The problem those arguing for a 'revival' of Centerism have (this morning Phillip Collins/Observer) is that they draw centrism wide enough to draw in Blairs' Labour & Cameron's Tories.

If that's the liberal centre then its been in power for decades & got us to the stagnating, unequal, failing juncture we have reached.... why would anyone think they now have the answers (other than their feeling of entitlement to govern?) as the are worried less by Reform than the Greens?

#politics #democracy

@ChrisMayLA6

I was struck by this:

"In the 1950s about 70% of manual workers voted Labour and the same percentage of non-manual workers voted Conservative. Today, education and age both predict voting affiliation better than class."

It is an example, I think, of the myopia of centrist or 'liberal' thinking. It misses the point that the current association of education and age with political affiliation comes out of the expansion of higher education in the 60s and 70s, then the generational inequality perpetrated by the single-generation handout of neoliberal privatisation, that has produced a society in the UK (and to some extent elsewhere) in which lots of well-educated young people don't have any assets to fall back on - which is really what being working class means - rather than having a regional accent or liking chips, as 'liberals' would have it - and lots of older people living longer that are less well educated but have both assets and relatively generous pensions.

What is 'social class' supposed to mean if not the difference between having no choice but to keep working all hours for somebody else, or conversely receiving unearned asset income ?

But naturally 'centrists', 'liberals', whatever you call them, must never see this, because if they did they would have to admit the economic interests (in preserving the status-quo) that really lie behind their own supposedly a-historical 'ideas' and 'values'.

@GeofCox

Yes, a really good point... and as you say what centrists are (wilfully) blind to

@ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox

I disagree

(Not with the assessment of how we got here, but with laying the blindness on "liberals)

Every liberal who calls for a #WealthTax (a lot of them) understand the dynamic you mentioned.

Now, "centrists" - yeah they are probably turning a blind eye.

@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox Every liberal who calls for a wealth tax is ignoring the preponderance of evidence that they are largely ineffective in reducing inequality and raise little revenue. What is needed is higher taxes on unearned income and lower taxes on income derived from working

@rpluim @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox

As implemented, with lots of holes, sure the few #WealthTax have barely moved the needle.

And yes, let's tax unearned income more

But the real problem is not income. It's the vast hoards of wealth that underwrite loans and favors - and create an exploitive rentier culture.

Just look at Musk. He has little income (of any type) while sitting on historic wealth.

@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox Whatever the solution to the Musk problem is, confiscation of people's legally acquired wealth cannot be the solution. Of course more investigation into how that wealth was gained might be.

@rpluim @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox

Sorry, are you saying a #WealthTax is "confiscation of people's legally acquired wealth"?

Because lots of places already tax property, cars and boats based on the value of the asset. So, I don't see why that same principle cannot extend to stocks, bonds, art, commodities and other sources of wealth storage.

And yes, of course, we need to look at how great wealth was accumulated and where it is being hidden.
#TaxTheRich

@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox Taxing an object every year after it has been legally acquired because you don't like the type of object it is seems pretty confiscatory to me. Taxing it at purchase is fine.

Property taxes are different, they are intended to fund the provision of local services

@rpluim @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox

So, if we use a recurring annual wealth tax to fund public services (like property taxes do), then that must be OK too.

Let's do that.

@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox That would be fine, if national taxes funded national spending, which they don't. Property taxes fund local spending, and local authorities don't have the same freedom to spend money into existence that governments have, so they have to make their books balance.
@rpluim @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox
Local property taxes are insufficient to support local services. Councils are supported by central government grants paid from national taxation.

@wyliecoyoteuk @rpluim @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox

And thank goodness local services receive funding from the national government.

Otherwise, it's a quick decent into a handful of wealthy enclaves and mass poverty everywhere else.

Well, much worse than it already is.

@rpluim @TCatInReality

This exchange raises many issues. The article argues that 'liberals' and 'centrists' are different terms for the same politics (but prefers 'liberals' as 'centrists' are merely defined by their position in the left-right spectrum. Actually, it's the other way round - the centre is merely the political expression of the status-quo, and it's this that creates the left-right spectrum). What particular policies the centre advocates are different in different times and places. The great European Enlightenment philosophers, like Locke and Voltaire, claimed as the progenitors of liberal democracy, and indeed the US Founding Fathers, were apologists for slavery. So it should not be surprising that in some times and places centrists/liberals support a wealth tax (as, incidentally, does the extreme right here in France).

