Value added tax/VAT ohne Bindestrich

I discovered only recently that the most authoritative places write value added tax, not value-added tax.

This goes against the normal rule that compound adjectives of this construction take a hyphen.

To quote this discussion:

Surely it should be value added tax, no hyphen, not value-added tax? See, for example: (1) (http://www.hmce.gov.uk/business/vat/vat.htm), (2) (http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=31977L0388&model=guichett), (3) (http://www.rd.go.th/publish/6043.0.html) — ALoan 00:48, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

According to the traditional rules pertaining to hyphens there should be a hyphen. But the traditional rules, still used in newspapers and magazines, and in many novels, are no longer used by advertising copy writiers nor by those who write labels on packages, nor by lots of educated English-speaking people. But I think its a good idea to follow the newspaper-and-magazine usage, for reasons that are explained in the article titled hyphen. Michael Hardy 21:39, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that the traditional rules would indicate that a hyphen should be used; unfortunately, until the Sixth Directive, the Value Added Tax Act 1994 and sundry other legislation is amended, the name of the tax in the EU in general and the UK in particular (however technically incorrect) is actually “value added tax” and not “value-added tax”. — ALoan (Talk) 01:52, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Just saying.

15 thoughts on “Value added tax/VAT ohne Bindestrich

    • Darum geht es doch gar nicht! Anscheinend hast Du nicht zehntausende Euros in Werbung einer Wortmarke investiert, indem Du Thomas Gottschalk f

  1. Picture the mind as an open area, wilderness basically. Then Haribo comes in with adverti–, I mean landscaping: they uproot some shrubbery, carve out a plot of land, pave it, put in some flower pots, stake a claim to it. It’s theirs now, and they will jealously guard it against interlopers.

    Those pesky Swiss thought they could grab some of that “land” (or mind-share) for themselves but they never really had a chance.

  2. I found this blog on my search for the English term for

    “Bereinigungsgesetz”

    This is a major topic on the web at the since long and I don’t know how to translate it for my friends around the globe.

    Your answer would be very much appreciated.

    Thanks in advance

    Christina

    • 1. If you subscribe to comments, you will not get a response from a human!

      2. What ist the context of “Bereinigungsgesetze”? what does it mean? Is it German/Austrian/Swiss? Why is it “a major topic on the Web”? Where do you want to put your translation for your friends around the globe?#
      It seems to have more than one meaning so you need to give more explanation of the source.

      • Thanks for your response, MM!

        These are laws for the FRG and they are generally called “Bereinigungsgesetze” in short.

        *Erstes Gesetz

        • You probably need to explain it. The Romain dictionary gives ‘validating statute’, which doesn’t really explain things to an English speaker. It’s difficult to find a sensible definition.

          • The situation is so unbelievably bizarre that I can hardly try to explain it, especially as I am no expert on jurisdiction. Both of the videos in my last post explain it best in German as far as I am able to evaluate the contents. The only context which I found in English on this topic was the following but I do not want to link the original website for most obvious reasons http://www.linguee.de/deutsch-englisch/search?source=auto&query=bereinigungsgesetz

            “settlement” for “Bereinigung”?

            In my understanding important laws were simply cancelled, completely deleted, thus creating this absurd (illegal?) current situation.

            Best wishes
            Christina

          • Yes, I saw that – I thought that might be where you were coming from. This is ridiculous. It reminds me of the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_protester_statutory_arguments]tax protesters Example[/url] in the USA who claim the tax laws aren’t valid.
            ‘Settlement’ doesn’t work, apart from the fact that it means a trust.
            In the UK/England and Wales there a number of statutes called Statute Law (Repeals) Act which remove outdated legislaion. So you could call it a ‘statute repeals act/statute’ or ‘legislation repeals statute’ (to avoid the repetition) or a ‘legislation revision statute’ – these statutes do seem to consist mainly of Aufhebung.

          • ‘statute repeals act/statute’
            ‘legislation repeals statute’
            ‘legislation revision statute’

            Thanks, MM, this will help and in the end I might have to explain the consequences of these “Bereinigungsgesetze”, nonetheless in greater detail to my friends.
            It’s literally ludicrous, absolutely crazy what’s going on here since decades and thus beyond imagination if you are all there and hear of the facts for the first time, at least according to my perception. The above videos helped me understand the conception of the causal relations and of course I did some research on the background story as well.

            Thank you very much for your fast answer and the professional help
            all the best

            Christina

  3. My post regarding

    BEREINIGUNGSGESETZE

    ~~~

    Error
    Your comment subscription could not be confirmed. Please check the link you clicked on for completion. If the link was sent more than 3 weeks ago, you must request a new confirmation mail.

    ~~~

    The comment was sent less than 3 weeks ago.

    ~~~

    Hello Christina,

    You have requested to be notified for comments to “Leading decision/Grundsatzentscheidung” (< http://www.transblawg.eu/index.php?/archives/4100-Leading-decisionGrundsatzentscheidung.html>). To approve this subscription (“Double Opt In”) please click this link:
    <
    http://www.transblawg.eu/comment.php?optin=fd43b6c84b067d2739b6753bd02ae893>
    .


    Transblawg is powered by Serendipity.
    The best blog around, you can use it too.
    Check out to find out how.

    ~~~

    What is going on here?

    Please send a message that is logical and perceivable for humans.

    Thanks

    Christina

  4. I found https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal to contain useful pointers, although mostly to UK law.

    Former Attorney General Ed Meese http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/2011/12/principles-for-revising-the-criminal-code talks about revising criminal laws in a U.S. context. Having skimmed the text of that talk, I lean toward “Consolidation Law” or “Consolidation Statute” as a suitable translation for “Bereinigungsgesetz” on the basis that “consolidation” is enough of an umbrella term to comprise both “collection in one place” and “(partial) repeal”. You have to explain the Bereinigungsgesetz anyway, just as you would have to explain it for German readers.

    Why not “Consolidation Act”? Maybe I’m being idiosyncratic but I feel that while there are Acts of Parliament and Acts of Congress, a “Gesetz” should be a “Law” or “Statute” in English translation. Looking at this semi-offical list of translations, however — http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/Teilliste_translations.html — I see that in only a single instance did they use “Gesetz” (Youth Courts Law for Jugendgerichtsgesetz), all the rest are Acts or Statutes. So maybe I should rethink my opposition to “Act” as a translation of “Gesetz”.

    Having also read the Talk page of the Wiki article https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Gesetz_zur_Bereinigung_des_Besatzungsrechts, in particular the comment from Wiki editor “Benatrevqre”, I am satisfied that this particular law has turned into a magnet for conspiracy theorists, so the less said about that the better.

    • I chose those translations because I thought they worked in the context of explanations to persons (possibly not lawyers) outside Germany.
      A Consolidation Act is something different: it collects all the law in one area and virtually codifies it, whereas a Bereinigungsgesetz “cleans up” the law in more than one area. The Statute Law (Repeals) Acts are the closest I can think of.
      I use Act for Gesetz, statute too but not as part of the name, only as a generic term. Law I use as a superordinate term for Acts and delegated legislation. I think the argument for Gesetz = law, as far as I remember, is that the legislative process is quite different in Germany, but I don’t myself think it’s different in a significant way.
      I would deal with this in a new entry, but the conspiracy-theorist problem puts me off. Just Googling the term Bereinigungsgesetz leads straight to it.

      • “Bereinigungsgesetz “cleans up” the law”
        “conspiracy-theorist problem”

        I started to get interested in the definition and legal consequences of the “Bereinigungsgesetze” when a friend send me the link to the website of the Police Union in Saxony, where Volker Sch

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *