"Won't somebody think of the suffering of the rich!?" - Blue sweater woman

God that blue shirt woman really riled me up. All the issues she says would be caused for rich people with a wealth tax are the same the poor get. They’re told “if you don’t have a cash inflow then get back to work, make sure you have enough savings, this is your fault.”

If you want to live in a well functional country you have to pay the costs. I am proud to pay my taxes in Norway. I consider it an investment in safty, good education, professional health systemes etc. I want my country to be a well functional place to live. Big hugs 🇳🇴

My income tax rate alone is already 49.5% how much more tax must I pay the Dutch Government?! 😅😂

The moment when the lady wearing blue described it as ‘terribly cruel’ that millionaire retirees might have to ‘change their lifestyle’ in order to create some cash to pay a proposed wealth tax. She doesn’t know the meaning of cruel…

This is the first balanced news article I’ve seen for a long time

We wouldn't even be having this conversation if countries hadn't basically legalised tax avoidance and evasion, allowing multi-national corporations to get away with effective Corporation Tax rates in the low single digits whilst SMEs have to pay the full whack (because they can't afford to pay for creative accountants). We have enough taxes already, the problem is that governments aren't collecting them.

What I understood from this video is as below: 1) You make money through business or other means and pay income tax. After that you save some money and buy non performing assets like jewelry and art while paying sales tax/vat/gst/ other taxes. And 1 year later as per the wealth tax rules you will have to pay taxes for owning these non performing assets. 2) If you are a middle aged, monetarily successful person and choose to purchase home for your children to own once they grow up, then you will be taxed for owning those homes as they are part of your wealth legally even though you have already paid all the relevant taxes while purchasing the homes. Kindly correct me if I am wrong in the above scenarios. Note: I just thought of the above 2 examples where I believe wealth tax is not a justified tax. There are many more scenarios which could show that the wealth tax is an unjustified money grabbing mechanism rather than legitimate need of the society like regular income taxes and other various taxes.

You know shit’s bad when the FT is putting out content on a wealth tax.

I often find those people who try and dismiss a wealth tax have a vested interest in keeping one from happening.

If we were to introduce a wealth tax we would then need to be able to better identify ownership of trust property and other similar interests. This is how the majority of wealth is held and unfortunately, the vast majority is offshore. Thanks City of London.

It is quite obvious that the western governments will have to charge a wealth/capital tax because the governments are not going to get much income tax when companies are paying minimum wage knowing that the government will pay universal credit to make up people's incomes. That is the reason that the rich are keeping their assets in "foundations" or off their personal balance sheet in off shore companies. Switzerland has a wealth tax where you pay 0.2% on your net assets depending on the canton you are resident in. That is the reason that people keep undisclosed bars of gold to avoid the capital tax and inheritance tax.

Maybe instead of a wealth tax, just look at the tax on the books and how people avoid them. Or do we assume people will be honest with this new tax ?

So I'm from the Netherlands and the Netherlands has the worst wealth inequality in the world with a Gini Coefficient of 0.902. To better visualize this, consider the fact that the top 10% controls 60% of net wealth in all of the Netherlands. Do you know what else the netherlands has? A wealth tax. So does it tackle inequality? I would wager it does not, else my country wouldnt have such a bad gini coefficient.

The reason why the rich got richer is bc when the state prints money, it goes to those who produce the products that ppl have to buy. The concentration of wealth followa the concentration of production. It will go on as long as the big companies continue to eat up the small shps and producers.

Norway and Switzerland's strong economic positions are not due to a wealth tax, one is due to nationalised oil and the other is a glorified world bank

Wealth tax is inefficient, there will always be loopholes to avoid it, and it is also unfair to those who actually work to increase their wealth. Plus, how to make sure the money flows from rich to poor people through the governments? Governments already have big budget from where they waste lots of money. Inequality is only solved sustainably by increasing social responsibility and awareness and increase financial knowledge on how to manage own money and income, but these 2 are hard to achieve and on the long run only

We had a wealth tax before. Look in the 1960s and 70s. Its a very bad idea because administering it is very hard. Consider how you can apply inheritance tax. Have you ever considered - why we did not charge an inheritance tax on King Charles? That would have raised tons of revenue. So instead of coming up with superficially appealing ideas - we need to figure out how we can make sure that the current rules are applied efficiently.

