The article deals with the property taxation of investment apartments and dwelling houses. This paper’s main aim is to verify the hypothesis that to increase tax on investment apartments and investment dwelling houses, it is necessary to amend the Immovable Property Tax Act. To confirm or disprove the hypothesis, the investment property was defined as the second home if used for longterm or short-term rent or not used at all. The article briefly focuses on other taxes connected with the acquisition of immovable property, analyses de lege lata regulation of recurrent property tax on investment apartments and investment dwelling houses in the Czech Republic, and briefly introduces two main systems of property taxation (based on values and area). The hypothesis was disproved. If the property is used as the first home, the taxation is, in line with the policy at the national and local level, lower. These rules apply to the property, both taxpayer-owned and long-term rented, as the criteria are the usage of the property. Concerning the dwelling houses and apartments used for short-term rents (typically Airbnb type of accommodation) or other businesses, they should be taxed at a higher rate. However, the tax administration must strictly follow the legal text as the crucial for taxation is how the property is actually used. It is also necessary to check the periodicity of the contracts and who the tenants are, the service provided for the guests, the purpose of accommodation, who is responsible for routine maintenance and minor repairs, etc.

The tax on acquisition of immovable property was abolished on September 26, 2020 in the Czech Republic. One of the  reasons mentioned in the explanatory report to the Act was the statement that the abolition deals with the effects of this  virus on society. The main aim of the article is to answer the question of whether the abolition of the tax on acquisition of  immovable property is a tool to suppress the negative consequences of Covid-19 or a politicum. To get the answer, it is  necessary to shortly describe the tax on acquisition of immovable property and its structural components and make a  basic comparison with the other EU Member States. We also summarise the pros and cons of the tax and related findings  of the Constitutional Court. As the property transfer tax is connected with the income tax and there were several  amendments in the proposal, it is needed to analyse these changes. Based on the research, it is possible to conclude that  the abolition of the tax on acquisition of immovable property is definitely not a tool to suppress the negative  consequences of Covid-19; it is just a politicum: political parties believe that the abolition of the transfer tax brings them  more voices in the elections.

The paper deals with a topic including the abolition of the tax on the acquisition of immovable property and its impact on the state economy. Although the tax on the acquisition of immovable property was abolished in September 2020, there are still many unanswered questions about the repeal. One of the main objectives of the contribution is to answer the question of why and, if so, on what grounds the cancellation was made at the most inopportune moment, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. The contribution will, inter alia, address tax theory, in particular in relation to trasnfer taxes, by comparing them, including the abolition of the tax on the acquisition of immovable property itself. An integral part of this will be to look at the effectiveness of abolishing this tax and to make at least substantial assertions as to why such a repeal did not take place either sooner or later, and in particular what effect it will have on the overall economy of the state, which is already facing a burden on the state budget due to the pandemic situation.

Collection of contribution dealing with selected areas of fiscal and non-fiscal area of financial law. The contributions cover the core and crucial areas of financial law, where the interconnection between the legal aspects and economic aspects is obvious. In the particular topics, the authors primarily focus on the relationship (and the quality of the relationship) between regulation and economic reality, or to be more precise law and economics.

Tax system in the Czech Republic and offers some specific suggestions for reform. In the long term, their taxation could be maintained. Many politicians not only in the Czech Republic believe that a higher property tax on real estate investments can solve the housing crisis. There are several examples showing that such a solution does not lead to the desired result. In many states, such a tax increase solved a certain "housing crisis". Such a solution is at all sensible and will ultimately not only disadvantage economically the socially weaker, who do not have the resources to get their own place. On the other hand, the overall taxation of investment housing could contribute to increasing revenues of municipal budgets without changing the budgetary allocation of taxes. The inclusion of elements of elementary equality and work with so-called local coefficients, possibly combined with the categorisation of immovable property as established in the Land Registry, appears to be a meaningful key to the solution. On the basis of these two groups or categories, differential taxation can be achieved for a wide range of properties without creating room for discussion about what is and is not an investment apartment [OECD 2010]. But there are two weaknesses in dealing with this, namely policy changes, where the increase in the coefficient is unpopular within local authorities, and that it will be quite different in this area. The area-based property tax has been gaining influence in developing and transitional countries around the world. This report first examines how the area-based tax is administered in thirty-eight countries according to statutes. Area-based assessment is more commonly used in rural areas than urban areas, for land than buildings, and with few adjustments. Over half the countries allow some local control [Fischel 2001: 17]. The paper presents an overview of the theoretical and practical experience of both the immovable property taxation forms (area-based and value-based) concerning the different aspects of micro and macroefficiency, equity and the “ability to pay” aspects as well as the fiscal and technical aspects, with the special emphasis on (post)transition economies – new EU members. The EU recommendations in this area, especially concerning the shift of tax burden from (labour) income to property, are pointed out. The comparative analysis of relevant taxation in the EU member countries is presented, pointing out that some of them, which have fulfilled the formal requirement of the recurrent taxes on immovable property introduction, still implement a simpler form – the area-based one. In particular, the article focuses on the definition of the tax system in the Czech Republic, and intentionally on the processing of property taxes. Inheritance, gift and acquisition taxes on immovable property, including their definition and the way in which they are transformed, are mentioned in particular in these property taxes. However, the main objective of the work was to approximate the property tax, in relation to value-based taxation or a modified area-based system. Attention is also focused on defining the pluses and minuses of these taxes, what advantages they are, what advantages they are not, and which of the countries uses which system of taxation. The work seeks to highlight why a system is used within the Czech Republic, including its benefits within the tax system.