Real estate is the core problem of the current bad state of Slovenian banks, which will have to be solved again with Slovenian taxpayers' money. It is clear that the heavy blow of falling property prices will also have to be taken (this is what the European Commission has signalled by calling for clarifications on the rise in property prices during the conjuncture).
Some measures to consider:
 - reducing the VAT rate on new buildings, thus reducing the final price of the property (from 20% to 8.5%, for example, and proportionately to 5% for social buildings), retroactive to the moment when the new rate of taxation on new buildings came into force, etc.; it may be appropriate to refund the VAT overpaid to the taxpayers, i.e. to the purchasers, while at the same time having an impact on income tax, in which case the amount of the tax refunded will be included in the taxable amount of the tax base;
- a change in the income tax scale, introducing several new rates, for incomes above €13,500 per year, 31%; for incomes above €17,500, 33.5%; for incomes above €22,000, 35%; and for incomes above €25,000 per year, 37%; above that, 41%. This results in a fairer distribution and respect for the fundamental principle of the burden on the income of individuals. The tax deduction for the purchase of a first home should be reintroduced in the ZDoh-1 (taking into account possible avoidance, with the help of related parties, etc.), taking into account the amount of the purchase up to e.g. € 150 000.
- Introduce a tax on luxury goods such as boats, private jets, high-end and high-end vehicles, defining the object of taxation by a factual description and by setting a minimum value, taking into account the basic guidelines of comparable market prices, etc., and by overlooking ownership (director of a limited company, etc.); luxury also includes real estate which does not serve the taxable person's housing needs; progressive taxation is based on wealth (independent of capital gains taxation);
- introduction of material liability for members of the management of banks, at a certain percentage of the bank's annual loss (the same would apply to other financial companies, such as insurance companies), unless the member of the management proves otherwise (i.e. that he is not responsible for the loss, etc.), with the possibility of seizure of assets (including family assets) and prohibition to hold similar positions for a further 10 years, or any position with similar responsibilities, irrespective of the role of the member of the management in the ownership of the company (one-person limited liability company).
- the introduction of a financial police; we obviously do not want to get into a situation where we sell out the country because tax enforcement is ineffective (the case of Greece, where the country has had to undertake wide-ranging reforms that have/will affect 'ordinary' citizens, while it is clearly and publicly known that a handful of individuals, the local tycoons, owe the country over €100 billion, which would have already fixed the country's public finances before the IMF etc. entered the picture).