It is glaringly obvious that the gap between the very rich and the very poor has become an enormous chasm that needs to be bridged. It is not just the job of one government to do something about this but all governments as wealth is being generated in a global economy which cannot be controlled by any single government. What is needed to cope with this problem is a new form of global governance that addresses the obscene inequalities that currently exist globally. It is essential to to this as a matter of urgency as the climate crisis, the threat of further pandemics and unsolved conflicts are set to make the situation much worse than it is at present triggering a massive rise in migration and the destruction of poorly built physical infrastructure and loosely held together social structures. We have no other choice but to get to work on the abolition of extremes of wealth and poverty in order to ensure the future stability of civilisation which now finds itself at a critical juncture.

It’s very simple: if we had a truly progressive tax system, financial inequality wouldn’t have soared to historic levels. As if we should be taking advice from elite, rich economists from privileged backgrounds who have advised our systems into this dysfunctional state.

The combined wealth and dividend taxes in Norway is almost like a confiscation of the assets. The Norwegian wealth tax is skewed and too high. Norwegian private investors cannot compete with foreign investors and the Norwegian state (who pays no tax). The effective tax rate on dividend can be 100% when wealth taxes are included.

@2:10 countries removing "wealth tax" @9:40 "I've never seen a tax abolished, not once, ever..." 🤦‍♂️

To my opinion just a wealth tax will not solve the problem . Wherever there ist a loophole to avoid taxes, this will be used. Governments should agree on harmonized corporate and income taxes in order to avoid unnessesary competition. A part of this tax should be paid directly into a separate Account for special projects, especially economic infra structure. This could be invested in assets as well to raise more investments. These funds should be administrated together with an Economy/Industry council out of representatives from the various industrial associations as well as trade associations and trade unions. A bit like the industry council in Japan METI, but not top down, but in coordination with ministry for economics and direct advice on how these funds should be invested for the national infra structure. This would be a win win situation for all, Independently from current Ideologies.

the fun fact about the people working at OECD (to device strategies to make people and companies pay taxes) is that they do not pay taxes on the wage they receive for working at the OECD. it is always good to make regulations that don't apply to yourself

My opinion of Merryn Somerset Webb has fallen several points while watching this piece.

The wealthy doesn't actually have a proper income, they have their wealth (principal) which they borrow against, generating positive cashflow. Instead of a wealth tax, it would be a lot easier to implement a cashflow tax, since all cashflows are recorded and can be easily identified both on and offshore.

People with income above 5 million euros/year are exempt from showing publicly their detailed earnings and debts and must declare taxes using a special platform, all this is in Portugal.😂😂😂😂

In 2007, Warren Buffett famously complained that he pays a lower rate of tax than his secretary. Fifteen years later and that hasn't changed. I'd happily bet than in another fifteen years it will still be the case. I suppose it can be fun to theorise like this but until there's a significant shift in our political landscape these ideas will remain just that.

One important point is that we don't add wealth taxes on top of existing tax. If you want to institute a wealth tax, you should eliminate other taxes such as inheritance taxes on the wealthy. Make one tax that applies to everyone who has say 10 million or more, no loopholes. That would be a start.

Basic tax rates in the UK are 20% , most people pay this, why not all?.

Would love to see a sequel, commenting on the tax cuts that were announced last week..

The big question is how is this going to address inequality, in a sense how is this going to change the situation of the poor.

Merrim's comment about having never seen a tax being abolished is missing the point. The suggestion was that a wealth tax could reduce other taxes, not remove them entirely.

Wealth will move to where it is least taxed. The question should be: Do you want wealth working in your community or somewhere else? Fair tax is a much better idea.

11:40 "it's incredibly cruel..." But what it's not incredibly cruel to do the same to the poor? 🤷

A tax on wealth should be to balance the budget only!!!!!!

Your guest, I forget his name, said that any list of the highest earners, is totally different from a list of the wealthiest people, this group is far more wealthy than the highest earners. Very wealthiest people do not earn income and do not pay much income tax. They receive dividends, rents, increases in capital gains, etc. Unearned income. Yes, I think there should be a wealth tax.

wealth tax plus a land value tax. A wealth tax reduces inequality in a way income tax doesn't ANYMORE.

