There can be no moral, ethical, economic or technical justification for taxing income from wealth less than that created by work.
That most of morals and ethics – and absolutely all of economics – says different isn’t going to hold Spud back now, is it?
For once he’s almost correct – There can be no moral, ethical, economic or technical justification for taxing income.
My guess is that they’ll rob pensions again. It’s not money people currently have in their pockets and it can be obfuscated because pension regulations are insanely complex.
If they’re dumb enough to bring in an explicit wealth tax loads of people are going to flee because we know it won’t stay at whatever level it comes in at.
Taxing income from wealth is taxing people for putting their money at risk and making good investment decisions. People who don’t put their money at risk and/or make bad investment decisions don’t get income from wealth so wouldn’t attract the tax.
Taxing income from wealth sounds pretty immoral to me.
“Taxing income from wealth sounds pretty immoral to me”
This already happens. Tax is payable on dividends, rental income and so on. Isn’t that just taxing income?
Taxing income from dividends – which are paid out of income that has already paid tax – should be at (20%-corporation tax rate) in Murphy-conomics.
Taxing income from capital is perfectly OK and 100% legitimate unless it’s capital invested in renewables, in which case a negative tax rate, in layman’s terms a subsidy, is applied. (That should keep the moral, ethical, economic and technological philosophers busy for a while.)
Professor Potato will be dangling his taxing wealth* report in front of anyone who will listen, playing it again like an ageing rock star. Go on spud, one last push for the ermine you’ve already measured yourself for.
*anyone who has £1 more than me
Gamecock isn’t seeing a problem here.
I put money in the bank. The bank pays me interest on it. I pay income tax on that interest. What’s the problem?
Me thinks ‘income from wealth’ is overly broad.
“Income from wealth” for the majority of people is “income from pension fund”. Ok, let’s hear it loud and clear: “tax people’s pension income”. Didn’t I notice huge screaming headlines in the Sunday papers about that a couple of days ago?
I’m sure the 2013 Cypriot bank raid is on their minds … Just take 10% off every bank account without giving any time to move it.
Gamecock may not have lived through the Wilson-Healey hyperinflation when cash savings were subjected to a hidden tax of 20-odd% p.a. that far exceeded the income from those savings. Under Gordon Brown the theft of 2+% p.a. through debasement of the currency exceeded the after-tax interest on savings for most people.
Two great things about Margaret Thatcher: the “real” incomes of the poor increased faster than under any Labour government and savings grew instead of shrinking.
jgh, they already do tax peoples income from their pension. One of my mates, who hasn’t worked a day (nor his wife in the 31 years I’ve known them), got the hump when he got his state pension and he had to pay £100 a month in income tax…..
Completely OT
The first part of the Post Office inquiry has reported:
Meanwhile Paula Vennells and the rest of those whose lies led to this are still walking the streets and will be for a long time to come because we believe in interminable inquiries so the guilty can escape punishment as long as possible with the hope the public forgets.
Spud should come to Australia, he has a follower here in our Treasurer Jim Chalmers, who wants to tax *unrealised* capital gains in superannuation that are over a certain threshold. The usual excuses are getting trotted out, it will only affect a few people, only fair for the rich to pay their way, blah. Of course, the threshold isn’t indexed so within 20 years it will catch a lot more people, it’s an annual cash in hand charge on paper gains. As usual losses can be carried forward but won’t get you a refund.
I won’t be affected yet. Not until it gets extended in the next raid. I’m just hoping my super is still there when I reach retirement.
The idea that it’s ethically wrong doesn’t seem to occur to TPTB, all they can see is a big pot of gold.
Arguing that a Wealth Tax won’t work / won’t bring in any money / is unethical / etc is the wrong way to go.
TPTB have already had lots and lots more money, and what happened to that?
As BiND reminds us, they can’t even sort out the Post Office scandal. Exactly how long do they need?