Interview with the economist billionaires fear: this is how we get a wealth tax

Yes, once the tax is collected from the wealthy, the big argument will be how it is redistributed.

My preference would be health, education, social care

Whitewavemark2

I don’t really think this is about preventing wealth. It is about ensuring those who profit most from a country’s infrastructure, education, defence etc etc, pay towards it just as everyone else does.

At present they operate outside the law. This is what the 2% is all about.

I would also like to see a way of closing the inequality gap because I don’t think it is good for democracy. That would take 8% according to Kugman and others which given the level of their wealth I don’t think is asking too much.

I would also like to see a way of closing the inequality gap in the way Kugman suggests.

Those individuals driven to achieve and accumulate wealth will always have that drive and ambition. Realistically it would be easier for a state to ensure they pay a fair share of their wealth toward's the state's infrastructure than preventing wealth.

Wealth tax does not help the economy to grow however which is what is desperately needed. I think the amount of money the top dogs earn is obscene but if it’s taxed it needs to be reinvested in some form and not just used for free handouts. People should be able to have jobs and earn a decent wage.

love0c

We as a country obviously need to tax to make the country work. However, the government must be careful not to discourage 'money' from leaving the country. Money is leaving at an alarming rate under this government. The next government is going to have the job of getting it back. I just hope Labour voters realise this. Responsible thought and critical thinking is needed when voting.

This as why there was a suggestion that should a British Citizen move abroad they would havd to go on paying tax. The suggestion was for 10 years. The USA already does it for life as long as you retain citizenship.

Yes but it isn’t just happening in this country. France seems to be leading the way and I have no doubt that other countries - the nordics,? Will follow suit.

That's what gives me hope Whitewave.

The video has been taken down for some reason.

Because the wealth of billionaires is held principally in companies the key to a wealth tax is for a government to restrict the investment of foreign companies in the home market.

This is the opposite of the current policy and would certainly attract reciprocal action against the UK. France is very nationalistic in its policies, I don't see it taking serious action against it's wealthy business owners that are already state controlled to a large extent too many jobs are at stake.

What ‘isn’t about preventing wealth’ *Wwmk2’ ?

Why let it all flow upwards before doing anything about the consequent evils it causes?

apologies for all the typos 🤭

GrannyGravy13

MaizieD there needs to be a clear demarcation between the mega rich (billionaires and now trillionaires) and the millionaire SME owners.

When and who decides they have accumulated their fair share of wealth?

I’m not calling for bread and water for all entrepreneurs, you know

You do sound a bit defensive, though.

There has to be a balance found somewhere. I believe that ‘money’ is a public ‘good’ which is provided by the state to enable the economic activity which contributes to maintaining a decent life for all it’s citizens. Perhaps a state like the one which produced and acted on the Beveridge Report in the 1940s and ‘50s.

As it stands now we have a state which allows, almost encourages, that public good to flow continually upwards in the direction of the wealthy and even to disappear into non productive activity targeted on increasing their own personal wealth without doing anything to improve the wellbeing of their fellow citizens or of the state itself.

Intake your point about a demarcation, though I think thatcwould be a very tricky thing to negotiate and manage, but it seems to me that if the state wants to rehonour Beveridge it either has to continue to issue more and more money to its poorest citizens to achieve a decent life. Which if course would just lead to hyperinflation and even more wealth flowing upwards, or it has to bring the wealth accumulators under control by encouraging them to use their wealth productively, sanctioning those who don’t, and preventing the accumulation of so much of the public good in the first place.

I don’t really think this is about preventing wealth. It is about ensuring those who profit most from a country’s infrastructure, education, defence etc etc, pay towards it just as everyone else does.

At present they operate outside the law. This is what the 2% is all about.

I would also like to see a way of closing the inequality gap because I don’t think it is good for democracy. That would take 8% according to Kugman and others which given the level of their wealth I don’t think is asking too much.

MaizieD there needs to be a clear demarcation between the mega rich (billionaires and now trillionaires) and the millionaire SME owners.

When and who decides they have accumulated their fair share of wealth?

While I applaud moves towards taxing existing wealth I still don’t understand why there is little interest in preventing the accumulation of that wealth in the first place.

