this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2025
136 points (100.0% liked)

Europe

7777 readers
508 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A left-wing bloc made up of the Socialist, Communist, Green parties and the hard-left France Unbowed had proposed a minimum 2 per cent tax on wealth over €100 million (S$150 million), dubbed the “Zucman tax” after the French economist who devised it.

Mr Lecornu expressed his “profound disagreement” with the wealth-tax proposal, insisting there was no such thing as a “miracle tax”.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yachts, private jets, luxury cars - there are a lot of products for which such a 'luxury VAT' could be an idea imo. Some European countries had that after WWII, but then abandoned it in the 1980s or so. I don't have list of products for which it could apply, and no list is perfect, but it would be part of the solution imho.

[–] theolodis@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Ok, if you limit it to yachts and private jets, I ould see it only hit the super rich, but then again, why not both? Why limit ourselves to one way of getting the wealthy contribute their share to society?

[–] Hotznplotzn@lemmy.sdf.org -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What is 'fair'?

If the 'wealthy' consume more - and more luxury goods - they would automatically pay more taxes, and the administrative costs of consumption taxation are much lower than they are in an income tax regime.

A consumption tax would also reduce the headache of low economic growth, which limits the income tax of the state in the long term.

A consumption tax is also 'fairer' in that under an income tax regime, savers pay more tax than consumers. Suppose we have a consumer and a saver with the same annual earnings. In an income tax regime, the consumer (who spends the money right away) pays tax only once when income is earned. The saver, however, pays not only once when the income is earned but also later on the income on the saved earnings (interest rates, dividends). So those who save (and invest) pay more taxes than those who spend their money right away.

Taxation on income (and capital gains) are often justified with the fact that the wealthy save more than the poor, so it is only fair that they pay more taxes, many say. In addition, it is often said that more wealth goes hand in hand with more economic power and political influence. Although these arguments have some validity, they do not address the core task of taxation. And, more importantly, they ignore the fact that social and political equality must be addressed primarily by other means such as transparency in political decision making, open public discourse, direct democracy, and other instruments.

Instead of taxing income and capital gains we could, for example, apply the consumption principle to the taxation not of wealth but wealth transfer since giving assets to heirs is, in fact, some form of consumption. This would ease the various troubles associated with all forms of income taxes, and would help to create a 'fairer' society.

[–] theolodis@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago

To define what is fair, we have to define what fair is. Is fair equality, or equity?

In my opinion it's equity. So while you might say "if everybody pays 2%, that's fair!" I'd argue that if you have 100.000€ you should pay a far smaller percentage in taxes, than somebody having 100.000.000€. Because we consider that the basic needs for everybody will be around the same amount, that means that if the poor pay the same percentage of taxes as the rich, they will have enough to cover the basic needs (in the best case), but their ability to afford luxury will be reduced.

At the same time, if you tax the poor 1% while taxing the rich 60%, the poor will have a far better life, while the rich will probably not even feel the difference, beside some numbers going down in a banking app.