in which case the BFG will immediately forward the complaint to the tax authority. Time limit for filing a complaint against a tax assessment, the principle remains that it is 1 Month - what is new is that the deadline does not yet begin to run, provided that a reference is made to the operational audit report that has not yet been issued. First therefore only starting to running, when The External audit report delivered It has been done. The one-month complaint period is extendable as before – the new feature here is the increased legal protection for the taxpayer, since the tax office can no longer decide on the extension of the deadline at its discretion. Rather Must in the event of valid reasons, to the Application open Extension of deadline granted will be. Compared with the earlier optional appeal decision by the tax office, the Disciplinary decision henceforth Basically mandatory. In exceptional cases, especially if the tax office and the taxpayer both do not want to take a decision on appeal, the BFG takes immediate jurisdiction. In the event of a decision on appeal by the tax office, a Draft application to be submitted to the BFG.

Against the BFG's finding, the remedy is the ordinary or. extraordinary Revision At Supreme Administrative Court to be elected. The prerequisite for the regular Revision However, the solution to the problem is Legal question Which one goes? Basic Meaning This is the case when the BFG recognition is from the Jurisprudence of the VwGH differs, corresponding case law missing or the one to be solved Legal question in the previous case law of the VwGH Not uniform answered It will. These requirements are very similar to those that have existed since the summer of 2012. Right to refuse des Supreme Administrative Court to distinguish. The Gang to Supreme Administrative Court so it was already then made more difficult and now to the regular review. The Federal Finance Court decides on the existence of a legal question of fundamental importance and thus on a possible regular review. If the path to the regular review is barred, the extraordinary Revision possible under certain conditions before the VwGH – for example, in cases of illegality, unjustified rejection of evidence requests, violation of the right of the parties to be heard, failure to hold oral proceedings despite a request, etc. A complaint to the Constitutional Court is also possible in the event of a violation of a constitutional right guaranteed by law or when applying a constitutionally impermissible law.

Image: © a_korn - Fotolia