Germany is weighing sweeping pension changes, including raising the retirement age to 70. Meanwhile, football fans are celebrating after the men's national side qualified for the World Cup knockout stage.
I feel like all proposals that change how social benefits work should be benchmarked against why taxing the rich wouldn’t be a better option, laid out plainly, so everyone can see the lies.
It should be illegal to propose anything that doesn’t include taxes for those who can pay them the easiest.
Germany doesn’t have a wealth tax though, right? There’s not really a reason for them to leave as it seems quite advantageous to stay there if you’re rich.
That’s kind of correct. On paper Germany has a wealth tax but it is omitted since 1997. The story is a bit frustrating, surprise. The federal constitution court found in 1995 that property is taxed not enough. So it ruled that the legislative has to reform the tax until end of the year 1996.
The government at the time consisted of conservatives and neo-liberals and guess what, instead of reforming they disabled the tax with the reason: We already tax high incomes with 53% so we should not tax the people more.
Fast forward: still no wealth tax and highest income tax is 45% and many exceptions in inheritance tax. So rich folks getting richer.
It is. But the court ruled that the tax is unfair… low on property. Well if we tax no one, every rich person pays the same amount -> 0 so it’s fair now right?
A country can continue taxing people after they leave. It’s the second suggestion by the leading economists on the matter right now, right after “tax the rich”.
The US does the extreme and says as long as you’re a citizen you’re getting taxed. A better plan would likely by 10 years or something. I think they describe it as paying the difference in taxes of the two locations. So if the ultra-wealthy flee to Dubai or whatever (most won’t), they pay the difference between Dubai and their home country’s taxes to their home country so the movement is tax neutral.
I feel like all proposals that change how social benefits work should be benchmarked against why taxing the rich wouldn’t be a better option, laid out plainly, so everyone can see the lies.
It should be illegal to propose anything that doesn’t include taxes for those who can pay them the easiest.
They always say the rich will run away.
Great, fuck 'em. Introduce an exit tax. And they can’t move their houses or other buildings with them.
Already exists in Germany, not perfect as some loopholes still present.
Germany doesn’t have a wealth tax though, right? There’s not really a reason for them to leave as it seems quite advantageous to stay there if you’re rich.
That’s kind of correct. On paper Germany has a wealth tax but it is omitted since 1997. The story is a bit frustrating, surprise. The federal constitution court found in 1995 that property is taxed not enough. So it ruled that the legislative has to reform the tax until end of the year 1996.
The government at the time consisted of conservatives and neo-liberals and guess what, instead of reforming they disabled the tax with the reason: We already tax high incomes with 53% so we should not tax the people more.
Fast forward: still no wealth tax and highest income tax is 45% and many exceptions in inheritance tax. So rich folks getting richer.
That’s fucked up. I don’t understand how the legally accepted response to “you aren’t taxing enough” can be “then we will tax nothing”.
It is. But the court ruled that the tax is unfair… low on property. Well if we tax no one, every rich person pays the same amount -> 0 so it’s fair now right?
Rich people also don’t have income, and legally pay zero taxes if they are clever.
The most astonishing part to me: in 1996 the government still gave a shit about court rulings.
A country can continue taxing people after they leave. It’s the second suggestion by the leading economists on the matter right now, right after “tax the rich”.
The US does the extreme and says as long as you’re a citizen you’re getting taxed. A better plan would likely by 10 years or something. I think they describe it as paying the difference in taxes of the two locations. So if the ultra-wealthy flee to Dubai or whatever (most won’t), they pay the difference between Dubai and their home country’s taxes to their home country so the movement is tax neutral.