The changed economic situation means that the government will collect less taxes than usual, but its spending will not be reduced, so the shortfall in government coffers will grow. This year, the country will be indebted for almost 30% of its spending (just under 3 billion of the 10 billion budgeted). In addition, it has debts from previous years, so its debt is steadily increasing, and if this situation continues, in a few years we will find ourselves in the same situation as Greece today, but the situation will be even more difficult, because it will not only be Slovenia that will be in this situation, but the whole of Europe.
Probably nobody wants this to happen, so I suggest that we start to solve the fiscal problems immediately. Given that the government is unable to reduce the state apparatus, it will be necessary to introduce new taxes, but raising excise duties on energy and electricity is not really appropriate, as it increases the cost to the economy, so it will be necessary to introduce other taxes that will not affect the economy.
The property tax will not be of any great benefit to the state, because it will go to the municipalities, so it is necessary to tax those things that citizens have but can easily give up and thus divert their interests and income to other areas, but they have to be of a scale that makes the taxation worthwhile, and pets are one such thing that could be taxed very easily.
Taxing all pets, such as birds, fish, rodents, cats, dogs, reptiles and other animals that are not used for agricultural production, could bring a large yield to the budget. I propose that a tax advance of EUR 10 per month be collected on each animal, and at the end of the year they would be entered in the income tax in the same way as dependants, except that instead of a deduction, taxpayers would have to pay 1% of the income tax on each animal, but with a minimum of EUR 100.
The funds raised in this way would be used primarily to provide for the basic needs of normal living for citizens, such as housing, kindergartens and homes for the elderly, because it is not normal for young people to have to go into debt for 20 to 30 years in order to live in normal conditions, and in some places there is a waiting time of more than a year for a kindergarten, while the elderly have to wait more than 3 years for a home. Most of the funds would be used to reduce the budget gap or to repay debt.
In addition to the extra revenue for the budget, we would also get a central register of animals, because now anyone can buy a pet and do with it what they want, which is why we see so many stray animals, because the owners simply get fed up of them and 'abandon' them anywhere. A tax would be useful in this case, as it would make many people realise that owning an animal is a responsibility, and it could also sanction those who fail to register and de-register their animals.
Finally, a calculation that will make it clear to the State that the introduction of such a tax is worthwhile in the long run.
There is no published total number for pets, so for the sake of calculation we can assume that every second Slovene has at least one animal, and some even more (there are known cases of people having as many as 10 cats or even 20 canaries), so we can say that on average every Slovene has one animal, which means that we have 2,000,000 pets. With this number, a tax of €100 per year per animal would yield a tax of €200 million. However, only those whose income is less than 15% above the minimum wage would pay the minimum tax, and everyone else would pay more. Doctors, lawyers, notaries and other well-paid employees also have many dogs, and the tax revenue would be much higher for them. In cases where a notary has an income of EUR 50 000, he would pay EUR 500 in tax for each animal. Because of the income tax, the yield would probably be one times higher, and in this way the State could receive EUR 400 million a year, which means that it would be so much less indebted and would pay EUR 15 million less in interest a year. In order to prevent tax avoidance, those who have a registered dependent would also pay a tax on their pets in their income tax.
The main effects would probably be, in the short term, fewer pets, as those who are not attached to them would probably give them up; in the long term, there would probably be an increase in fertility, as for many couples a pet replaces a child, and if they gave it up because of the tax, they would have a child and fertility would increase. This would also solve many other problems, such as the collapse of the pension system, the shortage of labour and other problems that will arise as a result of the reduction in population. Above all, this tax would reduce the budget deficit and cut interest costs.
The government talks at every turn about how it is working for the good of the citizens, and if it is serious about this, it will introduce this tax.