The announced death of the ISF and the tax shield ?!

Current Economy and Sustainable Development-compatible? GDP growth (at all costs), economic development, inflation ... How concillier the current economy with the environment and sustainable development.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 19/11/10, 11:27

Remundo wrote:More we deprive ourselves of tens of other billions who could have returned with fiscal restraint.


Absolutely and this raises the question (worthy of a homework at the ENA or SciencePo?): Does Tax Reduce Growth?
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 19/11/10, 11:38

Hi Christopher,

excellent summary question. The argument can be long, but we know the answer objectively: too much tax kills tax.
0 x
Image
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 19/11/10, 11:56

Right, except that I think the popular quote was truncated, the original being:

"Too much tax kills growth, so taxes"

: Cheesy:

On the other hand, without taxes one would never have been able to build the "public utility" infrastructures necessary for the growth of companies.

But the fact is that for 20 years the tax has been overwhelmingly functional ... major investments in state infrastructure (highway, airport, schools, high schools ...) have become very rare ...

For the rest you know my opinion on the interest on the public debt (40% of taxes) ...

See as well: https://www.econologie.com/forums/fonctionne ... 10068.html
0 x
User avatar
jlt22
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 414
Registration: 04/04/09, 13:37
Location: Guingamp 69 years




by jlt22 » 19/11/10, 12:05

Christophe wrote:

Uh by definition a financial investment generates gains ... and there is indeed a tax on the real estate gain (which should therefore be reinforced).



Of course, but as long as nothing is sold, there is no capital gains tax, and a government will sooner or later realize that the real estate market needs to be streamlined, and will end up seriously cutting back on this tax .
And, there big capital gain and little tax, the rich do not wait for these gains to live and therefore have their time.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972




by Christophe » 19/11/10, 12:11

Whoever buys a building without having it occupied usually loses money (moreover, an unoccupied building degrades faster)

Unless he is aware of a potential and exceptional added value in the neighborhood, and that is called insider trading ... right?
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 19/11/10, 12:23

buying land or buildings is extremely expensive, even for affluent budgets. In addition, this generates regular costs (mainly property tax) and not always revenue worth the investment.

Land and buildings being in limited quantity, and by definition already private property (except for public goods), that cannot move significantly.

Obviously as long as nothing is sold, there is no capital gain, so no taxes. It's logic.

The ISF has managed the tax tour de force to impose each year a speculative value (very imprecise estimate + property bubble) not realized (by the absence of sale).

This wealth tax, if it was transposed on income, would amount to taxing an overvalued and unpaid salary every year.

This shows the level of fiscal viscosity reached. : Idea:

Christophe is right: too much tax kills growth and therefore tax. But with the laxity of public over-indebtedness, France has managed for 30 years to put itself in an impasse. She's not the only one.

What will happen, and at the global level: the devaluation of currencies, including € uro, to "erase" debts.

Except that this time, growth will not come back at a gallop ... because massive and cheap energy is a thing of the past. :?
0 x
Image
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 19/11/10, 12:44

Christophe wrote:
"Too much tax kills growth, so taxes"



You guys know that this is the slogan by which the ultra-liberalists defend the disengagement of the State (School of eMilton Friedman, application: Thatcher and Reagan, now back in England) ...

If that's what you think, go for it!

Without being a Marxist, I note that this also means:

- you pay for your hospital (and the rich have a better hospital than the poor who don't ... not!)

- same for school

- it is also the huge fluctuations on for example the price of wheat (I left taxes, but it is ALSO the same package, that of ultra-liberalism): there again the rich will always eat caviar, the poor will be hungry ...

Etc, I don't want to go any further. It is much more complex. And it is a whole (ultra-liberalism, I mean: no tax = no state = no regulation = full liberal economy ....).

I am simply dismayed to see ultraliberalist theses defended on a site ... econological.

Because ultra-liberalism is ALSO the right to screw up, sell, etc ... nature and resources.

He is not my model. I lived in almost stateless countries (Chad, Niger). I can assure you that it is not the rich who are bothered. And that even a small tax, we will still eat away - check around you.

So it all seems extremely dangerous and completely naive to me.

But hey, everyone has their own opinion.
0 x
bernardd
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2278
Registration: 12/12/09, 10:10
x 1




by bernardd » 19/11/10, 13:02

I don't know how to tell you, but stop talking in a vacuum, go see the real numbers!

http://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/reports.do?node=100000141

Banks have as many outstanding loans as there are money, i.e. around € 16000 billion (table 2.3.1 columns 8 and 9).

This means that they receive the corresponding interest: by estimating an average interest rate of 5%, it is 800G € of interest withdrawn from the economic circuit, that it is necessary to place somewhere.

And necessarily in durable goods, because the bankers are well placed to know real inflation of around 10%, since they are the ones who create it, since the credits are direct monetary creation, without any counterpart.

So not only does the minimum income exist, but only for banks. And they are the first to do sustainable development, for their financial interests.

And in addition, banks water their owners and friends with loans at preferential rates: see the survey on Icelandic banks. http://sic.althingi.is/

If you find this normal, well do not touch anything.

And don't be surprised if there isn't enough left to finance pensions ...
0 x
See you soon !
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 15992
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5188




by Remundo » 19/11/10, 18:17

Banks, banks ...

They only lend to those who are willing to borrow ... The interest rate is the rule of the game between the lender and the borrower.

When it's a welfare state, or even several that do anything, it gives what you describe, Bernardd.

For Did67. It's unbelievable ... As soon as we explain that there is too much tax (in France, we are between 60 and 70% levy on the wealth produced for ordinary employees), we are ultra-liberal. .
0 x
Image

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Economy and finance, sustainability, growth, GDP, ecological tax systems"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 178 guests