this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2024
1113 points (98.9% liked)

World News

39096 readers
2706 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Multiple parties are jockeying for position in the aftermath of France's seismic snap election. The leftist New Popular Front (NPF) insists its ideas should be implemented.

France's left wing New Popular Front (NPF) - now the largest group in parliament - has called for a prime minister who will implement its ideas including a new wealth tax and petrol price controls.

The leftist alliance secured the most seats in the recent French elections but fell short of the 289 needed for a majority in the National Assembly, France's lower house of parliament.

President Emmanuel Macron's Together bloc came in second and Marine Le Pen's far-right National Rally (RN) party finished third.

France's parties are now jockeying for position and it's unclear exactly how things will shake out, but the NPF has insisted it will implement its radical set of ideas.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 85 points 4 months ago (5 children)

I will enjoy hearing about how the rich will just move away from their fancy mansions on the Riviera and their suites in Paris to avoid paying this tax and then seeing it not happen.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 20 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Some of them, sure, but I wonder how many would consider it worth the price. This is an income taxe I'm assuming, so it's not like they'd lose out on actual wealth, investments, etc.

It might be worth it if even just half stay and pay the taxe.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago (6 children)

That was my point- they won't leave. They like living there too much. That's just always the excuse when such taxes are proposed for not doing them. "The rich will all just leave."

[–] not_woody_shaw@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If it's successful presumably other places will start to follow suit. Somebody's gotta go first tho.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

It wasn't done nationally, but the U.S. state of Massachusetts did it recently and it was quite successful.

Once again, the rich people with their Boston penthouses and Cape Cod beach homes didn't want to leave.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/massachusetts-millionaires-tax-free-lunch-every-kid/

They raised $1 billion off of the relatively small number of rich people living in that state when the U.S. as a whole is taken into account.

There's just no question to me that such taxes work. And the more places you implement them, the harder it will be to escape them.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 months ago

I never understood this argument. As a middle class person, I would highly prefer if all rich people left.

They are the ones hording the wealth.

Wealth is generated by applying labour to natural resources, that process doesn’t really include rich people, they just gate the resources.

[–] Wxnzxn@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

While I agree, they most certainly will still try their damnedest to avoid it. From illegal stuff like tax fraud, to trying stuff like officially "moving" their workplace to a tax haven, while still living in France. There would definitely be more class warfare to be had, even after this were to pass (which they of course will fight tooth and nail against)

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No doubt. The rich can afford to pay people to find every loophole and take advantage of everything they can take advantage of. But I'm still glad this is happening.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago

And it doesn't have to work perfectly to be worth it. Even if through rich-person fuckery they manage to stuff their (overseas) mattresses with hidden income, I'd bet the net result would be more €€€ in the public coffres.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 4 months ago

Ah I misunderstood. I see we're in total agreement.

Still glad I made my comment, if only as a foil against general doomerism.

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Even if rich leave, so what? They dont have to pay taxes for shit and what little they do have to pay they will just avoid anyway.

[–] not_woody_shaw@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Real estate prices go down a little? It's hard to see a downside.

[–] d00phy@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think I’ve had this conversation with you before. Anyone who uses the “they’ll just leave” argument as a reason not to do it simply isn’t arguing in good faith.

This is a good start, for sure, but it should not be the end at all. The wealthier people get, the more effort they put into hiding/keeping that wealth.

Income/wealth/property/capital gains taxation is a balancing act. You want everyone paying their share; and everyone simultaneously agrees with that notion, while wanting to pay the absolute least for themselves. I would also argue that people need to see the benefits of that taxation in the form of maintained infrastructure and properly funded services. If it all just goes into the pockets of, e.g., the US military industrial complex, people will be less inclined to pay taxes at all.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Entirely possible. I've certainly discussed this topic multiple times. And yes, agreed, we need to do a lot more to curb excessive wealth.

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Why would they move? This is an income tax, not a wealth tax and the wealthy typically have relatively little "income". Sure they may have a net worth of tens, hundreds, or even thousands of millions but their "incomes" (as defined by tax codes) can be surprisingly low.

Look at the CEOs like Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos whose salary was a single US dollar. They were incredibly wealthy but had nearly no normal income.

So unless you jigger the tax code to capture the work arounds the wealthy use this income tax will hardly touch them. It will only catch high wage earners, like a software dev working FAANG or something.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I guess that's an argument for also having a wealth tax.

Because most of them still won't move. Paris will not become a less desirable city to live in.

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 1 points 4 months ago

I guess that’s an argument for also having a wealth tax.

I think it would be easier if they rewrote the tax code so that everything (loans, stock sales, etc) counted as regular income and was subject to taxes.

[–] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Paris will not become a less desirable city to live in.

Was it ever desirable?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The city of light? The city of love? Famed for its art and culture and cuisine? Full of beautiful architecture?

No, no one ever wants to go there.

[–] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Have you ever been there or just seen the photos?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I get that you don't like Paris, but there's a reason why a lot of rich people live there and it isn't because it's a terrible place.

[–] jumjummy@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Problem is that the Uber wealthy have all sorts of extra tax vehicles that even the 400k/year income folks don’t have. With various holding companies owning the various assets you use (e.g your car, house, etc.) your on-paper income can be quite a bit lower. Throw in various deductions and that’s how you get super wealthy people paying less taxes than “regular” people. Progressive tax rates already exist, and while this increases the percentage at these incomes, unless it addresses all the other loopholes, this will conveniently miss the 1% and instead impact high earning professionals.

[–] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 2 points 4 months ago

Besides, the mere fact of implementing those tax rates makes high end luxury homes less valuable, because rich people from abroad will have less incentives to want to move there. So, if rich French people want to move from a very expensive home in France to a very expensive home in Germany, the new one will have to be less luxurious, because they won't be able to sell the old one for that much.

[–] sparky@lemmy.federate.cc 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

This does actually happen more than you think - it’s why all the world’s football and tennis stars miraculously decide to move to Monte Carlo as soon as they hit the riches. Which is exactly why we need a coordinated tax policy at an EU, EEA or global level, to make sure that you can’t just choose a neighbouring country and pay an order of magnitude less.