Finally, it was to be hoped, the end of the "Soli" would come.
But this expectation has been disappointed.
The Federal Fiscal Court ruled on Monday that the solidarity surcharge was "not yet unconstitutional".
At least in the years 2020 and 2021, to which the lawsuit referred, the federal government was allowed to stick to the solos - 30 years after reunification, the additional burdens of which a small part of the citizens and companies should continue to cushion with billions through the supplementary tax.
The federal government praises itself for having exempted around 33 million taxpayers from the solidarity surcharge with the new regulation, which has been in effect since 2021;
another 2.5 million taxpayers pay significantly less.
Nevertheless, the solo has lost its justification.
The development aid for the federal states in the east (Solidarity Pact II) expired at the end of 2019, and the legislator expressly refrained from a Solidarity Pact III.
On Monday, the Federal Fiscal Court answered the question of why that doesn't count with the succinct note that there is no "mandatory legal connection" between solidarity payments and the solidarity pact.
We will see what the judges write in the reasons for the verdict.
It is at least as regrettable that the judgment should encourage the SPD and Greens in the traffic light coalition to strain the tax rules of the Basic Law, as long as the consequences only affect citizens and companies with the highest tax burden.
During the oral hearing, the plaintiff's representative had convincingly argued that the retention of the soli for the so-called top earners amounted to a "tax on the wealthy" that violates the Basic Law.
The Federal Fiscal Court, on the other hand, referred to the admissibility of social aspects.
But by no means would the abolition of the soli banish the abundant social adjustment screws from tax law.
Unfortunately, the FDP will not be able to bring their coalition partners to their senses.
There is still hope for the Federal Constitutional Court.