I know that the prime argument against imposing things like equalising capital gains tax, price controls and windfall taxes is that it would stifle business and entrepreneurs, but is everyone in business solely motivated by the possibility of becoming wealthy?

If we discouraged those who are motivated by greed for wealth would there be others happy to do business with more modest (or even, altruistic) desires?

love0c

We as a country obviously need to tax to make the country work. However, the government must be careful not to discourage 'money' from leaving the country. Money is leaving at an alarming rate under this government. The next government is going to have the job of getting it back. I just hope Labour voters realise this. Responsible thought and critical thinking is needed when voting.

Taxing the ultra wealthy in the way being suggested will overcome the issue of money leaving the country. It won’t matter where their wealth “sits”.

It is their citizenship that is important.

We as a country obviously need to tax to make the country work. However, the government must be careful not to discourage 'money' from leaving the country. Money is leaving at an alarming rate under this government. The next government is going to have the job of getting it back. I just hope Labour voters realise this. Responsible thought and critical thinking is needed when voting.

As an aside. This cooperation between tax regimes has been going on at a relatively low level for years, particularly between EU members - the system was known as Fiscalis, which I took part in working with Germany, Italy and Spain and equivalent officers. We used to meet up and it proved very lucrative when we targeted a particular sector or international company.

It was funded by the EU.

DaisyAnneReturns

It will only be the beginning of change if we have a government brave enough to do it, sadly.

Yes but it isn’t just happening in this country. France seems to be leading the way and I have no doubt that other countries - the nordics,? Will follow suit.

Once one country gets a successful system running other countries will of course do the same.

Of course if Reform get in it will definitely be put off but they won’t exist for ever 🤞🤞

It will only be the beginning of change if we have a government brave enough to do it, sadly.

DaisyAnneReturns

One of the points becoming clear is that to establish equality you cannot tax these very wealthy people on the basis of income to ensure equality, as they will ensure they have little or no income. He is suggesting a 2% tax on the total wealth of the very, very rich. Otherwise you are accepting that the very wealthy have a right to pay no tax even though they will have benefited from what tax provides. That cannot be right.

He went on to suggest that in order to reduce inequality, which to me is important to bring stability and greater democracy, the ultra wealthy need to be taxed at 8% pa. With absolutely no exemptions.

The cooperation between banks and indeed revenue depts., make this far easier than previously, when frankly the ultra-rich through various accountancy practices lived outside of the tax regime.

This is beginning to change - it will not be easy as the billionaires will use every means to avoid joining the rest of the world in paying a fair share for what you get, but it is going to happen.

I might even live long enough to see this happen.

There is now an automatic exchange of bank information between banks and other countries. There could be a seizure of assetts in this country. Please don't take his as what would happen just what could happen. Being criminalised is not what most people want.

valdali

I'm wondering how USA tax overseas Americans. If they didn't pay, how would US treasury enforce? I always thought the law that applies to you is the law of your country of residence.

I'm not questioning that they do, just find it intriguing how they can.

You pay for as long as you keep your American citizenship valdali.

He also seems to say that it needs to be 2% of wealth because this then ensures that the billionaires cannot pay less tax than the rest of the population.

One of the points becoming clear is that to establish equality you cannot tax these very wealthy people on the basis of income to ensure equality, as they will ensure they have little or no income. He is suggesting a 2% tax on the total wealth of the very, very rich. Otherwise you are accepting that the very wealthy have a right to pay no tax even though they will have benefited from what tax provides. That cannot be right.

There is another interview with Gabriel Zucman here:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTA5UuSfZk4

It's a different style of interview with very few interruptions - just those to ask a new question. I found it easier to watch and pick up facts. Of course the facts haven't change so it may be listening to both helped.

I'm wondering how USA tax overseas Americans. If they didn't pay, how would US treasury enforce? I always thought the law that applies to you is the law of your country of residence.

I'm not questioning that they do, just find it intriguing how they can.

I still have problems with the concept of a 'wealth tax'; I don't think it's as straightforward as people think it is.

Assets 'may' be easy to value, but so much of their wealth is on paper. e.g shares, which may go up or down in value. At what point are they valued for taxation purposes?