The way the proponents of this idea presented the idea in this video made it sound like a pretty feasible idea. Just focusing on the top few thousand richest people/families who are "ultra-millionaires" makes a great deal of sense. A lot of good can be done for those at the very bottom with that money.

It’s very hard to valuate art, private business, etc….unless you want to sell or insure. 🤔

Three words: LAND VALUE TAX. - Much easier to value than 'wealth' writ large. - Much harder to evade, (you either own a plot of land or you don't and the government knows that, you can't hide it in the Cayman Islands). - Reduces/stabilizes rental prices, (if you the raise rent then you admit that your land is worth more and therefore will be taxed more). - Could raise huge amounts of revenue, eclipsing that of a wealth tax, which can be used to reduce taxes on income i.e. peoples time and effort. - Encourages productive usage of land, (if you buy land and are simply waiting for the value to increase then you will be taxed while you wait). - Progressive and mitigates inequality, (The more valuable your land holdings the more you'll be taxed). - Proven to work in places from Alaska to Singapore. - Widely accepted by people from all across the political spectrum and economics profession to be a preferable way of raising tax revenue. This needs to be talked about much more. It's not a silver bullet but it would solve a lot of problems in the UK economy if a government just had the guts to do it.

I am not against it BUT we should check if reform of existing tax systems and loopholes could spare us the trouble of another tax that could be avoided and bring new troubles like "how to define wealth". I have a friend that inherited his great-uncles house and he had to go to court because the value of the house was priced so high he couldnt pay the inheritance tax without going into considerable debt and he even considered to not inherit at all for a house that had to be renovated extensively.

Just start implementing a LVT (Land Value Tax). Even the Tax Hawk Milton Friedman liked it. Most people's wealth is in land anyway. Taxing your overall wealth, that includes stuff like cars and horses, discourages buying of that stuff. You'll loose jobs and slow the economy.

Having studied tax philosophy and worked for a Ministry of Taxation I cannot underline this enough: a wealth tax levied on people's total assets is the worst kind of tax imaginable. It easily leads to ridiculous marginal tax rates as in Sweden where they started taxing people over 100% of their income. Just don't. There are much better ways of taxing assets. Also, the fact that wealth tax encourages spending and punishes investments should scare everyone. Lots of economists think/claim it is a great idea - but they have no clue about how taxes actually work. 7:47 is an excellent example. What is the problem if someone is a zillionaire in stocks and never ever sells them? Its a massive investment in companies that provide jobs to lots of people who pay taxes and pay taxes themselves. The zillionaire never gets any benefit from the shares. He/she only provides risk money that keeps lots of people employed that are on average productive and create a solid tax basis for everyone. What's not to like? Its as if investments are a loss to anyone - its not - its what makes the economy grow and adds welfare. If shares are sold off you can clip it with a capital gains tax. This is the right time for taxes to step in; when you spend - not while you invest. Otherwise the tax will only deplete the amount of capital investments in an economy - making us all poorer. Finally, the example mentioned of a multi-millionaire paying 5K in wealth tax is totally crazy - either the tax gives a decent revenue running into hundreds of millions or it will cost more to have it than not.

I think a wealth tax would be good, but not because it will somehow magically fix inequality. But we have an overarching income tax and a patchwork of inconsistent wealth taxes on individual asset types. It would be better to draw together property taxes, capital gains, tax on interest, stamp duty etc into a unified, consistent regime with a single tax rate and consistent rules. Far from being overcomplicated, it would simplify the mess we have now. And it would allow a rebalancing of taxation away from income. Taxing people for having stuff instead of doing stuff. Finally, in some cases it would mobilise underused assets that are kept idle because of inertia in their owners. E.g. keeping a house or a shop empty would be more painful, so this could press owners to use or sell their idle assets

Maybe the answer is to scale back government and its cost. Run-away government spending squeezes out the private sector and economic growth suffers. A lot of wealth is illiquid - think capital gains taxes, inheritance taxes etc. a wealth tax is idiotic.

