Nothing? Where do you think this wealth came from? Share prices grew a lot more than 2% per annum, now you're assuming that will stop?
Billionaires pay "0% - 0.5% tax" report finds - Suggests 2% minimum tax.
- Thread starter VincentHanna
- Start date
Associate
No.
As the share price increases, so will the 2% tax on it.
Lets assume his shares double in price.
He still has $4bn cash, but his wealth is now $500bn.. He now owes $10bn in tax. He has no option but to sell shares.
His controlling stake is determined on % of shares owned, not the value of them.
Not a fan of this way of thinking.
Same as "you haven't lost on your shares until you sell them".. If you're saying that.. You probably have lost.
These people are rich.
Why should they be forced to sell thier shares? Because we are forced to do a lot in general.
Why should I be forced to pay 40pc tax above 50k? Because it's the right thing.
If I'm paying that tax I absolutely think billionaires should be forced to pay based on wealth.
Remember this money would be helping (in theory) people who have very little. Who are disabled through no fault of their own.
If you don't support taxing wealth you support inequality growing. That's fine. Everyone's entitled to thier own opinion. Because there is no where else to get cash from to pay for basic human rights.
So you guys genuine believe it's better to let these people save a few numbers on a very big balance vs someone missing out cancer care because the NHS waiting times are too large?
Because thay is what it is. The more wealth you lock up, the more that is lost from the wealfare state.
So either you support
-tax increases across the board to pay for struggling services
-the American dream where the rich get richer and the poor die
-tax everyone more, many who are really struggling to prop up the services.
That's how I see it. Those who can should pay. Because although they may have made it off thier own back, it's. More likely it's inherited. And it of course has been funded by the average person. They didn't make this wealth from nothing.
Last edited:
If he wants to retain control, he could take out a loan against the shares.
We already have a wealth tax in this country - council tax. It’s based on the value of your property at some point in the distant past rather than your income. Other countries have far more aggressive land value taxes too.
Associate
That's all well and good and I agree with you mostly.
But the end result of taxing wealth is taking control of companies away from the individuals who built them.
Maybe you think that's good, but it will most likely cause the companies to flounder and fail. Then everyone who invested loses.
These companies often have ceos replaced. A lot of founders Don't even get into the running of them. They step away.. Who can blame them.
Amazon isn't going to die if bezos does. There are plenty of people who can take over.
At I've gotten older I've become less and less middle right and more left. A bit odd vs most. But I believe this is shifting.
Maybe it's because I don't have kids? Quite possible.
But I think IHT is great. As its a huge wealth divider. I want loopholes (like trust funds) closed. I support a world wide initiative on environment and tax issues. I wish brexit wasn't a thing as working together is better than going down the isolated route.
I hate that I have to pay for private health care and feel Lucky I can, but many can't.
Its hard not to be selfish.. We all Are. It's instinct. I don't pretend not to be. But I do think those who can should give back. I like our tax in the UK for payee.
I wish wealth was brought in line with it
Maybe it's because I don't have kids? Quite possible.
But I think IHT is great. As its a huge wealth divider. I want loopholes (like trust funds) closed. I support a world wide initiative on environment and tax issues. I wish brexit wasn't a thing as working together is better than going down the isolated route.
I hate that I have to pay for private health care and feel Lucky I can, but many can't.
Its hard not to be selfish.. We all Are. It's instinct. I don't pretend not to be. But I do think those who can should give back. I like our tax in the UK for payee.
I wish wealth was brought in line with it
Soldato
I think IHT is fine in theory. But like original post it ends up something that the mega rich end up avoiding and the middle class/professionals getting the brunt of it.
Yeah. Tax avoidance (legal Or not) needs addressing. But often those in power benefit.
You shouldn't be able to avoid IHT.
FYI I say this as someone who will likely benefit from looser IHT.
Last edited:
It's frustrating really and why it is difficult to change anything. Yet at the same time there is also general support to keep increasing the tax burden for people on PAYE, especially those who earn a decent amount above average. Go middle class, keep on keeping yourselves down. The wealthy are laughing at us.
Fresh from embarrassing yourself over the Farage saga you have now come to talk nonsence in this thread.
'Wealth taxes' are obviously a stupid idea with one reason, amongst many, being the problems of establishing how 'wealthy' someone is in relation to assets they hold before they are sold.
Another reason is that these taxes won't just apply to the 'rich' they will filter down and end up being yet another cash grab for low income but higher asset older people.
And why save any money as 'wealth' if the goverment is just going to steal it year by year why not just spend it now....
And I wouldn't trust any claim you have to have completed, understood and be able to be apply any 'financial training' you have received given that you tacitly approve of shady underhand dealings in financial insititutions that could lead to the law being broken in some circumstances never mind finacial conduct regulations.
A quite disgraceful comment to make, if you actually are a supposedly accredited, professional accountant.
