In the Flemish municipality of Mortsel, a remarkable measure is causing great indignation among residents. The back gate tax is considered discriminatory.
Recently, some 150 residents received a registered letter stating that they would henceforth have to pay €50 per year for a back gate that provides access from their garden to the public space. The measure, popularly known as the “back gate tax”, raises many questions among the affected residents and local experts about fairness and legal feasibility.
Gerda and François, residents of Mortsel for fifty years, reacted with surprise to the makers of Terzake who went to the back gates with the camera to take a look. They do not understand why they now suddenly have to pay a tax for something that has been part of their property for decades. “In principle, every owner of a building with direct access to the public domain has been obliged to arrange this administratively and pay compensation since 1 July 2010,” the letter states. However, Gerda emphasises that she and her husband have never heard anything about this before.
no letter
The decision does not seem to be applied in the same way everywhere in the municipality. Some residents in similar situations have not received a letter, while others are suddenly confronted with these extra costs. “People on the other side also have a back gate, but they have not received anything,” says one resident. This raises the question of why some gates are taxed and others are not. Ruth, who also has a back gate, confirms that she has not received an invitation to pay. “The difference between my gate and someone else’s is the same,” says another resident. The inconsistency leads to frustration among residents, who see the policy as arbitrary and unfair.
According to Michel Maus, there are questions about the legal feasibility of this tax, and it seems unfair that a tax is levied on a back gate while there is no comparable tax on a front door.
The backdoor tax does not seem to be entirely new and may even date back to the time of Napoleon. Nevertheless, the reintroduction of this tax today raises questions about its legal basis. The support among the residents is also limited. “These are taxes that have no support among the population,” says Maus. “But such measures fit within a political policy that strives for additional income.”
frustration and resistance
Many residents, such as Gerda and François, refuse to pay on principle. They experience the letter they received as a “threatening letter”. “If you fail to pay, they will close our gate at our expense,” François says indignantly. “That is really too crazy for words.” Another resident points out the lack of maintenance by the municipality. “If they force us to pay, they should also ensure that the passages are properly maintained,” he says. “Now we have to prune everything ourselves, while the neighbors let their piece be neglected.”
Municipalities are creative in coming up with different types of taxes. In addition to the backdoor tax, some municipalities are considering introducing a charging station tax. In addition, there are other taxes that municipalities can levy, such as taxes on the driving force of machines and taxes per computer screen for companies that are established in their territory.
The city council of Mortsel has so far refused to comment on the situation to the makers of Terzake. This silence fuels the anger among the residents. In the meantime, the pressure on the municipality to revise or abolish the tax is growing. For the residents, it remains a matter of principle.
security
The controversy surrounding the so-called back gate tax in Mortsel is not limited to the financial impact and the legal questions that the tax raises. Some residents are also concerned about the consequences for safety, especially in the event of an emergency such as a fire. For many residents, the back gate is not only a practical passage, but also a crucial escape route. Especially in a narrow street or neighbourhood where the front door can get blocked, it is vital to have an extra way out.
Experts point out that the tax is not only legally controversial, but can also create insecurity. Wim Demeyer, a specialist in fire safety, states that closing back gates can pose a risk. “A back gate can be a life-saving way out in the event of a fire, especially in densely built-up areas. It is important that municipalities first consider the implications for safety when imposing this type of tax.”
He also emphasizes that closing gates can hinder the efficiency of emergency services. “If firefighters or other emergency services can reach a home more quickly through a back entrance, that can make the difference between life and death. Closing that access, even temporarily, would not be in line with safety guidelines.”
Click Register to the Terzake broadcast about this issue.
