Zeile 21 in Anlage Sonstiges necessary for Einzelveranlagung?

[rhermione]

Hello,

If as a married couple, we choose "individual assessment" and only declare expenses that were borne individually in our individual tax declarations, should we also each select Line 21 in Anlage Sonstiges?

The problem I see on selecting this is that all the insurance and pension contributions in "Anlage Vorsorgeaufwand" are halved for both of us, but we declare only what we have paid as per our individual Lohnsteuerbescheingung so it does not seem right. Until we were married, this contribution was always fully deducted from gross income.

All other additional payments are also declared individually (e.g. we declare half the rental income in individual tax declaration.

Thank you!

[PandaMunich]

The problem I see on selecting this is that all the insurance and pension contributions in "Anlage Vorsorgeaufwand" are halved for both of us, but we declare only what we have paid as per our individual Lohnsteuerbescheingung so it does not seem right. Until we were married, this contribution was always fully deducted from gross income.

This option means that both spouses' Sonderausgaben (you say you only have the ones from your Steuerbescheinigung) get added up and then each spouse gets 50% of this total.

If you are using ELSTER, that is not yet able to give you the correct tax calculation based on that choice, but don't worry, the Finanzamt will.
You could use a for-pay tax software like Buhl tax, which has no problem doing the correct calculation for this choice: https://www.buhl.de/shop/produkte/tax

*******************************************************

You do understand that by not choosing "Zusammenveranlagung" (= a joint tax return), you are voluntarily paying too much tax?
There are only a few circumstances in which filing seprately is more advantageous, for example if one of the spouses had a lot of progression income, e.g. a large profit from the sale of a non-German property (one that wasn't used for your own living purposes and that you hadn't owned for more than 10 years).

[rhermione]

The problem I see on selecting this is that all the insurance and pension contributions in "Anlage Vorsorgeaufwand" are halved for both of us, but we declare only what we have paid as per our individual Lohnsteuerbescheingung so it does not seem right. Until we were married, this contribution was always fully deducted from gross income.

This option means that both spouses' Sonderausgaben (you say you only have the ones from your Steuerbescheinigung) get added up and then each spouse gets 50% of this total.

If you are using ELSTER, that is not yet able to give you the correct tax calculation based on that choice, but don't worry, the Finanzamt will.
You could use a for-pay tax software like Buhl tax, which has no problem doing the correct calculation for this choice: https://www.buhl.de/shop/produkte/tax

*******************************************************

You do understand that by not choosing "Zusammenveranlagung" (= a joint tax return), you are voluntarily paying too much tax?
There are only a few circumstances in which filing seprately is more advantageous, for example if one of the spouses had a lot of progression income, e.g. a large profit from the sale of a non-German property (one that wasn't used for your own living purposes and that you hadn't owned for more than 10 years).

Thanks PandaMunich for your reply.

I am indeed using Elster and selecting Einzelveranlagung.
The reason to not select the joint tax return is that one of us has progression income from company RSUs (Line 19 of Lohnsteuerbescheinigung) and the Elster as well as SteuerGo simulation shows the individual assessment to be more advantageous.

I however, had the doubts about Anlage Sonstiges, because in the previous year, we got the return filed by a tax advisor who also chose individual assessment for us, selected the Line 21 in Anlage Sonstiges and the "Bescheid" for both of us shows that Finanzamt only took half of the "Sonderausgaben" for each one of us. It was not added and halved as one would have expected.

Now that we are trying to file the return ourselves this year, we realise what happened and wondering which is the right option, and how to correct the last year's return if last year was the mistake from the tax advisor.

[PandaMunich]

I am indeed using Elster and selecting Einzelveranlagung.
The reason to not select the joint tax return is that one of us has progression income from company RSUs (Line 19 of Lohnsteuerbescheinigung) and the Elster as well as SteuerGo simulation shows the individual assessment to be more advantageous.

Line 19 is not about progression income, it is about the Fünftelregelung.
Most times, when people have an entry in line 19 it was severance pay (not that many people get RSU, which since you have to "serve" your employer for multiple years to get them, are also multi-year income and therefore also end up in line 19): https://www-vlh-de.translate.goog/arbei ... r_pto=wapp
But income in line 19, i.e. income subject to the Fünftelregelung, can also can lead to filing separately being more advantageous.

Line 16 a) of your Lohnsteuerbescheinigung, e.g. the part of the advantage you had through getting the RSU that pertains to the years you worked before moving to Germany, would have been progression income (= Einkommen unter Progressionsvorbehalt).
Sometimes, payroll departments don't understand that in case of people who had been transferred to Germany, a part of the RSU income gets taxed by the old country and that this "non-German" part should then end up in line 16 a).

But never mind, you probably don't care about the distinction.

I however, had the doubts about Anlage Sonstiges, because in the previous year, we got the return filed by a tax advisor who also chose individual assessment for us, selected the Line 21 in Anlage Sonstiges and the "Bescheid" for both of us shows that Finanzamt only took half of the "Sonderausgaben" for each one of us. It was not added and halved as one would have expected.

Now that we are trying to file the return ourselves this year, we realise what happened and wondering which is the right option, and how to correct the last year's return if last year was the mistake from the tax advisor.

It is now too late to object to last year's Bescheid corrected, they get set in stone 1 month and 3 days after the date they were issued.

Have a look into your old Bescheid, it should show in the section "ab beschränkt abziehbare Sonderausgaben" these two positions:

• abziehbare Vorsorgeaufwendungen aufgrund der im Rahmen der Einzelveranlagung gewählten hälftigen Aufteilung <-- that's half of your Sonderausgaben

• abziehbare Vorsorgeaufwendungen von Ihrem Ehegatten <-- that's half of your spouse's Sonderausgaben

If that is the case, the Finanzamt did what you had applied for and what it was supposed to do.

If it wasn't done correctly by the Finanzamt in the Bescheid and you asked the tax advisor to check the Bescheid (which is something you get charged by the hour for), then the tax advisor should have spotted the mistake.
In that case, you can claim the extra tax on your tax advisor's professional liability insurance.

[rhermione]

Line 19 is not about progression income, it is about the Fünftelregelung.

Thanks for explaining the Line 19/Line16a distinction --- it is interesting to know and could be useful in the future

It is now too late to object to last year's Bescheid corrected, they get set in stone 1 month and 3 days after the date they were issued.

Have a look into your old Bescheid, it should show in the section "ab beschränkt abziehbare Sonderausgaben" these two positions:
abziehbare Vorsorgeaufwendungen aufgrund der im Rahmen der Einzelveranlagung gewählten hälftigen Aufteilung <-- that's half of your Sonderausgaben
abziehbare Vorsorgeaufwendungen von Ihrem Ehegatten <-- that's half of your spouse's Sonderausgaben
If that is the case, the Finanzamt did what it you had applied for and what it was supposed to do.

Indeed, now I see how it worked out. There are both the entries as you mentioned so it was done correctly. Thank you very much for the explanations and clarifications!