The Czech government’s plan to reintroduce the electronic evidence of sales (EET) system faces mounting opposition from the ODS and TOP 09 parties over concerns regarding administrative burdens and legal compliance. While Finance Minister Alena Schillerová (ANO) maintains the system is vital for curbing the shadow economy—projecting 14 to 15 billion crowns in revenue—critics argue the current proposal creates unfair conditions for small entrepreneurs and risks another challenge at the Constitutional Court.
Disputes over the “EET OFF” regime
The government proposes an “EET OFF” regime for small entrepreneurs with an annual turnover under one million crowns who utilize the flat-rate tax. According to Minister of Finance Alena Schillerová, this is not an exemption but a special regime with a tax surcharge, raising the flat-rate tax from 100 to 1,500 crowns per month for those who choose not to participate in electronic evidence.
Vojtěch Munzar (ODS) argues that this does not function as a true exemption. He states that many small entrepreneurs, such as those working side-hustles on weekends or tradespeople with primary employment, are ineligible for the flat-rate tax and therefore cannot access this “EET OFF” option. Munzar and his colleagues have proposed four variations for adjustment, including a suggestion to exempt all physical and legal entities with a turnover of up to two million crowns from the system entirely.
The government’s proposed “EET OFF” regime requires participating entrepreneurs to pay a monthly tax surcharge, increasing their flat-rate tax obligations from 100 crowns to 1,500 crowns in exchange for exemption from recording individual sales.
Constitutional and legislative concerns
Opposition lawmakers are also challenging the inclusion of cashless payments in the new EET mandate. Jan Jakob (TOP 09) and Vojtěch Munzar (ODS) argue that the government should respect a 2017 Constitutional Court ruling that excluded cashless transactions from the original system because they already leave a digital footprint.
Minister Schillerová contends that the landscape has shifted significantly since 2016. She argues that the previous premise of simple traceability no longer applies to modern payment methods like virtual wallets and online accounts. She noted that the Ministry has addressed these concerns within the RIA (Regulatory Impact Assessment) process, maintaining that excluding cashless payments would deprive the state of crucial data needed to fight the shadow economy.
The conflict centers on a fundamental disagreement regarding the nature of digital commerce. While the government frames the inclusion of cashless payments as a necessary modernization for data collection, the opposition views it as a legislative overreach that risks repeating past legal failures at the Constitutional Court.
What happens next in the Chamber of Deputies
The government expects a final vote on the legislation to take place next week. While negotiations between the government and the opposition are currently ongoing, it remains unclear if the opposition will resort to procedural obstructions. Marek Benda, head of the ODS club, indicated that while the party disagrees with several parts of the proposal, he considers full-scale obstruction unlikely at this stage.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the “EET OFF” regime?
It is a system for small entrepreneurs with a turnover under one million crowns who use the flat-rate tax, allowing them to opt out of electronic sales recording by paying a monthly tax surcharge of 1,500 crowns.
Why does the opposition object to the inclusion of cashless payments?
Lawmakers like Jan Jakob (TOP 09) argue that such payments are already traceable and that a 2017 Constitutional Court ruling previously mandated their exclusion from the system.
What is the government’s projected revenue from the renewed EET?
According to Minister Alena Schillerová, the project is expected to bring 14 to 15 billion crowns into the state treasury by helping to combat the shadow economy.
Will the government succeed in balancing its revenue goals with the concerns raised by opposition lawmakers regarding administrative simplicity?
