Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
LJAR

How Could A "wealth Tax" Work

Recommended Posts

Here is the premise:

We dont want to discourage wealth creation, and we want to encourage people to get the most out of their investments.

So how could a system work that had no income tax, but gained revenue by taxing the capital instead?

Answers in a post.

UK personal wealth = £9tn in 2008 according to the ONS (includes pensions, houses etc)

Income tax to be replaced ~ £300bn

so a 0.3% wealth tax (exclude the main residence maybe (£3tn of wealth I think) - but double it on other properties to discourage landlordism)

various exemptions etc might push it up to 0.5%

what would be the effects do we think?

could you have a ramping rate up to 1% for wealth above 1bn or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will work as well as it did in Sweden.

Anybody with any sizable wealth negotiated with the revenue to be "let off" the tax or they would leave taking their job creating business with them.

The Swedes scrapped it after a few years

tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine it would make people just offshore most of their wealth so they end up paying practically nothing. A land tax on the other hand might work.

I think taxing any money coming in as income might work. Should money from property be treated more favourably than money earned in a 9 to 5 job?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're living in a post nationalist world. The movers and shakers look around the globe and decide where, from all the competing countries, they'll park their wealth, businesses, and skills.

Get too far out of line with taxation and the money and jobs will up sticks and go someplace else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're living in a post nationalist world. The movers and shakers look around the globe and decide where, from all the competing countries, they'll park their wealth, businesses, and skills.

Get too far out of line with taxation and the money and jobs will up sticks and go someplace else.

Yep. Although land is something you can't just pick up and take elsewhere.

Hopefully it means that the size of the state will have to shrink as their captive tax base gets smaller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. Although land is something you can't just pick up and take elsewhere.

Hopefully it means that the size of the state will have to shrink as their captive tax base gets smaller.

Why would a country want a negative incentive to the creation of wealth (and therefore economic growth?)

From a global perspective, this might be a very good thing for the future of humanity on the planet. But for any one country, it is suicide as per tim123's post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will work as well as it did in Sweden.

Anybody with any sizable wealth negotiated with the revenue to be "let off" the tax or they would leave taking their job creating business with them.

The Swedes scrapped it after a few years

tim

not if they were left in no uncertain terms that any income they might derive from any product of theirs attempted to be sold in said country would be subject to tariff,and any further incursion into territory,even on a recreational basis wiould result in their immediate detention and arrest for tax evasion in the future.

given that europe and the US are both in the same boat,an action of this nature in concert would severely limit access to markets...therefore profits....and also influence.

a united "cough up...or else" might be the appropriate solution(but ot one we are likely to get from our present bunch of bitch-slapped bought-and-paid-for stooges that claim to represent us....watch spain and greece carefully.....ther most certainly will be civil war/unrest,and the establishment cannot necessarily rely on the support of the "authorities" from now on.The diversion of mad mullahs has failed,when it has become painfully obvious that they do not pull the strings of office,they ust have been aided and abetted by other sources rather closer to home.

their punch-up is just the warm-up...not even one warble into act 1..........definitely no sign of fat lady.

Edited by oracle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it is a great idea for the reasons already listed.

But if you wanted to look into it, I think the French have/had something like that. Another way could be a property tax as a percentage of value instead of flatish banded rates as we have at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not if they were left in no uncertain terms that any income they might derive from any product of theirs attempted to be sold in said country would be subject to tariff,and any further incursion into territory,even on a recreational basis wiould result in their immediate detention and arrest for tax evasion in the future.

given that europe and the US are both in the same boat,an action of this nature in concert would severely limit access to markets...therefore profits....and also influence.

a united "cough up...or else" might be the appropriate solution

So hold on you are advocating yet another violence based system to replace the current violence based system.....

It wouldn't work as they would manufacture abroad everything EVERYTHING and exporting middlemen would use transfer pricing to defeat your extortion. And the extortion would merely be passed onto the consumers.

Worst case they laugh and really do leave turning the UK into North Korea. Remember oil based agriculture only makes us 60% food sufficient. Remove the oil and this would fall dramatically = cannibalism.... I'm ok with that, are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A man after my own heart.

We have the markets, we have the power. Banish people from ever setting foot in the country again to see friends and family.

The only question is, which side are our leaders on? Why don't they go after these c*nts like gusto?

Yeah right when enough companies and people leave you'd prevent them from leaving. History has proven time and again the olde' if you don't like it leave, people REALLY do leave and the pro statists i.e. yourself then actively prevent people from leaving. A big wall in Germany existed for this purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the premise:

We dont want to discourage wealth creation, and we want to encourage people to get the most out of their investments.

So how could a system work that had no income tax, but gained revenue by taxing the capital instead?

Answers in a post.

UK personal wealth = £9tn in 2008 according to the ONS (includes pensions, houses etc)

Income tax to be replaced ~ £300bn

so a 0.3% wealth tax (exclude the main residence maybe (£3tn of wealth I think) - but double it on other properties to discourage landlordism)

various exemptions etc might push it up to 0.5%

what would be the effects do we think?

could you have a ramping rate up to 1% for wealth above 1bn or something?

