Bulgaria: Constitutional Court revokes the unified account for tax payments

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Bulgaria: Constitutional Court revokes the unified account for tax payments

koleva.jpg

Rossitza Koleva

The amendments in the legislation in 2012 which resulted in the inability of physical persons and legal entities to specify which of their obligations towards the tax authorities they pay off contradict the Constitution. This is formulated in a decision of the Constitutional Court from February 5 2014. This decision practically revokes the principle of functioning of the unified tax-insurance account which was established during the GERB government with the idea to minimise bureaucracy. As a consequence, from the beginning of 2013 each payment done by physical persons and legal entities towards the state effectively meant paying off the oldest obligation, regardless of whether it was for taxes or contributions. As these two payments have different legal bases, they also have different legal consequences. The insurance contributions do not have the character of a tax since, when paid, the insured receives the right to be covered by social and health insurance (which is guaranteed by the Constitution), while taxes are due state receivables. According to the Constitutional Court right now the payments of the tax payers enter a single account, without being classified by tax type and insurance installments.

With this ruling of the Constitutional Court, another amendment is considered as contradictory to the Constitution, that is the amendment which ruled out the obligation of the National Revenue Agency to transfer the incomes from contributions in the relevant accounts of the National Insurance Institute and the Health Fund, by the end of each working day. According to the analysts, the lack of separation between contributions and tax revenues creates a certain risk that these funds are not used for the purpose for which they were paid. This results in conditions allowing for the possible violation of the constitutional rights of citizens to social and health security.

Two options are being discussed as solutions. The first option is the unified account to be divided into four separate accounts – one each for state taxes, for social security contributions, additional obligatory pension fund and health contributions. In all four of them the first to be paid off is the oldest by date. The second option discussed is to have one account but with four different codes for each type of payment.

Rossitza Koleva (rossitza.koleva@eurofast.eu)

Eurofast Global, Sofia Office

Tel: +359 2 988 69 78

Website: www.eurofast.eu

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The ruling is ‘well-structured’ in its references to the OECD TP guidelines, one expert says, while another argues it overlooks key technical issues
India also brokered its first-ever multilateral APA last year, the Central Board of Taxes announced
A global tax framework may not materialise anytime soon, but a common set of principles is becoming increasingly necessary, Rudolf Winkenius also tells ITR
Kingsley Napley’s claimants are arguing that taxing the provision of education breaches the European Convention on Human Rights
While pillar two can progress without the US, it won’t reach the same heights without American involvement, argues Renáta Bláhová, founding partner of BMB Partners Taxand
There are unanswered questions as to how foreign investors could reclaim money via tax credits, advisers suggested
Amid an ever-changing tax environment, India’s advisory market is bustling with competition ahead of the 2025 World Tax rankings and ITR Awards
The deal comes after PwC had accused Paul McNab of using confidential information; in other news, McDermott hired a new London tax head from a US rival
Looking at transfer pricing simplification is “obviously helpful”, but it should be done in line with current standards, a senior government figure reportedly said
The UK Government’s plans to close the tax gap via increased HM Revenue and Customs investment have failed to impress local tax advisers
Gift this article