Danish citizens only win approximately eight percent of tax cases brought before the courts, raising concerns about legal certainty and whether the legal system adequately protects taxpayers’ rights. This low success rate suggests a potential imbalance in the legal process, prompting discussions on necessary reforms.

One perspective attributes the low percentage to shortcomings in the citizens’ legal representation, suggesting that their lawyers may lack the skills to accurately assess cases or effectively argue them in court. Another consideration is the possibility that the government’s legal counsel possesses a disproportionate advantage in terms of expertise and resources.

However, if the 92 percent success rate of the Ministry of Taxation indicates a systemic issue, it is imperative to address the problem through political measures.

The author’s experience suggests a shift in the Ministry of Taxation’s approach over time. A previous emphasis on citizens’ legal certainty, exemplified by limitations on appealing lost cases and acknowledging the Ministry’s responsibility for unclear legislation, appears to have diminished. The current environment seems to favor pursuing any potentially winnable case, potentially at the expense of fairness to citizens.

The author suggests that the courts do not adequately oversee the administration and rarely find administrative decisions invalid, even when procedures are flawed. This, the author argues, is due to the Administration of Justice Act, which falsely assumes equal footing between citizens and authorities, placing the full burden of proof on the citizen. In reality, the authority holds advantages in knowledge and resources.

To strengthen legal certainty, the author proposes shifting some of the burden from the citizen to the authority through legislative changes. This would involve granting courts a clearer legal basis to exercise stronger control over the administration. Specifically, the author suggests introducing a provision that requires authorities to prove their decisions are based on a secure legal basis, adhere to administrative practice, and comply with guarantee provisions. The author argues this will lead to more objective evaluations and improve the quality of the authorities’ decisions.

Ultimately, whether the authority or the citizen bears the burden of proof is a political matter.