Having said that, the idea that tax is needed to 'raise revenue' or 'fund services' is another aspect of the false 'household analogy' Chris and I have been discussing in another thread - https://climatejustice.social/@GeofCox/116272097415626100 - ie. it is a centrist conception of tax (which should rather be seen as a mechanism for removing money introduced into the economy by government when it's no longer in useful circulation - as defined by political aims - for example when and where it's accumulation is driving up asset values, whatever the assets may be).

@ChrisMayLA6

@GeofCox @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 I reject the household analogy at the national level, but local taxes fund local spending in many countries, and thus the local books need to balance.

Wealth taxes are an example of what I call "management ideas", where the action is easy to describe "just take 1% of the wealth of people worth more than $x", but the implementation is very difficult, since establishing the value of property, art jewellery etc is both difficult and subjective.

@rpluim @GeofCox @ChrisMayLA6

I reject the notion that #WealthTax is too hard. It is made hard with opaque markets, tax shelters and lack of proper registries.

All can be resolved and any disputed valuations should be appealable (based on comparators)

It is only a question of political will. And saying "too hard" is defeatist.

@TCatInReality @GeofCox @ChrisMayLA6 It's not impossible to implement a wealth tax. It's just that the effort required is such that it would be much more productive to focus on reducing tax evasion and fair taxation of income from wealth. If you need an example, look at the ISF in France, which has existed in various forms for 40 years, has raised almost nothing, and is trivially avoidable if you're rich enough.
@rpluim @TCatInReality @GeofCox @ChrisMayLA6
TC, one example… say I bought a Rembrandt picture last year for $200 million. But now I claim that the provenance has been questioned… it might even be a modern fake. So in my tax return I’m valuing it at $20,000. How much time, money and court cases will it take to resolve this one example? Now multiply that by every asset I own…

@KimSJ @rpluim @TCatInReality @GeofCox

Great example with Rembrandt... because as the current scholarly discussions around hi autograph works play out your wrk bought for $200m, having been rejected from his catalogue & now worth only $20k, might well find its way back into his autograph works & thus gain its value back... so very convenient to time the 'valuation' when the work is in doubt.... which underlines the point about the difficulty of valuation

@ChrisMayLA6 @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

Kim, Prof May
I fear we are debating edge cases and ignoring the much greater potential, but OK...

In your Rembrandt example:
1) valuation could be tied to insurance cover. If you want to insure your possible-Rembrandt for Β£20k, go ahead

2) Tax auditors will look at patterns (as they do now). If an art collector devalues a dozen paintings, that gets investigated as tax fraud.

Like all laws, it works 99% of the time.
#TaxTheRich

@TCatInReality @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

I think 2) is the key issue; we need trusted tax valuers....

but yes, of course, the Rembrandt thought experiment was not the central issue, I agree; but did provide a real world example of how values shift & change

@ChrisMayLA6 @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

Yes, of course we should game out all the scenarios.

But we should also be clear when we are talking about edge cases (eg, I'm a billionaire with a Rembrandt that may be a fake)

A #WealthTax is imminently possible (with political will) and (like all taxes) an industry will grow trying to find/make loopholes. But if we don't start, we'll never get anywhere - and trillions will sit, untaxed, in hidden assets.

#TaxTheRich

1/2

@ChrisMayLA6 @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

To me, the far bigger obstacle to a #WealthTax is the startlingly large number of ways to hide assets

- Freeports
- Corporate ownership
- Tax havens
- Multiple shell companies
- Lack of registries
- Intermediaries
- Noncooperation between countries

That's the real obstacle - and one that should provoke outrage amongst the public and a demand for action.

One estimate has $21-32 trillion in hidden money. #TaxTheRich

2/2

https://taxjustice.net/faq/how-much-money-is-in-tax-havens/

How much money is in tax havens? - Tax Justice Network

An $21 to $32 trillion in financial assets are sitting offshore in tax havens. Due to the secrecy that pervades the tax haven system, precise numbers are hard to come by so estimates can vary. The Tax Justice Network estimates that $427 billion is tax is lost every year to tax havens.