Last edited:
Suspended
I would thought that as an accountant your customers would expect you to steadfastly try and minimise their taxation liabilities within the law, not be aspiring to tax the wealthier ones further. I think some of them might be rather horrified by your views unless they are a very niche bunch
I have always tried to fraternise with the wealthy and try and learn some of their ways to success. Whilst money doesn't necessarily make one happy, it sure as hell makes misery much easier to bear!
I'm not a public accountant, I work within a business.
But its an interesting point, its no different within a business, try to minimise tax WITHIN the law.
If the law changes then the reaction follows suit.
Suspended
You hit the nail on the head there.
The fact they are not taxed now means they find it far easier to generate more wealth. Meanwhile the rest of us are trying to keep the ship afloat.
Put it this way, if instead of paying your income tax, you got the wages untaxed, but had to pay your tax when you retired. Do you think you would be better or worse off at that point.
Suspended
Lol still all salty about your hero Farage I see.
Its not disgraceful, its the truth, their commercial issue was triggered by writing it down.
The first thing that happens when large issues happen in a commercial environment is people immediately start saying do not put in writing anything that could need to be declared in court.
Half of what you wrote has some grounding.
But most of it really isn't that difficult to get round.
Wealth taxes should apply to all, and with minor limits in regards a level we do not bother taxing below.
You would then end up in a situation something like :
1) Young, low income, low assets, low tax (on income)
2) Young middle aged, low assets, ok income, lower tax (on income)
3) late middle aged, ok assets, ok/good income, higher tax (on income and assets)
4) late working age, good assets, good income, high tax (on both)
5) retired, good assets, low income, medium/low tax (highish tax on wealth, low tax on income)
I have tried to make it very simple for you. The bits in brackets are relative to the rates charged now on income.
Why shouldn't low income high wealth individuals be taxed?
Why is it any different to low wealth mid income people being taxed?
In the UK we have a real issue with this. I don't know or understand why wealth gets a get out of jail free card vs payee which is fair game.
Hording isn't good for the economy
Last edited:
It's not about the person.
It's about the situation where you think that banks/ financial insititutions should not be accountable for the decisions they make and that the mistake they made in that case wasn't the bad decision they made based on lies but that they had made a record of their decision making that later showed what they had done and why!
It's a good thing you're semi anonymous here, if you actually are an accountant, as you seem to think that the ethics bits of your profession are optional.
Yes the issue for them was that they had recorded what they had done and why. The disgraceful bit is you suggesting they should not have done this.
it seems you work in an institutionally corrupt enviroment.....
financial institutions like banks are given special powers by the goverment and are therefore should be subject to far higher scrutiny.
No finacial institution like a bank should not be able to expain what it did and why at a later date if requires to do so.
And you have perfectly outlined a plan to reduce the incentive to save and for people to make plans for the future.
Last edited:
'Wealth' tied up in housing isn't very useful to society and the goverment should look at some ways to reduce the incentive to tie up so much income earned there.
Investments however aren't 'hoarded' and both savers and borrowers are needed for a functional economy.
Ideally 'wealth' should relate to already taxed income, or that which will be taxed when realised (i.e asset sold). Wealth taxes are therefore just another double taxation and a continuing one unlike the one time hit of VAT, if the wealth is used to buy, what may be a good or service with little to no ongoing value, before it is taxed as 'wealth'.
Last edited:
Suspended
I do think they should be accountable.
Commercially he didnt make sense for them.
They should have limited recording conversations to that. Instead they starter writing down some stuff that was not the key part of the decision making.
I never suggested that at all. When the started going into the waffly bit which was not a part of the decision but some kind of early warning they created the position they were specifically warning against.
I dont work in an institutionally corrupt environment at all. Its standard practice for disclosure.
I get it, you don't understand numbers.
You would pay less tax as a low paid individual.
People with notable assets would pay some based on that.
You could target the 50/50 between income and wealth to mean those in the middle paid a similar amount to now based on income. Probably less in reality once you start hitting the very high wealth low income earners for a fairer share.
You would in effect get to keep more of your income so you get ahead faster. As you get older and start to hold higher and higher asset values you pay more tax on them (you still pay less on your income).
If you end up on high income and with high assets you pay more.
It would actually bring normal earnings more into line with how pensions function. Its in effect deferred taxation.
Personally I’m OK with billionaires spending their money and stimulating the economy rather than hoarding it.
We have isas and pensions.
If these are set a reasonable level, anything on top is fair game.
To me it's same as tax free on earnings up to whatever it is now.
I don't know what that level should be.. Myself? I find using 20k a year not possible normally.
20k a year means you have at least 1500 spare cash every month. I feel its a fair amount.
If you can max that out for 30 years you're onto an isa millionaire status.
Plus your pension.
If this is ring fenced.. I don't see why there can't be wealth tax on everything else.
I'm not even opposed to it being on death. Ie IHT tweaks.. But it would have to be unavoidable. Which it currently isn't.
Wealth needs tapping.. Because you can't tap payee anymore.