The richest 1% in the Netherlands pay relatively less tax than everyone else and their incomes have risen more sharply, according to new calculations by the government’s macro-economic forecasting agency CPB. Earlier research, based on figures from 2016, showed that people on the highest incomes pay less tax and the new figures, based on the period 2011 to 2019, paint a similar picture. The very richest, or 0.01% of the population, paid a tax rate of some 28%, well below the 40% paid by people with average incomes...
Well they’d argue that the money they put in is taxed, presumably because it was income and subject to income tax. So any income used to assess tax, they’d argue is taxed.
I’d just argue any income (including from capital gains) should be taxed according to your wealth. I don’t care if it has already been assessed for tax. If it’s income, and you already have excessive wealth, you should be paying a hefty tax. The point of taxes is redistribution of wealth and communal improvement (eg infrastructure) so I really don’t care if something is taxed once twice or more times, I care that wealth is taxed and used for public good.
Capital gains taxes are only levied against the profit earned from investment, not the gross value returned to the stakeholder.
If someone buys a stock for $100, then later sells it for $150, only $50 is taxed. So the money that was “already taxed” by income taxes isn’t being double taxed at all, regardless of the rate of the capital gains tax.
Unless, of course, you count the fact that it was taxed as income by the person who gave it to you, in which case all money has been taxed numerous times before and the argument is that taxes in general are bad.
Yeah, I think in general people come up with veiled reasons for lower taxes but fundamentally it’s just because they don’t want to pay taxes at all.
I like taxes. I like having roads (though I want more public transportation), I like having firefighters and public parks and protected green spaces and…
The double tax argument is dumb because the money you’ve put in is not taxed, thus the capital gain.
So there is no double tax because only the portion that wasn’t taxed is.
Well they’d argue that the money they put in is taxed, presumably because it was income and subject to income tax. So any income used to assess tax, they’d argue is taxed.
I’d just argue any income (including from capital gains) should be taxed according to your wealth. I don’t care if it has already been assessed for tax. If it’s income, and you already have excessive wealth, you should be paying a hefty tax. The point of taxes is redistribution of wealth and communal improvement (eg infrastructure) so I really don’t care if something is taxed once twice or more times, I care that wealth is taxed and used for public good.
Capital gains taxes are only levied against the profit earned from investment, not the gross value returned to the stakeholder.
If someone buys a stock for $100, then later sells it for $150, only $50 is taxed. So the money that was “already taxed” by income taxes isn’t being double taxed at all, regardless of the rate of the capital gains tax.
Unless, of course, you count the fact that it was taxed as income by the person who gave it to you, in which case all money has been taxed numerous times before and the argument is that taxes in general are bad.
Yeah, I think in general people come up with veiled reasons for lower taxes but fundamentally it’s just because they don’t want to pay taxes at all.
I like taxes. I like having roads (though I want more public transportation), I like having firefighters and public parks and protected green spaces and…