3567
Winning is relative
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
3567 points (97.9% liked)
Memes
45899 readers
2332 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
^This is what the law and order crowed says when the law is for wealthy and powerful people.
Honestly, I was being a bit facetious by responding to an overly simplistic comment in an overly simplistic way. Personally, I think we should fund universal welfare programs by cutting out the ultra-wealthy middle man with a sovereign wealth fund like they do in Norway. No need to tax the ultra-wealthy if they don’t exist because they can’t extract the wealth from the people in the first place.
this "overly simplistic comment" has everything you need and more, but I'll bite.
Wealthy people own companies. Companies are perfect tool for accumulating wealth, since you can reinvest profits forever and pay income tax (corporate rate) only on stuff you intend to extract to your own name, which is usually not much compared to total amount of generated income. Private person, on the other hand, is taxed on whole income and may qualify for usually laughable deductions. Got huge bonus from your job at the end of the year and plan to get few months off work to "invest in yourself" and learn a new trade? Tough luck, buddy, you are "rich" now - welcome to higher tax bracket, government will take their cut first and let's see what you'll be able to afford with what's left.
VAT is a scam to fuck people who have to spend their income for actual living. If you live paycheck to paycheck you'll end up paying VAT on your whole income.
Wealthy people don't get their income in salary, salary is for working class. Dividends, capital gains, royalties - in any jurisdiction it's possible to find something which will be less severe than income tax, which is also often not progressive or capped at something like 20%. Social security contributions are easily bypassed by employing yourself as CEO for minimal salary. Boom - now you have same healthcare as people who have to pay great chunk of their whole paycheck for it.
If we restrict ourselves to EU citizens and your particular country is really anal or maybe 20% or something tax is too much for you anyway - you are free to move to Cyprus, Malta or Switzerland, which will have 0% capital gains if you meet not too tough conditions. Or "move", you just have to get a residence there to declare as your primary one and be present at least sometimes - there's no border control, it's really hard to track if you spent there more than half a year for tax residency purposes, this is usually a matter of long legal battles and you won't even get into that territory if you're not doing anything too bizarre.
This is a biggest difference with US citizens, they can't benefit from tax havens because of their passport, IRS doesn't care and is good equipped with lots of info, so US guys are left with real shady stuff with nominees and cash or traditional buy-borrow-die, which is sustainable only for ultra-rich.
I'm living and doing business in EU and it took me quite a lot of time to get from nothing into the position where I can utilize at least some of the benefits of the above - but you have to be completely fucking blind to not see that it's rigged and tax burden on people who don't try to game the system is completely disproportional.
Right… to get at that wealth through taxes you would need a wealth tax or a tax on corporate profits along with outlawing stock buy backs.
That’s not how a progressive taxes work. Under progressive tax you get taxed at a higher rate as you make more money, but only the amount above a certain threshold is taxed higher, you’re not going to receive less money because you make above a certain amount as you seem to be implying. It’s explained more fully in this short video. https://youtu.be/VJhsjUPDulw
In terms of reinvesting in yourself, yes there should be universal access to education. If you’re capable and desire to improve yourself through education that should be free and you should be paid to pursue that self improvement. A society made up of smarter people benefits us all, we should make that investment.
Agreed VAT is a regressive tax that taxes the poor more. We see 100% eye to eye here.
Well, yes which is why I said I support sovereign wealth funds. That is the state owns portions of companies directly in the same way other shareholders do. This cuts out the wealthy people entirely. The State can then use dividends of that fund to invest in social services. It can also use it’s position as a shareholder to give working people better labor contracts.
So you support lowering incoming taxes and raising taxes on dividends, capital gains, royalties? Sound like a decent policy to me. Well this is something else to consider; its almost like its more complicated than my original sarcastic comment implied.
Uhh… yeah we should close that loopholes, right? Even if we didn’t close that loophole I still think its a much better system for healthcare than in the US.
Not all that familiar with these kinds of tax dodging schemes within in the EU. But US corporations do similar things with the Cayman Islands. We could probably close these loopholes with enough political will. But again the easier and cleaner solution is a sovereign wealth fund which I mentioned in my first comment responding to you and you have not yet acknowledged as a way of raising funds.
Perhaps that is how things are but how should things be?
No, you just need to prohibit forming 1-man holding companies. Want to have shares? Write them to your own name, not to a shell company's name. That's a first step to get this income at least tied to individual. Or get a hedge fund license, which ultra-rich will do, but they will find a way in any system other than full commie madness.
I know perfectly well how progressive taxes work. In majority of cases bonus from employer will be taxed at source at higher tax rate regardless what you plan to spend it to. Even if your plans for these money would be fully deductible, you will still need to have spare cash to cover planned expenses until you get a refund. In case of wealthy person, there's a privilege to optimize your spending first and report/pay taxes later simply because there's no taxation at source involved.
No, it doesn't unless you propose nationalization. Even if shares in publicly-listed companies will be bought in some way said fund it's still possible to have billions in privately-held company. You can't get something that is not for sale unless you decide to rob.
What I'm proposing is irrelevant, the topic was who is paying for European social security. And my point is that it's paid by poor and middle class, since they have no freedom in optimizing and planning their income. You can have tax brackets up to 99%, it's absolutely irrelevant before a discussion what is subject to this tax. However, works well for populism reasons.
It's not a loophole, it's perfectly normal to have a paying job along with your other income sources. If these other income sources would've been subject for same tax brackets as job income, there wouldn't be a problem.
US healthcare is a scam which siphons insane amount of money simultaneously from government and people, I don't think there's any valid argument in favor of it.
Corporations could be established everywhere, corporate tax rate is another topic. In EU it's possible to dodge taxes on your personal income, not corporate, which is not the case for US citizens.
Again, how things should be is another topic, my original point is that high income taxes and tax brackets with what currently considered as income is cheap populism to shaft middle class. When applied to wealthy people this will catch a few exceptional individual performers like sports players which have no case in declaring their individual ability as company activity (ironically, only on "salary" part of their income - brand deals and royalties will be optimized into oblivion).
As of what would be fair... Removing VAT, eliminating 1-man holding companies to get assets to individual's name then doing same tax rate and get any income to be subject for same tax brackets and social security contributions as everyday man's salary. Regarding taxation at source and deductions for individuals... well, that would be also fair, but it is operational nightmare.
It’s very obviously that you do not.
The point of my original post was that most people making average wages will not necessarily pay more taxes if social services increase. If the taxes are progressive taxes that is definitionally true.
A progressive tax is a tax where the greatest tax burden falls on those with the greatest ability to pay the tax. That is typically on those making more than average.
A regressive tax is a tax where the greatest tax burden falls on those with the least ability to pay the tax. That is typically on those making less than average
You keep bringing up (often false or tenuous) examples of regressive taxes. There are examples of regressive taxes in Europe and elsewhere, I don’t dispute this. This does not undermine my point.
There are also examples in Europe and elsewhere where progressive taxes have been successfully implemented. My original post was pointing this fact out.
There is no point in moving on to any of my more complex points until you demonstrate that you comprehend this.
Do you understand why giving examples of regressive taxes in Europe does not undermine my position that taxes to pay for social services should be progressive?