Tax Justice Network

@TCatInReality @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

Yes, all good points & completely concur - the myriad ways of (legally) hiding assets from the taxman is the biggest issue....

@ChrisMayLA6 @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox
The problem is not that wealth taxes are impossible to implement, it’s that they are expensive and unwieldy in practice. Taxing income is far more efficient, especially if we close loopholes like living off loans secured against assets.
@KimSJ @ChrisMayLA6 @TCatInReality @GeofCox Except that "loan secured against asset" describes my mortgage, so the rules would need to be written carefully 😁

@rpluim @KimSJ @ChrisMayLA6 @GeofCox

πŸ’―

There's an old video of Musk on a podcast explaining several ways he avoids "income". Loans against his assets is a big one.

@rpluim @ChrisMayLA6 @TCatInReality @GeofCox
If you receive cash from increasing your mortgage, that *should* be taxed as income. If the money goes to the guy you bought the house from (the usual case) that’s not a income (and if that guy uses it to pay off their mortgage, that’s not income either).

@KimSJ @ChrisMayLA6 @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox no, that's not the problem at all. Taxes on landed property β€” which is a significant subset of wealth β€” are extremely easy to implement and extremely hard to evade.

The problem is that political parties rely on the ultra-rich for their funding, and the ultra-rich don't fund parties that talk about wealth taxes.

https://www.journeyman.cc/blog/posts-output/2014-12-09-me-and-you-and-the-duke-of-buccleuch/

Me and you and the Duke of Buccleuch

I've written before about an exponential land tax. Rather often in fact... Here I want to give a clear account of how it would work, with a computer program (in Clojure) so that you can fiddle with it yourself.The code on this page is live: you can edit it. I recommend that (at least at first) you change only the constant and the exponent.

The Fool on the Hill

@simon_brooke @KimSJ @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox

However, property taxes come up against a couple of issues - firstly, politically, a lot of people in the UK, owning their own houses, always feel a tax on property will see thresholds reduced until they come into the tax-band... and secondly, there is also the issue of finding the 'beneficial owner' unless we re-jig how property ownership is legally recorded.

Which is not say either is insurmountable

@ChrisMayLA6 @KimSJ @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox The beneficial owner problem is trivial. If you can't identify the beneficial owner, you simply take the entire land holding into temporary public stewardship until the beneficial owner identifies themselves, or until the tax due exceeds the value of the holding.

@simon_brooke @KimSJ @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox

Hmmm.... such (temporary) appropriation of land might well see the UK end up in a but of a legal morass; but I'm assuming you'd expect a change in tax law first, and getting that through a political system dominated by landlords (used tossing political creep on laws) seems unlikely

@ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox
Not really a legal problem: if the owner can't be identified, there is no-one to make a Protocol 1 Art.1 ECHR claim of being deprived of their property- if someone makes a claim they've identified themself. Just need to throw some funding to the KLTR & whoever the English equivalent is, as the existing body which deals with unclaimed property.

@HighlandLawyer @ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

Now we're thinking solutions
Love it!

@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox
I have long advocated a "use it or lose it" law for land & buildings: if it is unused for X number of years, the local authority has the right to put it up for public auction, take a fixed percentage of the price as agency fee, & pay the balance to the former owner. Wholly ECHR compliant & removes all incentives to keep properties empty or to engage in "land banking".

@HighlandLawyer @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox I did once mutter a threat of a CPO as chair of a planning committee meeting when the developer was asking for yet another extension to the planning permission for their temporary fence round the site on which they *still* hadn't started building yet.

I was bluffing, of course (the powers do exist in theory but are impossible to exercise in practice) ... but the development did then start before our "final" extension of the temporary permission expired, and there are now people living in the houses.

@HighlandLawyer @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox absolutely! Because one man’s land bank is the community’s brake on development.

@HighlandLawyer @ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

For vacant buildings and land with planning permission, that seems to make sense.

But for greenfield space, I think something else is needed. We need green space and shouldn't create a perverse incentive to build something/anything that generates money. Of course, there needs to be some tax and a way to avoid land hoarding.

@HighlandLawyer @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox @timrichards

This country was developed using Squatters rights.

Squatters and β€œSpeculators” feature heavily in history and AB Patterson and Henry Lawson poems.

@ChrisMayLA6 @simon_brooke @KimSJ @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox
And a surprising amount of the land is this country has no registered owner.
the land registry only goes back to 1862.

