The €22bn hole

[hopi watcher]

[quote=Jock_the_Waster;2136415]

Are you supporting the seizing of assets by the state off of people for no other reason than that of possesion?

No, the retrospective taxation of windfall gains. It would go some way to address out black hole.

[sharper]

But it isn't income really, it is wealth.

No. A wealth tax would be taxing them on whatever they have now (I still think that's a bad idea for numerous reasons but that's the difference).

Taxing them on the value of a transaction that happened years ago (and was taxed then) is a retrospective double dip. It would be completely insane and mean that nobody ever knows how much of their money is theirs because the government can always come back and ask for more.

[HarshBuzz]

No. A wealth tax would be taxing them on whatever they have now (I still think that's a bad idea for numerous reasons but that's the difference).

Taxing them on the value of a transaction that happened years ago (and was taxed then) is a retrospective double dip. It would be completely insane and mean that nobody ever knows how much of their money is theirs because the government can always come back and ask for more.

exactly, such a measure would result in massive capital flight. You could never be sure that the Revenue wasn't going to dip into your Post Office account next.

[Kevin Doyle]

We'd survive, but if cuts on this scale don't happen, the country won't.

You introduce cuts of that scale and the country will go down in flames.

[HarshBuzz]

You introduce cuts of that scale and the country will go down in flames.

do you mean literally? violent lot you unions

how would you close the 22bn gap?

[hopi watcher]

exactly, such a measure would result in massive capital flight. You could never be sure that the Revenue wasn't going to dip into your Post Office account next.

The same ole bogeyman, but no it wouldn't, it might actually act as a deterrent to profiteering, something we very badly need.

[DCon]

[quote=hopi watcher;2136435]

No, the retrospective taxation of windfall gains. It would go some way to address out black hole.

and if they stupidly spent their capital gains buying fields in Leitrim and Offaly?

What then? Will you tax the worthless fields?

[HarshBuzz]

apologies to the OP by the way for the resurfacing of the usual mudslinging in this thread. I will have no more part of it here.

also, hopi has joined Hal on my ignore list, a fine collection!

[hopi watcher]

[quote=DCon;2136498]

and if they stupidly spent their capital gains buying fields in Leitrim and Offaly?

What then? Will you tax the worthless fields?

Don't be silly, we are talking about 'windfall gains'; surely that does not pose any challenge to your understanding capacity? Then maybe...

[orbit]

No. A wealth tax would be taxing them on whatever they have now (I still think that's a bad idea for numerous reasons but that's the difference).

Wealth taxes are bad, largely because they are impractical. but the advantage of this scheme is that it's eminently practical. The revenue has all the details for capital gains over the last 10-15 years. On the question of whether it is a (retrospective) transaction tax or a wealth tax is something that could be debated. Like I said earlier, as soon as you start to take account for what happened to the money (eg as in bad property investments) then you are starting to treat it more like wealth.

Taxing them on the value of a transaction that happened years ago (and was taxed then) is a retrospective double dip. It would be completely insane and mean that nobody ever knows how much of their money is theirs because the government can always come back and ask for more.

But that would also be true for a wealth tax. You have no idea how much the rate will be next year, and you can't (in principle) avoid it, without offloading your wealth. I would set this at the kind of level that a wealth tax would be set at (ie. allowing it to be paid over a significant number of years).