ID :
30224
Fri, 11/14/2008 - 15:20
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://www.oananews.org//node/30224
The shortlink copeid
Neutrality of Constitutional Court questioned after tax ruling
(ATTN: CLARIFIES Kang's remark, CORRECTS dollar value at 10th para, TRIMS)
By Kim Hyun
SEOUL, Nov. 14 (Yonhap) -- The Constitutional Court faced a sensitive debate over its political independence on Friday, after its landmark ruling virtually crippled a real estate tax against high-end homeowners in line with the government's proposed tax cuts.
The court wrapped up its two-year deliberations over a controversial real estate
holding tax by ruling on Thursday that the family-based taxation formula is
discriminatory against married couples and thus breaches the Constitution's
protection of marriage.
The ruling did not come as a surprise to many, as the finance minister, Kang
Man-soo, had earlier predicted it.
"The result was just as Finance Minister Kang Man-soo had foreseen," said Rep.
Choi Jae-sung, spokesman for the main opposition Democratic Party, referring to
controversial remarks made earlier by the minister.
The real estate tax, levied on the wealthiest 2 percent of the country's
population, was implemented by the liberal Roh Moo-hyun government in 2005, but
it is now perceived by President Lee Myung-bak as a breach of the country's
market economy.
Opponents say the heavy tax dampens national consumption and real estate
transactions, while Roh sought to curb rampant real-estate speculation and
redistribute the nation's wealth to the lower classes.
The Constitutional Court largely upheld the spirit of the ownership tax, but its
verdict drastically reduced the taxable population. The ruling ultimately made it
easier for the conservative administration to push its own tax reform agenda,
which now awaits parliamentary approval.
Critics questioned the court's independence, given the finance minister's
controversial remarks last week. Kang, who favors reversing the controversial
tax, said during a parliamentary interpellation session that his ministry
"contacted the Constitutional Court, but I can't give you a clear forecast.
He went on to say the ministry's tax directors had met with the court officials,
and that he had "heard from the directors that the family-based tax formula would
likely be judged unconstitutional."
Critics are also taking note of the court justices' personal wealth. Eight out of
the court's nine justices are subject to the real estate tax, which levies a 1-3
percent tax on owners of properties worth 600 million won (US$433,212) or more.
In their ruling, seven of the justices found the family-based tax formula
unconstitutional. They would still be ineligible for the upcoming tax return,
however, as their individually-owned property values exceeds the 600-million won
bar.
Kim Nam-guen, a leading member of the progressive Lawyers for A Democratic
Society, said the ruling Grand National Party now has an opportunity to
"politically abuse" the court's ruling.
"The real estate tax law was formed around a family-based formula in
consideration of the fact that most people live in family units, as opposed to
individual ones," Kim said.
"Given the ruling, the government should now try to modify the real estate tax
law to make up for the unconstitutional elements rather than politically abuse it
to abolish the real estate tax, which it seems highly inclined to do," he said.
The Constitutional Court, which celebrated its 20th anniversary this year, has
often served as the ultimate authority in arbitrating the country's political
conflicts.
In 2004, it rescued the political career of then President Roh by nullifying the
parliament's vote to impeach him. In the run-up to the 2007 presidential
election, the court approved a sensitive probe into fraud allegations involving
current President Lee, then an opposition presidential candidate. Lee was later
cleared of the charges by the prosecution.
Some experts criticize political circles for putting too much burden on the
Constitutional Court by resorting to it to resolve their disputes.
"It is the National Assembly and the government that made the real estate law,
and whether to revise it or abolish it is the responsibility of political
circles. It's regrettable that they have been waiting for the court to rule,"
wrote Lee Jae-gyo, a lawyer and law professor at Inha University, in a column
published by the daily Chosun Ilbo.
Korea's Constitutional Court, as in Germany, serves as the ultimate authority on
the judicial review system. In the United States and Japan, that role is reserved
for the supreme court.
hkim@yna.co.kr
(END)
By Kim Hyun
SEOUL, Nov. 14 (Yonhap) -- The Constitutional Court faced a sensitive debate over its political independence on Friday, after its landmark ruling virtually crippled a real estate tax against high-end homeowners in line with the government's proposed tax cuts.
The court wrapped up its two-year deliberations over a controversial real estate
holding tax by ruling on Thursday that the family-based taxation formula is
discriminatory against married couples and thus breaches the Constitution's
protection of marriage.
The ruling did not come as a surprise to many, as the finance minister, Kang
Man-soo, had earlier predicted it.
"The result was just as Finance Minister Kang Man-soo had foreseen," said Rep.
Choi Jae-sung, spokesman for the main opposition Democratic Party, referring to
controversial remarks made earlier by the minister.
The real estate tax, levied on the wealthiest 2 percent of the country's
population, was implemented by the liberal Roh Moo-hyun government in 2005, but
it is now perceived by President Lee Myung-bak as a breach of the country's
market economy.
Opponents say the heavy tax dampens national consumption and real estate
transactions, while Roh sought to curb rampant real-estate speculation and
redistribute the nation's wealth to the lower classes.
The Constitutional Court largely upheld the spirit of the ownership tax, but its
verdict drastically reduced the taxable population. The ruling ultimately made it
easier for the conservative administration to push its own tax reform agenda,
which now awaits parliamentary approval.
Critics questioned the court's independence, given the finance minister's
controversial remarks last week. Kang, who favors reversing the controversial
tax, said during a parliamentary interpellation session that his ministry
"contacted the Constitutional Court, but I can't give you a clear forecast.
He went on to say the ministry's tax directors had met with the court officials,
and that he had "heard from the directors that the family-based tax formula would
likely be judged unconstitutional."
Critics are also taking note of the court justices' personal wealth. Eight out of
the court's nine justices are subject to the real estate tax, which levies a 1-3
percent tax on owners of properties worth 600 million won (US$433,212) or more.
In their ruling, seven of the justices found the family-based tax formula
unconstitutional. They would still be ineligible for the upcoming tax return,
however, as their individually-owned property values exceeds the 600-million won
bar.
Kim Nam-guen, a leading member of the progressive Lawyers for A Democratic
Society, said the ruling Grand National Party now has an opportunity to
"politically abuse" the court's ruling.
"The real estate tax law was formed around a family-based formula in
consideration of the fact that most people live in family units, as opposed to
individual ones," Kim said.
"Given the ruling, the government should now try to modify the real estate tax
law to make up for the unconstitutional elements rather than politically abuse it
to abolish the real estate tax, which it seems highly inclined to do," he said.
The Constitutional Court, which celebrated its 20th anniversary this year, has
often served as the ultimate authority in arbitrating the country's political
conflicts.
In 2004, it rescued the political career of then President Roh by nullifying the
parliament's vote to impeach him. In the run-up to the 2007 presidential
election, the court approved a sensitive probe into fraud allegations involving
current President Lee, then an opposition presidential candidate. Lee was later
cleared of the charges by the prosecution.
Some experts criticize political circles for putting too much burden on the
Constitutional Court by resorting to it to resolve their disputes.
"It is the National Assembly and the government that made the real estate law,
and whether to revise it or abolish it is the responsibility of political
circles. It's regrettable that they have been waiting for the court to rule,"
wrote Lee Jae-gyo, a lawyer and law professor at Inha University, in a column
published by the daily Chosun Ilbo.
Korea's Constitutional Court, as in Germany, serves as the ultimate authority on
the judicial review system. In the United States and Japan, that role is reserved
for the supreme court.
hkim@yna.co.kr
(END)
