Your Taxes: Justice and liberty for all

Israel goes into its 63rd year with discerning tax and judicial systems.

April 20, 2010 22:45
3 minute read.
taxes 1 88

taxes good 88. (photo credit: )


Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analysis from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user experience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Report and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew - Ivrit
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief


While we celebrate Yom Ha’atzmaut, let’s review a dramatic court drama that recently unfolded here. It has all the ingredients of a crime thriller, a tough legal issue, and state tax revenues at stake.

The taxpayer, a dashing lawyer by profession, was tried for killing someone and wounding two others. According to the indictment, someone called the lawyer and asked for professional advice about a family law matter and arranged to meet him at night at Kfar Devoriah.


The lawyer arrived at the meeting place and was surprised to find he had walked into an ambush; three people were waiting for him with wooden clubs. When he arrived, they started beating him up. Fortunately, this lawyer carried a gun. In the heat of the fight, he pulled out the gun, aimed at his three assailants, killed one of them and wounded the other two. In the end, the court found the lawyer was innocent on grounds of self-defense.

But it didn’t end there. In his VAT returns, the lawyer claimed back the VAT on his legal expenses. The VAT Division turned this down. The lawyer appealed. At first the appeal was rejected, but later the VAT Division recognized half the legal expenses as being business inputs.

That wasn’t good enough for the lawyer; he appealed to the Nazareth District Court (Sami Shibli vs the VAT Division, Ayin Shin 000002/10 of April 8, 2010). The judge was Avraham Avraham.

Section 38 of the VAT Law states that a business dealer is entitled to offset input VAT according to a lawfully issued tax invoice against the output VAT it owes the VAT Division. Section 1 of the VAT Law states that VAT is imposed on services rendered to a business dealer for the purposes of, or for use in, a business.

The lawyer claimed the legal expenses in his trial were incurred either: (1) to enable him to continue practicing law, or (2) in the course of his business.


If you were judging the case, what would you rule?

Regarding the first claim (trial expenses incurred these expenses were just like medical expenses, which are not recognized for tax purposes. Expenses incurred in a criminal trial to preserve the liberty of a business dealer, his good name, his health, his life and so forth, are located beyond the boundary between what can be claimed and what cannot, even though each of these fundamental things are necessary to enable a business to keep going.

Regarding the second claim (trial expenses incurred in the course of the individual’s business), the judge stated: “This case is far beyond the boundary of what can be recognized. I do not think that a business dealer who defends himself against a client who comes to attack him and kills him as an act of self-defense does so for the purposes of, or for use in, a business. He does so to defend his body, not his business. It is not an act in the ordinary course of his business.”

In other words, the taxpayer should count his blessings he wasn’t convicted and that justice prevailed. But the criminal-trial expenses could not be recognized for VAT purposes.

The case dealt with VAT, not income tax. For income-tax purposes, an expense is generally deductible if it is incurred wholly and exclusively in the production of taxable income. Presumably, such trial expenses may not be recognized for income-tax purposes for the reasons outlined above.

Israel goes into its 63rd year with discerning tax and judicial systems.

As always, consult experienced tax advisors in each country at an early stage in specific cases.

Leon Harris is an international tax specialist at Harris Consulting & Tax Ltd. and Western Fiduciary Ltd.

Now is the time to join the news event of the year - The Jerusalem Post Annual Conference!
For more information and to sign up,
click here>>

Related Content

The Teva Pharmaceutical Industries
April 30, 2015
Teva doubles down on Mylan, despite rejection


Cookie Settings