The 2nd Senate of the Fiscal Court of Cologne dismissed the lawsuits against the assignment of the tax identification number (Tax ID) in seven model proceedings. In its decisions now published on July 7, 2010 (including 2 K 3093/08, 2 K 3986/08, 2 K 3265/08), the court expressed significant doubts regarding the constitutionality of the Tax ID. However, these doubts did not lead to a referral to the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe, because an appeal to the Federal Constitutional Court is only possible if a court is fully convinced of the unconstitutionality of a norm. Regarding the assignment of the Tax ID, the Senate could not be convinced that the individual citizen's right to informational self-determination outweighs the public interest in uniform taxation.
Behind these model proceedings are over 170 lawsuits filed by citizens who, before the Fiscal Court of Cologne, which is solely responsible in Germany, invoked the unconstitutionality of the Tax ID assignment. According to the plaintiffs, the nationwide Tax ID paves the way for the 'transparent citizen'. This is also evidenced by the fact that even babies receive a Tax ID by mail from the Federal Central Tax Office (BZSt) immediately after birth. Furthermore, the 'numbering' of individuals as 'personal identification numbers' is rejected on religious grounds.
The Senate bases its constitutional doubts, among other things, on the fact that the Tax ID would ultimately lead to all citizens residing in the Federal Republic of Germany being centrally registered by the state. This would create the possibility of establishing a large central database through corresponding expansions of the data to be stored or through the networking of various data pools. This could also lead to the risk of creating personality profiles in the future. It is also questionable whether it is truly necessary for the purpose of uniform taxation to assign the Tax ID 'comprehensively' and to store data 'comprehensively', regardless of whether the persons concerned have already met a taxation criterion. In this regard, it would, in a certain sense, amount to 'data retention'.
Insofar as individual plaintiffs also asserted the violation of religious freedom under Article 4 Paragraph 1 of the Basic Law (e.g., in proceedings 2 K 3093/08, 2 K 3986/08), the Senate is of the opinion that there is no infringement of the protected sphere. The Tax ID merely represents an internal administrative identifier. The plaintiffs are not being denied their Christian name; it remains preserved and will continue to be used as before.
The 2nd Senate has allowed an appeal against the judgments to the Federal Fiscal Court in Munich.
Since august 1, 2008, the Tax ID has been sent by the BZSt in Bonn to all residents (Section 139b AO). Germany thus follows the example of many neighbors in the European Union. The introduction of the Tax ID aims to simplify the taxation process and reduce bureaucracy. For this purpose, the competent BZSt electronically receives data stored in the registration registers from all registration authorities. In addition, data relevant for wage tax, such as religious affiliation, health insurance contributions, the number of wage tax cards, and children with their Tax IDs, are stored (Section 39e EStG). The Tax ID consists of eleven digits, from which no conclusions about the taxpayer can be drawn.
Source: Press release of the Fiscal Court of Cologne dated September 09, 2010
Goldberg Attorneys at Law 2010
Attorney Michael Ullrich, LL.M. (Information Law)
Specialist Lawyer for Information Technology Law (IT Law)
Email: info@goldberg.de
