personal tax data: transparency vs. privacy

[..]

Brussels, 3 June 2010

Citizenship : European Commission calls on Finland to ensure personal tax data is protected by EU rules

The European Commission today warned Finland that its data protection law may be breaking EU rules because it does not protect personal tax information published in the media. Finnish taxpayers’ personal data is available to the public and is being collected by businesses for sale as special publications, CDs and text messages. Finnish data protection rules do not cover personal data that has been made public in the media. Under EU rules, personal data may only be collected for legitimate purposes, and may only be further processed for the specific purposes for which it is was collected. In a letter of formal notice – the first stage in the infringement process – sent today, the Commission asked Finland for more information on how it will ensure that personal tax data is protected, as required by EU rules.

source: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleases...ence=IP/10/673

Finland is a country with very high taxes and individual income tax data is public, thus tax fraud is very hard to do.

The question however is what is more important transparency or privacy? thoughts? opinions?

[oden]

Slam dunk-privacy!

[Texas Contrarian]

Collections of income and net worth data should be protected with the tightest security possible. They're none of anyone else's business.

In fact, I'm a strong believer in maintaining a low profile and not owning homes that suggest significant wealth. Real estate tax appraisal databases are available to the public in a large number of counties. That's bad enough. If you own vacation homes or other properties, I strongly recommend that you form an LLC or some other entity so that it's hard to guess your financial status.

If you fail to maintain a low profile, you're just setting yourself up as an attractive target for unscrupulous plaintiff's attorneys and other scam artists.

The Europeans are big on wealth envy sentiments. Check these items:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ory?id=9524428

http://www.newser.com/story/62231/fi...ng-ticket.html

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/01/08/r...00-speeding-f/

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01...-bank-account/

Amazing.

What the hell business do prosecutors have nosing into people's finacial status?

[atlcomedy]

Originally Posted by oden

Slam dunk-privacy!

Yep

I actually think our (USA) current practices are pretty effective. From time to time certain individuals (mostly politicians) are guilted into "voluntarily" disclosing their financial affairs.

I think releasing data in aggregate, but not individually identifiable, is helpful.

As far as politicians or government officials go, I'm actually less concerned with what they make or pay, but I'd like more transparency around disclosure of (potentially) related party transactions.

I'm not naive enough to think that there won't be relationships or related party transactions. There should be. I don't want a high school wood shop teacher Chairing the Fed just because he doesn't know any bankers. But put all the cards on the table and let us the people know what the score is.

[atlcomedy]

Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

In fact, I'm a strong believer in maintaining a low profile and not owning homes that suggest significant wealth. Real estate tax appraisal databases are available to the public in a large number of counties.?

Suggest being the operative word.

If the last few years have taught us anything, there's a decent chance the guy in the $3000 suit, (leased) sports car, & million dollar+ home actually has a negative net worth, lives paycheck to paycheck & has ulcers from worrying about losing that paycheck.

Conversely the guy a couple neighborhoods over in the (paid off) $200K house that wears khakis and polos bought on sale at Marshall's and drives a (paid for) Camry, has a very handsome portfolio....

[Texas Contrarian]

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

If the last few years have taught us anything, there's a decent chance the guy in the $3000 suit, (leased) sports car, & million dollar+ home actually has a negative net worth, lives paycheck to paycheck & has ulcers from worrying about losing that paycheck.

There have always been plenty of guys like that running around Dallas.

Back in the '80s, a lot of women started calling 'em MasterCard Millionaires!