Weird Hypothetical Question re Taxes

Finance, Taxes, Banking, Insurance and Retirement
1
Greetings friends and fans alike.

Imagine a tax noob were to receive unemployment benefits for a few months in early 2020, based a % of previously received IV Taggelder income (so no general pension contributions). Say around 20k was taxable out of around 23k. At the same time an IV pension was pending, but seemingly unlikely. When the IV pension was approved in late 2021, the Arbeitslosenkasse understandably demanded the return of said money, but ultimately could only recover from this individual's general pension (from work contributions), which didn't exist. Proof was provided from the relevant office, and that was that.

Or was it?

Say this person then received a new Bescheinigung from the Arbeitslosenkasse for 2021, in January 2022, showing the same amount received and taxable from the 2020 Bescheinigung. Confused, they decide to ignore it for a few months, while postponing 2021's filing until later this year.

Say this person recently decided to call them and ask what's up, and their attention was directed to the minus sign following the amounts (this hypothetical person was more accustomed to seeing a minus sign before a number. What an r word!).

Essentially, it's as if they retroactively didn't receive the 23k, at least for tax purposes, notwithstanding the non-paying-back part. The Arbeitslosenkasse told them they should be eligible for a refund, as crazy as that sounds.

So, finally, what if then the Gemeinde's tax office insists on the 30 days deadline to challenge an accepted declaration, which naturally preceded the adjustment nullifying the amount? Instead of adjusting 2020's filing, which they insist is impossible due to these 30 days, despite the limitations of linear time, are they meant to declare negative 20k for 2021? lol? Write to the Kantonal office? And expect a different response? Should they simply disregard the potential tax windfall, and be happy they didn't have to pay back the 23k? (not that they could have). Imagine that without that 20k (which is now void) no tax liability at all would have accrued in 2020 (imagine other taxable income less than 10k, hypothetically).

inb4 "Imagine someone actually reads and responds to this..."

2
I have actually no idea where you are heading to but my advice is always to call the tax office. In my experience they were always helpful and fair.

Edit: and until you get a final tax bill, nothing is fixed.

3
Imagine that the said person contacted a fiduciary and ask for a professional opinion

4
I think he's talking about getting taxable money from RAV which was properly due to him at the time but a later judgment on an IV claim nullifies his entitlement as the IV is back-dated. Theoretically the IV should refund or partially refund the RAV with nothing for the OP to do or pay. They would also pay and difference for the overlapping period. They seem to do it behind the scenes and it certainly can make the tax situation confusing.

5
The tax office is correct, once an assessment has been closed out it will not be reopened. Errors and omissions must be adjusted in later years.

6
A fiduciary? Very general. Do you mean a tax attorney? They're too poor for that. Wouldn't it cost about the same as the refund? tax on 20k is like a 1k. And probably wouldn't work. Maybe a metaphysician to attest to how time works?

I could have been more concise. Maybe a simple question: what does one do with a negative tax receipt? You get your bescheinigung and it shows negative 20k of taxable income. Then what? In the year field, both 2020 and 2021 is specified, indicating the adjustment. Declare minus 20k for 2021's return?

And assume one did pay RAV back, as would normally be the case. Then you've paid tax on money you've returned, and no chance of an adjustment for 2020, since 2022 is beyond the 30 days from your 2021 filing of 2020's taxes?

7
A fiduciary is an accountant dear boy, and it is more than obvious your "friend" has no chance of sorting this out without professional advice

8
You were close. An accountant is a fiduciary, but not all fiduciaries are accountants.

9
Wrong, not every accountant is a fiduciary.

10
True. Thanks for pointing it out. For the other guy, maybe an analogy would be helpful. An apple is a fruit. But a fruit is not an apple. Similarly, a woman is a person, but not all people are women. Not yet at least.

11

Go ask some bloke on the street about your tax problem, I'm sure he'll be of eminent use to you

12
I don't think eminent works there. roegner will know. That guy seems pretty sharp. Not saying it does or doesn't, to be clear. I'd just like confirmation before I approach strangers.

13
If you are that friendly, I doubt people are giving your further advice, just saying.

14

Similar:

illustrious

distinguished

renowned

esteemed

pre-eminent

notable

noteworthy

great

prestigious

important

significant

influential

outstanding

noted

of note

famous

celebrated

prominent

well known

lionized

acclaimed

superior

of high standing

high-ranking

exalted

revered

elevated

august

grand

lofty

venerable

foremost

leading

paramount

legendary

big-time

big/major league

You can chose which synonym fits your bloke on the street

15
Your income amount from the RAV was retrospectively paid for by the IV claim. If it covered the full amount then it becomes as if the RAV never paid at all, however the tax on the amount is due no matter who the source of that tax liability is.

16
Hmm. I dunno. They've accounted for all the retroactive pension as well as zusatzleistungen income for the two years. Definitely didn't come from there. Also, the bescheinigung seems to nullify the tax liability. Also zusatsleistungen isn't taxable, and the pension amount is tiny.

What does one do with a tax certificate with a negative amount?

17
Thank you, your eminence.