A Grapevine service announcement Pay attention: The Holuhraun eruption is at it again

Family Write-Offs

Published September 13, 2012

Icelandic legislators have been particularly kind to a certain social class of Icelanders. Its members, often associated with year 2007, don’t have to pay their debts, are able to practice bankruptcy and tax fraud without adverse consequences or, indeed, interference. They drive their luxury vehicles to and from their luxury mansions, the cost of their luxury lifestyle borne by their private “corporations,” which quietly roll into bankruptcy after they’ve been milked of funds supplied by the Icelandic private-friend-ised banks.
Most members of this privileged class are males, 25–50 years of age. It need surprise no one that the laws enabling their lifestyle have largely been produced by members of the same demographic group in Iceland’s Parliament.
WRITING OFF FAMILIES IS EVEN EASIER
Since the 2008 bank collapse, debts worth billions of ISK have been written off, overtly and shamelessly, for the privileged classes. Rarely mentioned, however, is the ease with which they are able to write off their families.
A “single” child support payment, as determined by the Icelandic Social Insurance Administration is now 24,230 ISK, or about 200 USD. Meanwhile, the average monthly cost of living for a family of four in the Reykjavík area is 617,611 ISK or 5,370 USD, according to a recent Ministry of Welfare report.
Local District Commissioners rule on child support payments if parents cannot agree on the amount. To “ensure consistency and equality in child support rulings,” the Ministry of the Interior provides a tablet based on a few monthly income categories, from about 395,000 ISK to 700,000 ISK. Support payments then vary from a ‘single’ support payment (i.e. 24,230 ISK) up to one and a quarter, half, double etc., according to the various income categories.
Common sense dictates that in cases of monthly incomes higher than the tablet lists (higher than ISK 700,000) commissioners should calculate what percentage of the monthly income the child support payments amount to, and such math reveals the tablet’s percentages range from 12%–15%.
HIGHEST EARNERS PAY LOWEST SUPPORT
In practice, however, the calculations are quite different. According to an assistant district commissioner in the Reykjavík area, commissioners don’t determine support amounts “proportionally to the payer‘s income” and it is “very rare that [commissioners] award a triple support payment” (i.e. award an amount equal to three times the base child support payment).
Your name doesn’t have to be Einstein to discover what this formula means. Yes, those with the highest incomes—the privileged classes—pay, proportionally, the lowest support payments. Thus a parent of two, for example, whose monthly income is two million ISK, pays about 4% of their salary in child support, while the average Joe/Jane pay pays 12–15%.
Whatever happened to ensuring “consistency and equality in child support rulings?”
Is it because the support payment sums in the calculation tablet are never higher than amounts to a double base child support payment? Could commissioners possibly believe that even if the tablet’s authors had listed twenty different income categories up to ten or twenty million per month, that the monthly support amounts would still never have been higher than what amounts to a double base support payment?
Perhaps the commissioners believe that the privileged classes need all the money they can get. After all, being rich is expensive. One must pay the cleaning lady, the gardener, maintenance for the swimming pool, the summer house, ski chalet etc. etc. Enough already!
How a civilized society can consider it just that the monthly financial obligations of its richest members toward their children not exceed 48,000 ISK per child is incomprehensible. But an Icelandic family lawyer had a ready reply to that speculation: “…of course there is much more public assistance for single mothers* here than where you are [the USA].”
Ahh. That fits the Icelandic modus operandi. It is considered completely logical that the taxpayers pay the cost of supporting the families of the country’s richest individuals—just like their debts.
THE SYSTEM REWARDS THE FAMILY WRITE-OFFS
This area of Icelandic family law is shameful. For a certain class of fathers* walking away from spouse and children is literally to their financial benefit. The financial consequences for them of breaking up their families are that they have more money than ever before to spend on their new family-free lifestyle. Poverty, on the other hand, awaits the family left behind if the mother is left without good job prospects.
A spouse should have the right to leave marriage and children, but he should have to pay for it, and he—not the taxpayers—should bear the responsibility for his family’s financial welfare.
Dissolution of families comes at a great cost to society. People should not be better off financially if they decide to leave spouse and children and begin a new life somewhere else. The law should not reward people for writing off their families.

