Billionaires should face a minimum tax rate

[s1962a]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67191791

What is the downside to this? Seems sensible. If someone wants to live in the UK or European country, they should pay this flat rate of tax on global wealth. 2% is still a lower tax rate than the 45%+ high earners are paying in this country.

[voyds9]

Because it's on wealth and not earnings.
There is likely to be a trickle down, millionaires in a few years?
Then what assest rich, cash poor. So on top of your council tax you will get another tax because you own a million pound house

[Super Sonic]

voyds9 said:

Because it's on wealth and not earnings.
There is likely to be a trickle down, millionaires in a few years?
Then what assest rich, cash poor. So on top of your council tax you will get another tax because you own a million pound house

Nice Reductio and Absurdum

[Biggy Stardust]

Taxing it because it's there.

The law is the same for everyone but they want to change it because it isn't "fair".

[Astacus]

Biggy Stardust said:

Taxing it because it's there.

The law is the same for everyone but they want to change it because it isn't "fair".

Sounds like as good a reason as any

[Biggy Stardust]

Astacus said:

Sounds like as good a reason as any

Your version of fair might not be the same as someone else's version. That might be problematic.

[Biggy Stardust]

s1962a said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67191791

What is the downside to this? Seems sensible. If someone wants to live in the UK or European country, they should pay this flat rate of tax on global wealth. 2% is still a lower tax rate than the 45%+ high earners are paying in this country.

https://www.conservativecrusader.com/bar-stool-economics/

[macron]

The downside is their advisors will stop it happening.

Most billionaires are not billionaires, they're nothing on paper. So who you catching?

[Silvanus]

Biggy Stardust said:

Astacus said:

Sounds like as good a reason as any

Your version of fair might not be the same as someone else's version. That might be problematic.

You could say that about a great many things.

[Newc]

Perfectly fair, so long as the contribution is recognised.

Everyone gets one general election vote per pound of personal tax paid.

No taxation without representation. Only fair, right ?

[Gecko1978]

seems like a good way to get super rich folk to leave one country for another

[Mr Whippy]

So they have the take more risk to cover the tax burden.

So they can then offset the likely and increased losses on investments by… paying less tax

[98elise]

s1962a said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67191791

What is the downside to this? Seems sensible. If someone wants to live in the UK or European country, they should pay this flat rate of tax on global wealth. 2% is still a lower tax rate than the 45%+ high earners are paying in this country.

Wealth that's been crystalised is already taxed. Wealth that hasn't isn't cash, and may in fact end up being worth nothing. I doubt any billionaires would be happy losing 2% of their companies each year.

If we have wealth taxes why would it be limited to billionaires? You don't pay and taxes on your wealth I assume?

People in that position tend to be mobile. Why would you want to build businesses or invest in the UK when you have to hand over 2% of everything you own globally every year? If it was me I would just move somewhere warmer and more inviting

[loafer123]

I think we should tax use of the word “Progressive” at £500 a go.

[Muzzer79]

s1962a said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67191791

What is the downside to this? Seems sensible. If someone wants to live in the UK or European country, they should pay this flat rate of tax on global wealth. 2% is still a lower tax rate than the 45%+ high earners are paying in this country.

Sounds like a fast track way to have your resident billionaires upping sticks (because, let’s face it, they are the most mobile of people) and live somewhere else……

[Panamax]

s1962a said:

If someone wants to live in the UK or European country, they should pay this flat rate of tax on global wealth.

Brilliant. Guess why all the successful people left UK in the 1970s...


More significantly, it's bonkers that organisations doing business in UK are able to escape tax in UK.
It's equally bonkers that "ex-pats" can meander around the world not paying much tax anywhere.
And even more bonkers that various ex-politicians can make a fortune, keeping their considerable wealth "offshore".

But hey, why bother when the so-called royal family are living tax free right here at home.

[Rivenink]

IMO, what's "fair" is that those who benefit the most from how our society is, should pay the most to maintain it.

And those benefiting the most are those who make the most money from it.

A healthy balance of wealth distribution is needed for well functioning capitalist society. Otherwise you end up with corrupt hellholes where falling from a hotel balcony becomes a real risk to wealthy people.

[Astacus]

Biggy Stardust said:

Astacus said:

Sounds like as good a reason as any

Your version of fair might not be the same as someone else's version. That might be problematic.

Yarp

[Astacus]

Silvanus said:

Biggy Stardust said:

Astacus said:

Sounds like as good a reason as any

Your version of fair might not be the same as someone else's version. That might be problematic.

You could say that about a great many things.

Yarp

[PlywoodPascal]

Biggy Stardust said:

Taxing it because it's there.

The law is the same for everyone but they want to change it because it isn't "fair".

The law is a tool to achieve an end.
Most people think that one of those ends should be a fair distribution of the costs of society amongst the members of it,
It is demonstrably unfair that some of the most wealthy should pay less tax than many of the ‘around average’.
Furthermore it’s undesirable - we know that societies with more uneven distribution of wealth lead to less efficient economics and less pleasant places to live.
And finally, much of the wealth of the wealthiest comes from economic activity that relies on or benefits from the infrastructure of the country - it’s thus not just that they avoid paying for the facilities (or people, if they employ anyone who doesn’t earn enough to avoid being on benefits) that in part help generate their wealth.

It’s nonsensical to approach the issue of tax from the perspective of treating everyone equally… we need instead to consider the outcomes, and what we are trying to achieve.

Edited by PlywoodPascal on Monday 23 October 20:50