Every year paying 2% on the wealth above the threshold means you have to make at least 2% ROI on these assets to stay neutral with the money. That also means there is more of an interest to actually invest the money in economic activity, rather than buy assets that just appreciate price, while being tucked away in some warehouses.
That would be amazing! No need for 2% to be the end goal instead of just a good start. A good government serves all its citizens, not just the ones with big bank accounts.
It’s a first step. One thing this will (hopefully) provide is more accurate data on exactly how much wealth is being hoarded. The current data is being assumed to be underestimating the actual numbers
2%? 🤣🤣🤣
Oh well, it’s something…
For a wealth tax that is quite substantial.
Every year paying 2% on the wealth above the threshold means you have to make at least 2% ROI on these assets to stay neutral with the money. That also means there is more of an interest to actually invest the money in economic activity, rather than buy assets that just appreciate price, while being tucked away in some warehouses.
I know 2% is fairly laughable when we’re talking normal people money, but this is 20 million per 1 billion.
A country can do a decent bit of good for people with 13 billion.
Making it 6% would cover the cost of retirement pensions.
That would be amazing! No need for 2% to be the end goal instead of just a good start. A good government serves all its citizens, not just the ones with big bank accounts.
And I would suggest that by starting at 2%, it will be easier to get to 6% later, whereas if you try to start at 6%, you may get too much opposition.
It’s a first step. One thing this will (hopefully) provide is more accurate data on exactly how much wealth is being hoarded. The current data is being assumed to be underestimating the actual numbers
I think smg like this in most countries would make a lot of difference. It’s a start
It’s a wealth tax and not an income tax? Interesting. Is it annual, or just once, or what?