The distrust of an exaggerated state urge to collect as much personal data as possible is deeply rooted in society. This critical basic feeling runs across the entire political spectrum, from the left to the right-wing parties. In the history of the Federal Republic, the authorities’ claim to power, all financial andto examine the personal circumstances of the citizens as comprehensively as possible. Politicians of all kinds and citizens with a wide variety of backgrounds are united by the conviction that the state’s information power and the influence of large interest groups must not grow without limits. In the past, it has always been a sign of responsible politics thatprotecting citizens’ financial affairs and respecting individual privacy. In a democracy where the population’s trust in institutions is of central importance, the protection of financial data is seen as an indispensable part of personal freedom.
Political responsibility and the value of long-term perspectives
A far-sighted and healthy policy is characterized by the fact that it does not give in short-term, populist or election-oriented interests, but is consistently oriented towards long-term goals and sustainable values. It is particularly important to preserve the freedom of citizens instead of restricting them with ever new monitoring measures. politicians andDecision makers should be aware of their particular responsibility to respect and protect citizens’ financial privacy. The political debates in recent years show that the issue is constantly boiling up as the state or international institutions attempt to create new regulations on banking data disclosure or to monitor financial transactions.enforce. In such situations, it is all the more important not to be guided by short-term moods or the desire for quick successes, but to focus on the basic principles of freedom and legal certainty.
The change in the framework conditions for banking secrecy
When the legal framework for the confidentiality of bank data is being discussed today, it is no longer just about promoting tax honesty. Rather, fundamental questions of trust between bank and saver, the relationship between state and citizen and international cooperation are at stake. The state’s access toSensitive financial data of its citizens has implications that go far beyond the area of tax collection. He can touch the entire structure of trust and social stability. Especially in countries where the relationship between citizen and state is tense, such interventions can have serious consequences for the social acceptance of statehave institutions.
Causes and consequences of increasing state desires
In recent years, the financial pressure on citizens’ assets has grown steadily. This development is mainly due to the fact that many countries, especially in Europe, are struggling with significant budgetary deficits and ever-increasing government debt. In the political discourse, it is often argued that the state is based on a comprehensivetax honesty in order to be able to meet his obligations. It is often complained that the protection of financial privacy deprives the state of urgently needed funds. But this view falls short: The budget deficits and the debt are not usually due to a lack of tax honesty, but to political decisions thatincrease spending and accept deficits.
National debt in Europe and its consequences for trust
A closer look at financial and budgetary policy shows that national debt in the eurozone countries has increased significantly since the beginning of the new millennium. While the Maastricht criteria provide a debt cap of 60 percent of the gross domestic product, numerous Western European countries have clearly exceeded this limit. That’s how she layNational debt in Germany at the end of 2011 at 80.5 percent, in France at 86 percent and in Italy even 120.7 percent. This development is all the more remarkable since the affected states could benefit from a historically low interest rate level and low financing costs for many years. Nevertheless, the opportunity was not taken to significantly reduce the debt burdenor to secure yourself for possible economic downturns. On the contrary: the expenses were continuously increased and the existing rules were repeatedly disregarded. It is therefore understandable that many citizens in this environment lose confidence in the reliability of state fiscal policy and are worried about their savings.
The search for citizens for protection for their assets
In a situation where public debt is growing and confidence in political institutions is dwindling, many citizens are looking for ways to protect their accumulated capital. Some also go on ways that move outside of the applicable laws. Although this should not be downplayed, it is important tounderstand. The increasing pressure on private assets is often less due to tax evasion and more to the need for security and stability. The debate about state access to bank data is often led with the argument of combating “black money”, but the term itself is blurred and is politically exploited.
The problem of the term “black money”
The term “black money” is one of the most commonly used and at the same time misunderstood terms of the recent past. According to their own statements, hardly anyone has such money, but their existence is repeatedly portrayed as a mass phenomenon. This means assets deprived of the state’s access – be it because they were taken untaxed or becausethey were simply no longer declared after the tax payment. In many cases, it is also a question of savings that have already been made after taxation and have hardly received any interest in recent years. Their concealment hardly causes any losses to the state, but is often presented as a massive problem.
Trust instead of as a basis for tax honesty
Experience shows in many ways: A state that citizens trust has fewer problems in collecting taxes and financing their tasks. Instead of relying on totalitarian control and comprehensive surveillance, politics should build on mutual trust. In an international comparison in particular, the example of Switzerland shows that a reservedState access to financial data does not have to lead to less tax revenue or to weaken social security systems. The Swiss authorities have comparatively limited control options, but the country can still show high social benefits and a low level of debt in the pan-European context. Bank secrecy has by no means changed thereproved to be an obstacle to a solidarity society.
Conclusion: The importance of a balanced financial policy
In conclusion, it can be stated that a policy based on mutual trust and respects citizens’ financial freedom is beneficial both for the stability of society and the state budget. Overdramatizing the topic of “black money” and a one-sided focus on control measures only lead to further uncertainty. for amodern State is crucial to find intelligent and balanced ways to protect financial privacy without jeopardizing the necessary governmental tasks. Citizens are willing to contribute to the common good – provided they can trust their rights and freedoms to be respected.