Isn’t the problem more that people don’t reinvest their wealth back in the economy? Having hoards of cash and investments that aren’t used to aid the economy but just sit in someone’s account seems to be the problem. 🤨 We should incentivize more capital investments that sustain and grow the economy.

I am not an economist, but one thing I learned is that 'real wealth' should never be personalised. The rich people I knew, never owned their wealth; is there a difference in enjoying your wealth despite that its ownership is 5 trusts/companies away and on paper belongs to your cleaner? Another issue, why after people, whereas corporate wealth is 'free floating' over the planet... is morale more than responsibility?

Maybe there could be a conditional exception to the asset net wealth tax for business owners and executives. If the company they run pays the lowest worker (employee and contractors included) are above a certain threshold in proportion to their own compensation (including stocks and bonuses) and none of the workers are on any income based welfare programs like food stamps, then these executives won't need to pay the wealth tax. This may encourage them to pay their worker more and act as a PR boost for their company. For a large company, the tax revenue from higher paid workers may be even more than the possible revenue gained from a wealth tax on the executives.

Great article. As said at the end - when society becomes so unequal that it becomes a mainstream discussion point then the politicians will act, but not before. However they will only have a fairly small window in which to act before public anger leads to them taking action themselves. As things stand inequality is growing and the greater the crises we face - be that covid or climate change - the faster the growth in inequality. There are a minority of super-rich who recognise this - like the Gates's and Buffets of this world - but too few as it currently stands.

Really hate the “hard admin” effort argument. Bruh people are paid to do that work. Also it’s not like they can’t base the tax provisions on previous iterations or currently existing ones, all you’d need to do then is make modifications to suit the country’s aims. The tax being “unfair” to cash strapped people, especially to landlords, is the reason for why the tax is being proposed. Houses for leasing aren’t productive assets, and so are stocks. Previous tax cuts were intended so that people would invest into the society and make productive assets but that hasn’t happened. Hence, the wealth tax would force people who did not fulfil the intended purpose of tax cuts to either make productive investments, or redistribute their assets to the rest of society.

Instead of trying to tax people more, how about the government starts spending its money more wisely

Following WW II, the U.S. had a marginal tax rate on wealth above 90%. And the nation thrived. This is a tax rate which has dropped significantly. I don't know where one contributor claims particular taxes don't go away. And didn't President Macron eliminate the wealth tax?

Tax is a political issue as well as a numbers thing. People see redistributive taxation of any sort as being about taking collective responsibility. The symbolism of this tax is much more important than the revenue. Although it should be carefully designed to maximise the public benefit.

A wealth tax would be great, because currently especially in the U.K., income tax is unfair due to the fact that the wealthy quite often don’t earn relatively a lot through an “income” but through their asset wealth. I think in the U.K. we really need to lower the percentage of income tax taken from the bottom earners significantly. Basic rate is currently 20% on income of 12-50k? Let’s make it 10% on 12-40k, 20% on 40-60k, 35% on 60-80k and 45% on 80k-100k and 55% on 100k+.

You explained Net Wealth tax = Wealth - Debts, won't that just promote debt borrowing?? If I had a lot of assets and I know I will fall in the New Wealth Tax zone, I'll try to acquire more debt by keeping my assets as collateral. Why can't there be a Wealth Tax irrespective of debt?? If someone owns assets worth $10 Million or more apply a Super Tax on them say 2% or something?

It's crazy that some argue that the rich are too heavily taxed. Most of their money is offshore, in property or in trusts so they would not be taxed on their true worth.

How about making the inheritance tax system work... Like making Mogg, Sunak and Johnson pay?