Income tax ins't 300bn its about 160bn, other taxes make up the other 400bn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government could of course try and spend a bit less than around half of GDP. Brown managed to double spending in a couple of years without much to show for it, so if we cut it back then it shouldn't be that much worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The government could of course try and spend a bit less than around half of GDP. Brown managed to double spending in a couple of years without much to show for it, so if we cut it back then it shouldn't be that much worse.

Nah that won't fly with the pro statists on HPC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah that won't fly with the pro statists on HPC.

Government spending as a % of GDP has been going up steadily for decades and never goes down again. Not just here, but everywhere else as well.

There's so much wailing from the vested interests (especially here with the BBC in on the act) that it becomes almost political suicide just to slow the rate of growth as the current government is. Imagine the gnashing of teeth if GDP dropped to what it was in 1997 when things seemed to be worked more or less ok.

Governments spend more and more and get larger and larger until they go bust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the premise:

We dont want to discourage wealth creation, and we want to encourage people to get the most out of their investments.

So how could a system work that had no income tax, but gained revenue by taxing the capital instead?

I was giving some thought to an alternative taxation system myself. My suggestion is predicated on the principle that tax, weighted by a tranche of income is less equitable than a system which weights the tax by factor reflecting amount sums already been acrued by the individual; to include bank deposits, savings, property, investments and so on.

So it doesn't tax wealth per se, just the on the additions toexisting wealth.

Take the example of an entrepreneur, starting out, who could claim no disincentive in their chosen path as they would, arguably, have, at this stage, accrued little by way of assets so would be taxed more lightly whatever their success. Similarly, a low-earner with a paucity of assets would see the tax level weighted downward. However, the already successful businessman with a large portfolio of assets and general wealth would see their tax rate weighted higher. Exceptionally, perhaps, the high-earning spendthrift with the high income and no assets would see their recycling of cash back into the economy rewarded by lighter taxation.

Could it work?

Eng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't tell 'nationalist'!

Too late, I've just seen the heresy.

Nationalism will make a come back, I mean, does anyone who isn't an international banker actually like globalism?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too late, I've just seen the heresy.

Nationalism will make a come back, I mean, does anyone who isn't an international banker actually like globalism?

Yes.

Everyone who puts their short term desire for lower priced goods and services ahead of their long term understanding (if it exists at all) that lower priced goods from low cost countries put their long term survival at risk. About 90% of the population is my guess if I look at what Tesco and the big box retailers are doing to the high street.

Globalisation is just like small government. Everyone wants it until it impacts them personally. The only difference between the two is the timing of the impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I imagine it would make people just offshore most of their wealth so they end up paying practically nothing. A land tax on the other hand might work.

Looking at the some of the high earning occupations in the UK (lawyers, bankers, doctors, footballers, actors) how many have their income connected to land?

How then is a land tax going to help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's quite simple - if you want access to markets then you pay taxes.

You mean the importer/UK seller (who is probably several stages removed from the manufacturer) pays the taxes. Of course given that these taxes would be a cost of doing business in the UK, the tax would simply be passed onto the customer as increased prices.

(Remember we already have 20% VAT, how many TVs would people buy if the VAT were 100% ?)

I'm sure we could get agreement with the other big markets...if there were a will.

I think your confidence is misplaced, just because our government wants to commit suicide why should everyone else (and it has to be everyone else) follow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Globalisation is just like small government. Everyone wants it until it impacts them personally. The only difference between the two is the timing of the impact.

Actually most people like big government, but they only want to pay for a small one.

"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away." - Barry Goldwater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Government spending as a % of GDP has been going up steadily for decades and never goes down again. Not just here, but everywhere else as well.

There's so much wailing from the vested interests (especially here with the BBC in on the act) that it becomes almost political suicide just to slow the rate of growth as the current government is. Imagine the gnashing of teeth if GDP dropped to what it was in 1997 when things seemed to be worked more or less ok.

Governments spend more and more and get larger and larger until they go bust.

Its not at all as simple as you make it seem. Taxes have been going up everywhere as a counterbalance to increasing inequalities in income and wealth. However i agree with you, much better that the inequalities hadn't got so large that we need redistribution via high taxes, to keep our countries functioning as viable nation-states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what would be the effects do we think?

It's very difficult to measure wealth accurately.

How much is your house worth? For tax purposes no doubt you'll claim it needs a new roof and the neighbours are total scum.

How much is that Van Gogh in the loft worth?

It's even harder when you're into company valuations, one could have opinions from equally qualified professional valuers that varied enormously. Fancy spending thousands each year arguing with HMRC's valuation office?

Non-starter IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone watch the Queen documentary over the weekend. They said they was paying 82% tax plus another 15% for something else making it 97% in all on earnings :blink:

No wonder they fooked off abroad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 311 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.