The Tax Justice Network said trillions could be raised with a ‘featherlight’ tax on the 0.5% of richest households, copying a current Spanish tax

The Tax Justice Network said trillions could be raised with a ‘featherlight’ tax on the 0.5% of richest households, copying a current Spanish tax

Governments around the world copying Spain’s wealth tax on the super-rich could raise more than $2tn (£1.5tn), according to campaigners calling for the money to help finance the climate transition.

As a growing numbers of countries consider raising taxes on the ultra-wealthy, the Tax Justice Network campaign group said in a report that evidence from a “featherlight” tax on the 0.5% richest households in Spain could help raise trillions of dollars globally each year.

The Spanish government, under the socialist prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, introduced a temporary “solidarity” wealth tax in late 2022, which is collected in 2023 and 2024, on the net wealth of individuals exceeding €3m (£2.6m). It is estimated to apply to the richest 0.5% of households.

  • KevonLooneyEnglish
    203·
    29 days ago

    Valuing your incentive shares is not hard. It’s done every day. The bank that would give you a loan does it to know how much money they can loan you.

    Your illiquid private shares would just have the value discounted by some percentage to account for this: say, 30%. So you could be taxed on the remaining 70%.

    I understand that you don’t want this to be true, but it is. You are not the first person with an illiquid asset, and It’s relatively easy to value it for tax purposes. Property tax is paid based on the assessed value of real estate, which is also illiquid. Every year billions of people manage to pay their property taxes without having to sell their homes.

    So you’re wrong.

    • MoonManKipper@lemmy.worldEnglish
      35·
      29 days ago

      Not the same - a bank needs it to be roughly right across a portfolio of loans, I need it to be exactly right for me.

      Property tax etc is an understood part of owing a property- an intrinsically valuable thing. I’m strongly in favour of land tax - it encourages the productive use of land. I can’t live in shares, and I can’t eat them. At some point I may make some actual money from them and at that point I should pay tax. I should not be taxed now on possible future gains, anymore than I should be taxed now on a possible pay raise if I get a promotion.

      Fairer and more effective tax is essential- and to advocate for it effectively a grasp of the basics is essential. Otherwise you’re counter productive. I feel I’ve made my points and shall withdraw

      • KevonLooneyEnglish
        112·
        29 days ago

        It is the same. Property tax valuation isn’t “exactly correct”, nor does it need to be. It’s just roughly consistent across similar properties. If anything, it’s easier to value the private shares you own because they are exactly the same as the shares someone else in your company owns. Properties are all unique.

        I don’t mean to insult you, but you are clearly not an expert in finance. Like I said, I understand why you don’t want to pay a valuation tax on your shares but it would be technically simple to implement.

        Honestly though, you don’t have to worry about it. No wealth tax is being proposed on any amount under $100 million. And no tax is proposed above 2%. If you have $100 million in private shares, your tax burden will not negatively affect your life. Get an expert.