1775 m. Lietuvos mokesčių įstatymas

Abstract

Straipsnyje lyginami ir analizuojami 1775 m. Lietuvos ir Lenkijos mokesčių įstatymai. Remiantis 1775 m. Lietuvos pavietų padūmės ir gėralų mokesčių tarifais, nustatyta, kad Lietuva buvo suskirstyta į 7 zonas su skirtingo dydžio mokesčiais, o miestai – į kelias klases. Tokio skirstymo pagrindimas nėra visiškai aiškus, tačiau rodo fiziokratų įtaką. Mokesčių lengvatos atspindi Apšvietos epochos prioritetus

A package of tax laws of 1775 passed by the Diet of the Republic of the Two Nations has been analysed. It has been stated that separate tax laws for Lithuania and Poland were adopted. They were mostly focused on the regulation of the hearth tax. A hearth (a ‘smoke’, if translated litterally from Lithuanian) or as in Poland a ‘chimney’ was a taxable unit. In comparison with the Polish law, its Lithuanian counterpart is characterised by a more detailed classification of the taxable units. In Polish rural areas, two zones of tax payers were distinguished with different tax rates, whereas there were even seven such zones in Lithuania. The law did not clearly set down a basis for such division, yet some details indicate that apparently land fertility and roads to cities and ports, where the agricultural produce was sold, were taken into consideration. In taxing residents of the cities and small towns of Lithuania, there was a distinction made between the urban settlements chartered and not chartered with the city law of Magdeburg, i. e. those possessing the self-rule and those without it. In addition, three classes of the chartered cities were introduced. Similarly, there were two classes of cities and one class of small towns in Poland. Thus, the classification was more detailed in Lithuania in this respect as well. The hearths of non-Magdeburg settlements, i. e. small towns, had to pay the hearth tax of the same rate as that set for rural hearths in the zone where such small town was located. Five classes of hearths were distinguished in cities, depending on the quality of buildings; classes of cities and hearths or buildings were matched in calculating the tax and, consequently, a building of a certain class was charged different rates in cities of different classes.[...]