Paying money into the bank is an operation that is anything but infrequent, but taxpayers must remember that these are operations under the lens of the tax authorities.
The payment of money into the bank is allowed by law with no limits on the amount, but pay attention to tax obligations. The taxpayer must be able to prove that he has paid the taxes linked to that money.
Perhaps not everyone knows that account holders should always pay some attention in case of payments of money on the current account or at the post office. In fact, around the corner there are possible risks of investigations and controls by the Revenue Agency.
The point is very simple: the danger of being accused of tax evasion from the Inland Revenue is not that remote in these circumstances – especially in cases where you are unable to prove the provenance of such money with written documentation. The tax regulations on the subject speak for themselves: the money paid in a credit institution or at the post office can be considered by the tax authorities as a clear signal of violation of the rules on the payment of taxes. It is a presumption of tax evasion and against it it is the duty of the taxpayer to defend himself and justify the operation.
So let’s take a closer look at the issue, trying to highlight how to pay money into the bank without taking risks.
Paying money into the bank: proof of the taxpayer and the limits to the operation
As just mentioned, the tax rules protect first of all theRevenue Agency and therefore it is clear that, in the absence of proof of having complied with the tax obligations on the matter, the taxpayer who pays money to the bank or to the post office could be sent an assessment notice, with the consequent obligation to pay taxes and consequent penalties.
We emphasize that on a quantitative level, the taxpayer-account holder does not have to respect particular constraints. In fact, there is no rule that imposes a maximum ceiling on the amount paid into the bank. However, we must point out that the taxpayer must be able to prove that the money is not linked to tax evasion. L’burden of proof in fact it weighs on him.
In confirmation of this setting that favors the tax authorities there is a rule of the TUIR, on the basis of which all payments of money to a current account or credits obtained by bank transfer are alleged “Revenues”. Being such, they must be taxed.
And we must not forget that the Revenue Agency can easily control the flows of money into and out of the current accounts of citizens thanks to the so-called. Register of current accounts (bank and postal), ie the “Financial report register“. It is a gigantic database in which the banks themselves and post offices, every year, enter all the information relating to relations with all their customers – and therefore also information relating to payments.
How should the taxpayer behave?
Based on what has just been said, the taxpayer must know that he is required to carry out specific behaviors – in order to avoid consequences with the tax authorities. Here’s what it needs to do:
- o declares the money in its tax return, by way of taxable income, paying the related taxes in relation to it according to its personal income tax bracket;
- or he must be able to prove in the event of a tax audit that it is income already taxed at source or for which no taxes have to be paid (eg donation).
The taxpayer will do well to pay attention to tax obligations at stake, since thanks to the aforementioned Register of financial relations, the Revenue Agency can know everything that the taxpayer has done with his current account – payments of money or cash included. And if it identifies a suspicious transaction – or an inconsistency between the tax return and payment – it will be activated without delay against the taxpayer. In other words, if the office realizes that the amount of the payment has not been reported in the tax return, thetax assessment. And this occurs without prior warning or prior warning to the taxpayer.
Indeed, the latter will then have to challenge the assessment before the court, clarifying and proving that the money paid was the result of tax-free income or that there had already been taxation at source on the cash paid – that is to say before being delivered to the taxpayer.
Payment of money in the bank: deposits of small sums do not determine the initiative of the tax authorities
However, in conclusion, we cannot fail to mention that it is true that the financial administration cannot take the initiative for every potential transaction at risk of evasion. There are no organizational possibilities for the tax authorities and this would also be uneconomic.
This is why it is true that controls will focus on paying larger amounts of money (especially if frequent throughout the year). Those who pay a few hundred euros from time to time should therefore not run any real risk of tax checks.
#Paying #money #bank #increasingly #risky #tax #authorities #stepped #controls #risks #watch