Zakat - question 2

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

So I’ve been wondering in what sense does Zakat differ from several taxes we (at least in Holland) pay over our salaries and assets.

There are several taxes we pay over our income (these together can count upto 6% of your income):

  • social tax which is then distributed via the government to people who don’t have any work (long term, e.g. due to illness, widow(er)s, orphans)
  • pension tax which is then distributed via the government to people who are currently over the age of 65
  • medical insurance tax which is then distributed via the government to people who don’t have medical insurance but are in need of (costly) treatment

taxes over assets (1.2%):

  • when your combined assets exceed a certain limit, you start paying tax over the excess amount

Apart from these you can (voluntarily - but most ppl do it) pay a social tax which is distributed among people who have lost their job.

So the issue is that usually people say you have to pay 2.5% zakaat over your income/assets, which is then given to the needy etc.

My question is that given the above, can we count our ‘tax’ as zakaat? After all, 1400 years ago there were not these many taxes and zakaat could in a way be considered the social tax of that time.

2

Re: Zakat - question 2

i think u cant count those taxes as zakat ...............

coz zakat have many conditions that are not supposed to be in a govt tax collection system.

like zakat can only be paid to the person as mentioned in quran. further zakat cant be paid to non muslim.

beside the major difference is that taxes are primarily paid by the citizens to the govt in response to the services they receive in individually or collectively. however zakat is a tenent of islam and is only paid to the poor.

3

so which persons are mentioned in quran? If it isnt orphans, widows, poor and other needy, who are then eligible to receive zakat? And why cannot it be paid to non-muslim? A needy person is a needy person irrespective of religion

[quote]
beside the major difference is that taxes are primarily paid by the citizens to the govt in response to the services they receive in individually or collectively. however zakat is a tenent of islam and is only paid to the poor.
[/QUOTE]

as a matter of fact, the services (such as infrastructure, protection, law etc) we receive from the government are put under a different tax and that amount to 20-25% of our income. The 6% I mentioned above is specifically and solely for the purpose of helping the needy/poor.

4

Re: Zakat - question 2

zakaat is not same as tax as bro Maverick explained well. it can be given ONLY to muslims who are in NEED and it must be 2.5 % of the asset with some exceptions. we, in Canada, pay a very High income tax upto 55% plus sales tax 15% plys property taxes, water taxes garbage collection fee and all that so we still pay zakaat on top of that

5

Can u show some evidence that it should ONLY be paid to muslims?

And why is that if taxes go to those who are needy via the government, is different from paying zakat (directly) to the needy? And if zakat is 2.5%, is it wrong if you were to pay 6%?

ps: note that income tax (and all other taxes you mention) are something else than this social tax. Most notably, the other taxes are for services you get from the government; however, the social is solely for the needy/poor. It is a totally separate government institution.

6

The flaw is that you can't be sure if the money you are paying as tax is actually ending up with the poor.

Social welfare payments are not always means tested. A middle-class person living comfortably off savings can claim social welfare payments after being unemployed for long enough in a social welfare state. - So you can't be sure that the portion of your taxes being spent on social welfare are actiually going to the deprived

Pension tax is similarly paid to all, irrespective of whether they are poor or not. When I retire, I fully intend to benefit both from my private pension (which should inshallah be cozy by that time) as well as taking pension paid for by the taxpayers. I will inshallah not qualify for zakaat but will claim tax-funded pension, so again you can't be sure that the portion of your taxes being spent on pensions for the elderly are actually going to the deprived

In most social welfare states, the right to claim medical aid is not completely means-tested either. A wealthy person can choose to receive your money if they don't want to use their private insurance. So again - you can't be sure that your tax is only paying for medical care for the poor. As a child from what was alhumdulillah a well-off family, I had all my dental work paid for by the taxpayers anyway. People just like you who paid for it could under no way qualify it as zakaat.

7

For all other charity institutions, one cannot be sure either whether they bring the zakat at the rightful place. In the end it's a matter of trust. As for your other arguments:

[quote]

Social welfare payments are not always means tested. A middle-class person living comfortably off savings can claim social welfare payments after being unemployed for long enough in a social welfare state.
[/quote]

It's not as easy as it sounds. In order for you to receive money due to unemployment due to illness, you have to have had a medical check-up with a medical written report indicating that you are 100% unable to work. Only in that instance will you get money. If you are only 50% unable, you get halve. So here indeed my taxes will be only going to those that are in real need of money.

If you are unemployed due to other circumstances, you have to provide evidence each month that you applied for jobs that fit your qualification. Besides, if you are unemployed for less than a year you don't get anything at all from this institution.

Moreover, suppose you are living off savings, you cannot claim additional social welfare payments if your savings provide you an income which is higher than the minumum salary. If your savings are lower than that, social welfare will only give something additional to bring you upto the minimum salary level. So here too, my tax money indeed is a form of allowance for the needy. Furthermore, if your income based on savings is larger than the minimum salary you have to start paying these taxes too!

[quote]

Pension tax is similarly paid to all, irrespective of whether they are poor or not. When I retire, I fully intend to benefit both from my private pension (which should inshallah be cozy by that time) as well as taking pension paid for by the taxpayers. I will inshallah not qualify for zakaat but will claim tax-funded pension
[/quote]

Here I agree that all pensioners will get something from welfare. However, if you don't have any additional pension savings, you get more from social welfare than someone who gets a lot already from private pension funding. Also, widow(er)s who don't have any other means of income, get welfare from here.

[quote]
In most social welfare states, the right to claim medical aid is not completely means-tested either. A wealthy person can choose to receive your money if they don't want to use their private insurance.
[/QUOTE]

This is not the case here. Everyone by law is forced to have medical insurance for the basic medical needs. The medical social welfare I'm talking about are those persons who are so poor they cannot even afford that. Or persons who have such chronic and costly illnesses (such as mentally retarded persons, severely disabled or injured people) that they will never be able to pay all the costs themselves. So here too, my tax money will only go to those who really need it and would never be able to get the medical care otherwise

Dentist payments fall under a totally different category here (which is compulsory insurance as well btw, but is not included in the 6% above).

8

Re: Zakat - question 2

The biggest oversight in this comparison of tax and zakat is the difference in how it is established.

Tax is taken on income
Zakat is taken on savings

Essentially Zakat is a financially fair system whereas tax on income is not.

The secondary purpose of Zakat is to redistribute wealth. It is therefore a system designed to minimise savings and increase economic cash flow.

The western system of income tax and interest based savings encourages rich to get richer and poor to get poorer, this is because the poor cannot save because they are taxed, the rich are taxed to an extent that does not affect their potential to save.

Zakat however is percentage based on savings. So very rich people i.e those with savings over say $250,000 will pay over 6k dollars in Zakat each year. If the potnetial to save decreases the overall amount of saved money reduces to an amount which also reduces the zakat reaching a balance point.

Likewise those who are poor do not pay anything on income and if they have no saving pay nothing again.

This is the solution to the recession and the problem that no one is spending. Zakat however encourages spending because if we spend then there will be no zakat if it was in our accounts for less than 1 year.

9

Re: Zakat - question 2

why dont u contact some qualified scholar 4 this purpose.

further if u can pay so many taxes what hinder u to pay only 2.5 % more ..........