Cover photo: Henry & Co. from Pexels I must also warn of the illegal process of adopting the Tourist Tax Act. Namely, the text of the proposal of the Law on Tourist Tax, which was in the process of public debate from 19.09. 2018 to 18.10. In 2018, it did not contain a provision on the payment of a flat fee on extra beds, but it was subsequently inserted immediately before the enactment of the Law on 09.05. 2019 in the Croatian Parliament. This grossly violated the prescribed procedure for passing the Law. The interested public could not comment on the provision of payment of a flat tourist tax on an extra bed for services in the household and on the family farm because this provision was not in the text given for public consultation. In addition, the insertion of the said appendix significantly changes the significance and impact of the entire Act on the business conditions of the owners of accommodation in the household and on the family farm. This raises the question of whether the Law was passed in an illegal manner and is in fact null and void and subject to repetition of the entire procedure? ARTICLE 12 OF THE LAW IN CONFLICT WITH ARTICLE 11 OF THE RULES Article 12 I quote: Persons providing catering services in the household or on the family farm pay an annual lump sum tourist tax for each bed (main and auxiliary) and the accommodation unit in the camp and camp-rest area, ie according to the capacity in the Robinson accommodation facility used for the provision of accommodation services in accordance with a special regulation governing the performance of catering activities. – completed quote. Due to the above, I hold that the insertion of the obligation to pay a flat-rate sojourn tax for household accommodation service providers on an extra bed is contrary to the legal provisions of the same Act on full or partial exemption from the obligation to pay the tourist tax. Also, this provision is contrary to the provisions of the ordinance on the classification and categorization of facilities in which catering services are provided in the household and on the family farm. ILLEGAL PROCEDURE FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE LAW ON TOURIST TAX? Furthermore, in the Tourist Tax Act (OG 52/19, in force since 30.05 May 2019, in Article 5, paragraph one, it is stated that tourist tax is not paid by children under 12 years of age. In the same law, Article 6, paragraph 1 states that tourist tax reduced by 50% is paid by children aged 12 to 18. So the most common users of an extra bed are either completely exempt from paying the tourist tax or pay a tax reduced by 50%. Having in mind the different treatment of extra beds in the Regulations on the classification and categorization of catering facilities that were in force for a certain year, today we have accommodation facilities with expressed and those with unexpressed extra beds. The current Ordinance also does not require the disclosure of extra beds. Consequently, it will happen that the owners of facilities that have a categorization according to the latest Ordinance will not be charged with the sojourn tax (and tax) for extra beds, while owners with an “older” categorization will be charged with the stated extra beds. Of course these owners will massively apply for a new categorization without extra beds which must be done by the end of this year. The large number of facilities that need to be visited and new solutions issued, and the small number of executors at UDUs, will create a chaotic situation and unnecessary tensions. CONSEQUENCES OF SUCH A LEGAL PROVISION WHY CAN’T YOU PAY A FULL TOURIST TAX ON EXTRA BEDS? I would like to draw your attention to the suspicion of the illegality of the provision on the payment of sojourn tax on an extra bed in a household from Article 12 of the Tourist Tax Act (OG 52/19, in force since 30.05.2019). The only possible payment of the tourist tax on extra beds would be after the overnight stay of persons who are obliged to pay the tourist tax. The collection of a flat tourist tax (and then a tax) on extra beds is too much of a burden that cannot be justified by anything. Extra beds are mostly used by children who do not pay the fee or pay only half of it. Extra beds are only available on request and are generally not charged separately. Their quality is also not the same as permanent beds, so it is completely illogical that tourist tax and tax are charged on extra beds as well as on permanent ones. If a flat tourist tax were paid for extra beds as stated in the Act, then an apartment with two permanent and two extra beds would be treated as an apartment with four permanent beds. This presupposes a new way of classifying and categorizing catering facilities, according to which extra beds become permanent. If the user of the extra bed does not pay the tourist tax, can the owner of the accommodation be required to pay the same? ARTICLE 12 OF THE LAW IN CONFLICT WITH ARTICLE 5 OF THE SAME LAW From the stated article of the Ordinance, on the basis of which the categorization of accommodation facilities in the household is performed, it is prescribed that the extra bed does not express in the capacity of the object except in the studio apartment (6).It is also prescribed that the extra bed (folding) is furnished at the request of the guest (sofa, two-seater, armchair, etc.) it does not have to be prescribed elements: bedside table or shelf, bedside lamp, carpet next to the bed and the ability to turn off and turn on the main lights from the bed (6). It is obvious that the extra bed is not in use except at the request of the guest, that it does not meet the requirements of the basic bed and that it is not expressed in the capacity of the facility. Accommodation capacity of the building is determined by the number of fixed beds, and in the studio apartment by the number of extra and fixed beds, depending on the area of the module. (2) The household facility has the following capacity: 1. single room – one bed (one person), width up to 120 cm, 