*Statistics Iceland 2008 study of children’s legal residences: 90.7% of single Icelandic mothers all had their own children living with them, compared to 11.8% of single Icelandic fathers.



Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

The Ceiling On Icelandic Tourism, And Apologies For “The Clinton”

by

In 2005, a few months into my editorship, Paul Fontaine and I did a marathon road trip around Iceland’s Ring Road—the most beautiful 1,332 kilometers of road in the world. That 72 hours didn’t bring lasting inner peace, but I can say that most of the time I was filled with the appreciation of life, the fully engaged imagination, that monks and junkies and babies on the breast are supposed to experience. That trip around Iceland, and the people you see, especially if you expand the Ring and include the Westfjörds, is a profound tourism experience—I can imagine nothing else

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

The Elusive Hidden People

by

The use and adaption of folklore is changing rapidly in a country flirting with mass tourism, and some of us worry that the highway to cliché is paved with quick fixes. No one blames a visitor thirsty to learn about Icelandic storytelling traditions. However, for witnesses of the tourism circus, it’s worth considering which stories are being told and how they resonate with Iceland’s cultural legacy. Our generation is receptive to elusive and mystical elements, hence the rising interest in the study of folklore and old traditions. Perhaps this tendency is connected to a search for a new sense of

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

The Deafening Cognitive Dissonance of the Interior Minister

by

“I can say categorically that his investigation indicates that no one on the White House staff, no one in this administration, presently employed, was involved in this very bizarre incident. What really hurts in matters of this sort is not the fact that they occur, because overzealous people in campaigns do things that are wrong. What really hurts is if you try to cover it up.” – Richard Nixon, at the start of the Watergate scandal. On August 26, Parliamentary Ombudsman Tryggvi Gunnarsson sent Minister of the Interior Hanna Birna Kristjánsdóttir a third letter regarding police investigations of her Ministry,

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

A Volcano Bigger Than Timberlake

by

Historically, Iceland has seen some volcanic eruptions at a devastating scale. The most prominent in public memory is arguably the late 18th century Móðuharðindi, two years of brutal hardships caused by an eruption in volcanic ridge Lakagígar. The sky and sun darkened, while ashes destroyed pastures, and temperatures sank, leading to the death of an estimated 75% of the country’s livestock and a fifth of its human population. After 200 years of economic and technological progress, any such incident should now be easier to deal with. That seemed to be the case, albeit on a smaller scale, during the unforeseen

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

A Summery Summary

by

In case you missed reports, while traveling or otherwise enjoying Iceland’s ten days of summer, here are the latest news in brief, a summary of the last week or two. Prime Minister Sigmundur Davíð warns that, should fresh meat imports be allowed, a virus, common in foreign meat-products, might cause Icelanders to behave like foreigners. The populations of Britain and Norway still seem to behave normally, as they remain relatively Toxoplasma-free. That was the day after the Minister complained, on Facebook, that the Icelandic media did not pay due attention to Iceland’s weightlifting champions. It seems a countryman just won

Mag
Opinion
<?php the_title(); ?>

Foreign Policy For Profit

by

Last week, the Russian government announced they would respond to Western sanctions over the situation in the Ukraine with some economic sanctions of their own—a full embargo on food imports from the EU, the US and several other Western countries. Norway, which is on the list of embargoed countries, is hit especially hard, Russia being the single most important market for Norwegian seafood exports last year. Immediately, many Icelanders exclaimed that this was great news! Fish exporters seemed especially happy, because—for some reason—Iceland was not included on the embargo list. The funny thing was, nobody knew for certain why. A

Show Me More!