There is no point getting a bigger tax-collection bucket if we're just going to drill big holes around the halfway mark. Likewise, there's little point getting a bigger bucket if the content is just going to be wasted on unproductive expenditure. There is, however, absolutely a case for more taxation of the wealthiest in society, most of whom don't actually work anyway. The amount of wealth disparity in countries like the US and UK hasn't just appeared out of nowhere, it has been created by policy choices and social conditioning. The only way to address it, if indeed with agree it is a problem, is through policy choices which are designed to counter the causes of the problem. Further, a big BIG part of the problem is a complete lack of accountability within our political systems which feeds the kind of political dysfunction which creates and allows these problems to continue in the first place. We've had decades of astronomical wealth growth for those at the top whilst the everyone else has experienced stagnation and decline. Yet, every time a crisis comes along it is those suffering the stagnation and decline who are expected to pay whilst the former group are protected. How on earth did so few people go to prison in the aftermath of the Global Financial Crisis? Because the system is rigged by those who create these crises to protect them when they cause the next crisis. Who paid for it all in the end? Those who were hurt the most but had the least direct involvement. Most average people still haven't really recovered from the GFC. But the top 0.1% - 5% have never been better off. We literally live in a system which incentivises risky, even darn-right stupid and fraudulent activities by the rich because there is absolutely zero accountability for their class strata because no matter what the result is the same - poor and middle earners picking up the tab. It's Capitalism for the poor, Socialism for the rich.

It's only bloody obvious we should tax those filthy rich🤞🏻🤞🏻🤞🏻✌ And u can spare me that they'd move some place else or invest less - it's all a load of rubbish, the only way they'd suffer would be them ending up having 2 luxurious yachts/jets etc instead of 3.

Merryn Somerset Webb claims that she has "never seen a tax abolished, not once" - yet this very same video discusses how wealth taxes in a handful of European countries were abolished, including specifically by Emmanuel Macron in France in 2017

We would not need a wealth tax if asset prices were not artificially inflated through private banks money creation & negative real interest rates.

any Politian in any country in the world can do this and that with tax , but as we have seen just recently with lizz Truss even good ideas to grow the economy can be fatal to their political career. Lizz Truss meant well but the public and markets didn't want a bar of it, but doesn't mean that in the future it may be welcomed and a viable way forward.

You face a simple choice: redress wealth inequality, as we did after the second world war, or face violent revolution. If you don't want your neighbour to steal your chickens then you have to make sure he isn't hungry enough to steal your chickens. Also and unless you can provide a compelling argument that you earned being born into a wealthy family, you must accept that luck has played a part in your success and you therefore owe a moral debt to those less lucky than you.

The fundamental problem post-Brexit is off-shore tax evasion, where the richest own nothing personally, all held on offshore/blind trusts in different tax jurisdictions ie tax havens. Needs to be illegal to be resident and do so. Either believe in the country or leave.

“… I have been in this business for a long time, but I have never seen a tax abolished …” Except for wealth taxes.

According to the ONS, 60% of UK net wealth is in land which is the easiest asset class to tax

Love your take on this issue!

Just imposed a one-off wealth tax using a wealth ladder system. If individual reached wealth of 10M then taxed at 1%, 50M at 2% and 100M and so on at 4-5%. Its horrible if wealth tax are imposed anually.

Wealth tax has been tried multiple times in many different countries and always failed. When an already successful country implements a wealth tax, it remains more or less successful _despite_ that tax, not because of it.

That the FT is talking about wealth taxes, tells me that its time has come

Everyone is discussing who must pay tax, but nobody is asking what happens to that tax money

One problem with valuing a Pension Plan, is that would be unfair compared to unfunded pensions (like my public sector pension, plus the state pension when I get there). My pension has no fund value as such, so it would be unjust to treat holders of funds differently.

If you don’t have to pay it, you probably think it’s a great idea. If you do have to pay it, you probably don’t think it’s a good idea. Asking people’s opinion is just asking for an admission of which category they fit into. Human self interest almost always prevails.

Should there be any corporation tax along with wealth tax?

A lot of people say tax the rich, but no one's got a good idea of how to actually make it happen. A lot of the proposed ideas will have some pretty bad side effects, imo.

It’s 💯 needed, when certain people are spending £35,000 a day on holidays to the Maldives etc when people are freezing in their homes - then a wealth tax is quite simply needed. However, even though I am someone on the opposite side to the rich I would still agree that wealth tax shouldn’t be aggressive, like anything it should be well thought out.

The objection sating its hard to value tgjngs, doesn't stop the tax office doing it. Calling it intrusive is joke.

workers who actually work, i.e. they get money for the time and labour they put in, and don't own shares of the company should pay no income tax at all ever. tax should be paid on income-generating assets, such as land, buildings, capital, patents, etc. the worker already contributes to society with their time, sweat and tears.

it's incredibly cruel to evict somebody who has NO MONEY .