2. double room – two beds (two single beds or one double bed), 3 triple room – three beds, if the area of the module for a double room is larger by 3 m4, 3. apartment and holiday house – one, two or three beds in each room (for the third bed the area of the module larger by 5 m3), 3. studio apartment – maximum four people on extra (folding) and / or fixed beds in an existing building. (4) An extra bed can be placed in a single or double room, if the area of the module is larger by 5 m3. (XNUMX) There may be two extra beds in the living room of the apartment and the holiday home if they are not in the rooms. (XNUMX) Extra bed (folding) is set at the request of the guest (sofa, sofa, armchair, etc.). Along with XNUMX of them, there are no prescribed elements: a nightstand or shelf, a night lamp, a carpet next to the bed and the possibility of turning off and on the main lighting from the bed. (6) Extra bed is not expressed in the capacity of the facility, except in the studio apartment. – completed quote. Namely, in the Ordinance on the classification and categorization of facilities in which catering services are provided in the household (OG 69/17), Article 11 states, I quote: Simply put – paying a flat tourist tax for extra beds is not justified, it is not legitimate, it is not fair. The only fair way to collect the tourist tax per extra bed is to collect the tax per night spent for persons from 12 to 18 years 50%, and for persons over 18 years 100% of the prescribed fee, according to the records in the visitor. LEGAL PROVISION CONTRARY TO OTHER PROVISIONS FROM THE SAME LAW
Leicester City need just five points to complete a fairytale Premier League title triumph after Leonardo Ulloa scored twice in a 4-0 home victory over Swansea City yesterday.With top scorer Jamie Vardy suspended, his stand-in Ulloa stepped up with a brace of goals at the King Power Stadium, either side of goals by Riyad Mahrez and substitute Marc Albrighton. It lifted Claudio Ranieri’s side eight points clear of second-place Tottenham Hotspur, who host West Bromwich Albion this evening, and means that they can claim the title by winning at Manchester United next Sunday if Spurs fail to beat West Brom.Leicester’s victory had the added effect of ending the title bids of both third-place Manchester City and fourth-place Arsenal, who were held to a 0-0 draw at struggling Sunderland.Vardy’s dismissal, after he was shown a second yellow card for diving, had been the chief talking point of Leicester’s 2-2 draw with West Ham United last weekend, which had raised the possibility of nerves getting the better of Ranieri’s miracle men.But they made an ideal start against Francesco Guidolin’s Swansea as Ashley Williams’s careless clearance struck Mahrez, who calmly stroked his 17th goal of the season past visiting goalkeeper Lukasz Fabianski.Ulloa made it 2-0 on the half-hour by heading in Danny Drinkwater’s free-kick and killed the game off in the 61st minute when he toed in a cross from Jeff Schlupp, who had sprinted into the box from halfway.The fourth goal, in the 85th minute, was the work of Leicester’s substitutes, with Demarai Gray sparking the move by sprinting to the byline on the right and sending a cross into the box.From Andy King’s back-post header, Gray saw a close-range volley parried by Fabianski, but Albrighton followed in to lift the rebound into the roof of the net.Leicester’s win definitely sounded the death knell on the title aspirations of Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal, whose goalless stalemate at Sunderland did little to help their push for a top-four finish.Sunderland left-back Patrick van Aanholt came closest to breaking the deadlock at the Stadium of Light with a first-half free-kick that hit the post, while both teams had penalty appeals for handball turned down.Arsenal, for whom Jack Wilshere made his first appearance of the season after recovering from a broken fibula, remain fourth, five points above Manchester United, but having played a game more.“We created less, but could still have scored. We should have been in front in the first half,” Arsenal manager Wenger told the BBC.“It leaves us having to win the next game, as always. We fight against teams who fight not to go down, so we prepare to fight again next Saturday.”The point was of much greater use to Sam Allardyce’s Sunderland, who climbed out of the relegation zone on goal difference at the expense of Norwich City.“With four games to go it is in our hands now,” said Allardyce, whose side had won 3-0 at Norwich in their previous game.“Our performances are good – excellent last week and very good today. Hopefully we can get enough points to stay out of trouble.”Share this:FacebookRedditTwitterPrintPinterestEmailWhatsAppSkypeLinkedInTumblrPocketTelegram
A group of investors led by Czech businessman Karl PraÅ¾ák is targeting a takeover of Slavia Prague. The group says it will also bring in over the municipal authorities of the Czech capital’s Prague 10 district as a new shareholder, reported local daily Mlada fronta DNES. “The involvement of Prague 10 is one of the conditions of the owners of the stadium and the club,” said Vaclav Slavicek, chief executive of local firm Vinet, which is the owner of Slavia’s stadium.The final decision regarding the planned investment is to be made following the forthcoming local elections in the Czech Republic.The municipality could secure a share of about 40% in the company which will own both the stadium and the club. The amount of the potential deal is estimated at about CZK 400 million (€15 million).The Prague-based side is currently owned by Czech businessman Ales Rebicek.”Prague 10 could cover a part of payment for the shares by returning the bonds which were used to finance the construction of the stadium,” said an unnamed source close to the deal said. The bonds were also purchased by other districts, including Prague 6 and Prague 13.Set up in 1892, Slavia Prague plays in the Synot Liga, the top tier of the Czech professional football league.