One-off flat wealth tax on millionaires?

Every millionaire of sound mind and body, rich from property or otherwise, under 55 to pay a flat wealth tax of €40,000.

Should net a billion for the exchequer. We could put it into the constitution that it cannot happen again (this is so that people won’t say “but all the richies will emigrate!!!1!”)

They’ve had a good ol’ run for the last decade, and this isn’t some loony trotskyite “eat the rich” proposal. It’s about paying a very modest levy towards the nation that made almost all of them such immense wealth.

This country’s in for some serious challenges in the next few years with the bubble popping. Our hospitals need serious investment and restructuring, those thrown out of work by the bubble will need to be retrained, hopefully to some societally useful end.

Why? Why should someone who has worked hard for their money pay more tax? It’s an easy solution to say “someone who isn’t me should pay more tax”.

Errrr… you realise that someone who earns 30K currently pays a higher percentage of his money than someone who earns 15K, right?

We already work on the principle that if you earns more, you pays more.

I’m just saying this logic could do with a slight extension.

Taxes are the entrance fee you pay for living in a society. Folk like Denis O’Brien don’t feel the entrance fee is worth it, so they leave this society. It’s open to everyone to do the same. You don’t even have to say goodbye to Ireland forever, just visit for less than 3 months in total per annum.

All organisations raise the entrance fee when their finances get tight.

Why should nations be any different?

Take two examples

Person A works 8am - 7pm for 30 years of their life and retires with €1m in the bank. Over a lifetime, they have paid several million in tax.

Person B draws the dole all their life and draws the non contributory pension. The most work they’ve ever done in their life involves is climb up a balcony to steal Person A’s TV. At 65 they demand a higher non contributory pension payment.

Should person A be penalised for their work by being forced to pay more tax which is to be handed over the person B?

What if you had that million in your house, but not in cash? Where would you get the cash to pay? Would you have to borrow against your house?

Random, that’s an argument against the very notion of progressive tax.

I’m more interested in how the supporters of the progressive taxation regime we currently have can argue against the speculated tax I mentioned.

So, to those such as yourself who are seemingly opposed to all forms of taxation where a richer person pays a higher proportion than a poorer person I say we should agree to disagree in silence.

We have too little common ground to say anything of substance to each other, as our worldviews are diametrically opposed and mutually repugnant to one another.

Like Dawkins debating Benedict 16 or Bush vs Bin Laden, it’s just not going to produce any enlightening discussion for onlookers.

Those of us who agree on the broad principle: that the rich pay more in the pound than poor as they currently do, can have a debate over how far that should apply.

You must be getting mixed up with Mary Harneys plan to pay for nursing homes :laughing:

Maybe you can come to an agreement to give a certain tranche of the value of the house upon your death. Kind of like equity release.

The usual inflation models would be calculated as to what 40K is likely to be worth at the time of your death, and you’d sign a binding agreement to hand that over. The revenue might be able to sell off that paper, so the dosh would in reality go to some institutional investor at the death of the taxpayer.

As someone who’s had a relative die leaving an overpriced house to a member my family and has indirectly benefited from that, I think that’d be fair and proper.

It is unearned wealth which is involved in virtually all house price rises, after all.

Gosh I know what we could do. We could impose a tax on assets that pass on death. Maybe call it something like an “inheritance tax” or to disguise it call it “Capital Acquisitions tax”.

Don’t jump my throat I’m just teasing you :wink:

No worries old bean.

I meant over and above the Death duty.

Basically, I’m thinking that the 40K’d be paid immediately by a middleman, who will later take an inflation-adjusted chunk of the moolah from the estate of the homeowner upon that person’s death.

I reckon many families in this situation will simply club together to pay off the lump sum.