@simon_brooke @KimSJ @ChrisMayLA6 @rpluim @GeofCox

Amen!

And that political money is crucial to blocking the political will for a #WealthTax

But some day, it will come down to taxes or pitchforks. And their private islands will eventually run out of supplies.

@TCatInReality @simon_brooke @KimSJ @rpluim @GeofCox

I think I'd like a T-shirt that said:

Tax or Pitchforks

or perhaps:

Tax or Guillotine (for those with a stronger stomach)

A great political summation TC!

thanks

@simon_brooke @ChrisMayLA6 @TCatInReality @rpluim @GeofCox
Yes and no. Valuing a residential property such as you or I might occupy is relatively easy. Enough houses are bought and sold that there is an established value. But what’s the value of 5,000 acres of grouse moor? Or a private island which last changed hands a century ago?
I like the solution that the declared value is an offer to sell to the Government at say 20% more than that value. Undervalue too much and you risk losing it!
@KimSJ @simon_brooke @ChrisMayLA6 @TCatInReality @GeofCox This ties into the ISF, which I mentioned earlier. There were people who had large plots of agricultural land that were re-zoned as residential (by the local council), and as a result the theoretical value of the land massively increased, resulting in a big tax bill. Taxing that land when (if) it's sold to a developer to build houses on seems much fairer.

@KimSJ @ChrisMayLA6 @rpluim @GeofCox

Taxing "income" has been the strategy for a century.

The wealthy know that and have very refined ways to avoid taking income.

It's time for a 21st Century approach to tax - and that is #WealthTax

@rpluim

In the UK at present it's true that council tax funds local expenditure, but this is not true in other countries and easily changed (as we see by the fact that newly created central government funding makes up varying proportions of that local expenditure in the UK too).

The difficulty of implementing wealth taxes is of course a live debate among tax experts, and Richard Murphy for example takes your view. I don't find it convincing - all assets are valued, for example on purchase, for insurance, when a notional value is needed for CGT/IHT, etc...

@TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6

@GeofCox @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 What's the value of a Picasso or a van Gogh? The only way to find out is to sell it. You can set a value on it when someone inherits it, but then what is it worth 50 years later? And if it turns out to be a fake, do you refund 50 years' worth of wealth taxes?

Taxing earnings is just easier to do, and much easier to justify and explain.

@rpluim @GeofCox @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 Interesting you mention Picasso... https://www.addleshawgoddard.com/en/insights/insights-briefings/2024/finance/bringing-investment-creativity-art-world-art-securitisation-what-how-why/
So there's one answer: the tax value is the size of the loan a bank is willing to have secured by the asset.
Art Securitisation – what, how and why? | Addleshaw Goddard LLP

Sotheby's has launched a $500 million art-backed debt instrument, securitising loans against artworks valued at $2.85 billion, including pieces by Rembrandt, Warhol, and Picasso.

Addleshaw Goddard
@rpluim @GeofCox @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 There's also the schadenfreude-maximising option: self-assessment, but with a wrinkle.
The owner submits a value, pays the tax as per that value: no muss, no fuss, no evidence needed.
The wrinkle: the tax body may buy the asset at the owner's stated value (or a little above, I won't quibble a wee bump to keep the taxman honest too); if you play silly buggers with the valuation you get exactly what you claim it's worth and society takes the rest.

@jimmynohands @rpluim @GeofCox @ChrisMayLA6

Love this creative thinking

@TCatInReality @jimmynohands @rpluim @GeofCox @ChrisMayLA6 interesting to think through how that might affect hoarded land and buildings.

There are lots of beautiful old buildings near me that are being left to rot. A lot of people (myself included) believe it's on purpose: after a certain point, it can't be maintained, but could be bulldozed and re-developed.

If registering it for tax purposes opened a route for bringing it into public ownership, they'd either risk lose it for a low price or volunteer extra tax for the privilege of hoarding it.

And if that tax is for local spending, then the local public win either way.

@jimmynohands @rpluim @GeofCox @ChrisMayLA6

Also... a great many of these assets are insured for ... Checking notes ...a determined value.

@GeofCox @rpluim @TCatInReality @ChrisMayLA6 Thanks for this, and your previous post regarding class. It's articulated very well things I've thought about for a while and been unable to define.