Lady in the blue has clearly never had to worry about where her next meal will come from or whether she'll go without heating through winter, bc that's what's cruel. The way I see it, we can do it, we just have to make all the considerations and make sure we do it properly, keeping as many people if not happy, at least not actively riotous.

Here’s one for you… VAT is charged on all aspects of renovating property from paying for labour to buy materials and services however newbuilds are VAT exempt This should be reversed i.e. renovations should be exempt from VAT (value added tax 20%) and newbuilds should be charged VAT….. that way people will be encouraged to renovate repair insulate and extend existing buildingsCreating more living space out of the existing building stock and more energy efficient buildings which is far more kind to the environment… also. Why not cut ourt spending on BOMBS & BULLETS. Then you want have to steal so much money from citizens th fund things that are designed only to murder maim and destroy life

Another thing to think about is how universal it is to avoid (or at least dread) paying taxes (even among people calling for expanded government spending). For example I don't know anyone who would consider putting "the government" in their will, or would give to it, like one might give to a charitable organization. My own view of a good charity is one where most of the money goes to the people the charity is trying to help, and not so much to the people who work there (and especially not to people who only used to work there, but are now retired but still being paid by getting a pension). I enjoyed the discussion on wealth tax and will continue to think about it (guarded support), and it would also be nice to hear a discussion on specifically what is wrong with the levels of inequality (there certainly is a problem with poverty but is the argument that there is also a problem because the rich are so much richer than the middle class than before?).

Just make the rich pay their FAIR SHARE. Also, corporations need to be made to pay their FAIR SHARE. Elaborate corporate holding structures based in offshore tax havens allow the biggest companies to avoid hundreds of billions in taxes....

Anyone that says "jolly good" is not on the working mans side.

A wealth tax is honestly stupid if you think about it.

The problem with wealth tax is that if I am saving money diligently and passing it on while someone else is having too many kids, spending money frivolously, etc then why should I or my future generations pay for it?

This was a terrible example of why this discourse is so flawed. Nowhere in the film was there any discussion about the billions of taxpayers money that is wasted by governments everywhere. If there was more fiscal responsibility, less government waste, better education for the masses so that the accumulation of wealth and betterment went hand-in-hand then the discourse would be balanced. When will we see a film about that?

Wealth tax should first be paid by those who advocate for it. Do unto others as you want it done unto you.

“It’s cruel to those with wealth who have to make considerable changes to their lifestyle” That is called reducing wealth inequality.

No. Just like income tax. Starts with the top 1% and before you know it, middle class paying 35% of their income. The wealthy are always provided a loophole.

You don't really need a wealth tax because there are only two ways wealth hurts society. Those are monopolies and hoarding real estate. Real estate taxes are flat because that benefits the wealthy. Make real estate tax progressive and there will be less hoarding because hoarding won't be as profitable.

the author repeatedly refers to 'a smart wealth tax' as if it exists and has been proved working. Switzerland is hardly a shining success: 4% of all tax revenue means that hardly anyone pays anything, and certainly not paying extra comparing to what they would pay in inheritance and capital gains taxes, which were abolished/limited/replaced by the wealth tax.

Closing the loopholes and ending avoidance globally would make no difference to the people who pay taxes. So what is stopping them? Conversation between Richi and Akshata. "I'm thinking of making you pay more tax". Response. "And I'm thinking of making your life miserable".... I give in.

@18:41 how long were you waiting for the gold McLaren to go by?

People would continue to avoid taxes as much as they can, and governments would mismanage any they get.

Why do governments need more money ? Aren’t they wasting enough already ?

Its also very unkind to tax people who work who need the money. An easier plan would be to reduce income tax by half across the board and then let votes decide where the shortfall is coming from or cut spending.

Excellent work. Please, more content on the extreme inequality we are mired in and how to arrive at a sane and equitable world. The ultra-rich received their privilege one policy choice after another, and different policy choices can create a different reality. And if the billionaires decide to swan off to Portugal or Panama, good riddance to them.

You can get over the collection and valuation problem by relying on self-reporting with the caveat that the government can buy the asset from any person for the reported amount plus 25 percent. If unreported then the government can assume the self reported valuation is 0 and can seize.