We often hear that taxes in Bulgaria are low. Rarely do people ask if it really is. What if I say that taxes in Bulgaria are too high?
Let it be clear first – our tax is not “just 10%”. The employer pays a huge amount on top of the salary to hire an employee – which also has the effect of reinforcing the gray sector. We pay insurances that may be necessary, but few can say they match the quality of service they receive in return. Because taxes should always be measured against what is received in return – and a 1% tax is too high if you are receiving a service that is not worth that tax.
Let me remind you that the American Revolution was carried out under the slogan “no taxation without representation”. This principle should also apply in Bulgaria today – if we do not agree with what taxes are used for, any tax is too high.
Today, taxes are often viewed in comparison to other countries with which we compete to attract investment. And what happens if we look at taxes only in the context of Bulgaria? To the state that spends them on us?
First of all, if taxes in Bulgaria were low, it would mean that the state is forced to limit itself to its most basic functions. He would cut spending where he could to get those “low” taxes. Can we say that this is the case?
Aren’t there dozens of redundant state structures? Can anyone tell why a Ministry of Tourism is needed? Ministry of Innovation and Growth?
Can the work of the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports, e-Government, Environment and Water, Transport and Communications – not be carried out by a minimal team of officials in a smaller agency, without ministerial and deputy ministerial armchairs and accordingly with higher salaries and a clearer task?
Do we need 240 deputies for less than 6.5 million people in the state?
This is only a small part of the parts that it is not clear that we need. Very small. We can sort out things for which it is not clear whether the state should distribute funds until tomorrow.
Well, since the state HAS these funds to give them away for things it may not need, then isn’t the most logical conclusion that taxes are too high? Our taxes are clearly not enough, for eand the state has fulfilled its functions, and they are so large that it can invent new functions to spend on.
Can anyone remember the last time a government agency, a ministry was closed, a service was cut, something was transferred, some expenditure was cut?
The idea that taxes are too low, however, it should be noted, is very convenient for those in power. So they can always sell the idea that there are not enough funds, so they look for new and new ways to increase the state’s income – by taking money from us. Instead of looking for a way to cut costs so that the money we give goes.
You’ll say that if all of this crap is cut, it’s an apocalypse, but we have an advantage here – we can already see what happens if these crap are removed. Javier Millay in Argentina introduced exactly these measures with a sharp, dramatic reduction in losses. It was there that people led by Argentina’s leftist, progressive forces were explaining how it would lead to hyperinflation and prices would skyrocket. No apocalypse occurred. Inflation fell sharply, and the budget was balanced for the first time in many years. Practically nothing happened.
So why do we reason from the point of view of bureaucrats whether our taxes are low or high, comparing them to other countries? Why don’t we look at taxes as our money – if it takes more to make what we want happen, it’s low. If they are enough to be used for things we don’t want, then they are high.
