French Government Plans 75% Tax Rate on the Rich

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • BigBadBrian
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    • Jan 2004
    • 10625

    French Government Plans 75% Tax Rate on the Rich

    LINK

    PARIS — The call to Vincent Grandil’s Paris law firm began like many others that have rolled in recently. On the line was the well-paid chief executive of one of France’s most profitable companies, and he was feeling nervous.

    Some rich citizens have already left. In recent years, the actress and model Laetitia Casta, the chef Alain Ducasse and the singer and actor Johnny Hallyday all moved away to avoid high taxes.
    President François Hollande is vowing to impose a 75 percent tax on the portion of anyone’s income above a million euros ($1.24 million) a year. “Should I be preparing to leave the country?” the executive asked Mr. Grandil.

    The lawyer’s counsel: Wait and see. For now, at least.

    “We’re getting a lot of calls from high earners who are asking whether they should get out of France,” said Mr. Grandil, a partner at Altexis, which specializes in tax matters for corporations and the wealthy. “Even young, dynamic people pulling in 200,000 euros are wondering whether to remain in a country where making money is not considered a good thing.”

    A chill is wafting over France’s business class as Mr. Hollande, the country’s first Socialist president since François Mitterrand in the 1980s, presses a manifesto of patriotism to “pay extra tax to get the country back on its feet again.” The 75 percent tax proposal, which Parliament plans to take up in September, is ostensibly aimed at bolstering French finances as Europe’s long-running debt crisis intensifies.

    But because there are relatively few people in France whose income would incur such a tax — perhaps no more than 30,000 in a country of 65 million — the gains might contribute but a small fraction of the 33 billion euros in new revenue the government wants to raise next year to help balance the budget.

    The French finance ministry did not respond to requests for an estimate of the revenue the tax might raise. Though the amount would be low, some analysts note that a tax hit on the rich would provide political cover for painful cuts Mr. Hollande may need to make next year in social and welfare programs that are likely to be far less popular with the rank and file.

    In that regard, the tax could have enormous symbolic value as a blow for egalité, coming from a new president who has proclaimed, “I don’t like the rich.”

    “French people have an uncomfortable relationship with money,” Mr. Grandil said. “Here, someone who is a self-made man, creating jobs and ending up as a millionaire, is viewed with suspicion. This is big cultural difference between France and the United States.”

    Many companies are studying contingency plans to move high-paid executives outside of France, according to consultants, lawyers, accountants and real estate agents — who are highly protective of their clients and decline to identify them by name. They say some executives and wealthy people have already packed up for destinations like Britain, Belgium, Switzerland and the United States, taking their taxable income with them.

    They also know of companies — start-ups and multinationals alike — that are delaying plans to invest in France or to move employees or new hires here.

    Whether many wealthy residents will actually leave and companies will change their plans, of course, remains to be seen. Some of the criticism could be political posturing, aimed at trying to dissuade the government from going through with the planned tax increase.

    But some wealthy people left after Mr. Mitterrand raised taxes in the 1980s. And more recently, the former Victoria’s Secret model Laetetia Casta, the restaurateur Alain Ducasse and the singer Johnny Hallyday caused a stir by moving to countries just across the border to escape the French treasury’s heavy hand.

    There is no question Mr. Hollande is under fiscal pressure. He has pledged to reduce France’s budget deficit, currently 4.5 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, to 3 percent by next year, to meet euro zone rules.

    The matter of how best to hit that target, though, is as much a political question as a fiscal one. Mr. Hollande was elected in May on a wave of resentment against “les riches” — company executives, bankers, sports stars and celebrities whose paychecks tend to be seen as scandalous in a country where the growing divide between rich and poor touches a cultural nerve whose roots predate Robespierre.

    Half the nation’s households earn less than 19,000 euros a year; only about 10 percent of households earn more than 60,000 euros annually, according to the French statistics agency, Insee.

    There is currently no plan to change the tax rates for most people, which is 14 percent for the poorest and 30 percent for the next rung. For higher earners — people with incomes above 70,830 euros a year — the tax rate will soon rise to 44 percent, up from 41, in a change that was already set before Mr. Hollande’s election.

    A tax accountant in Paris with many wealthy clients, Steve Horton, has calculated that a two-parent, two-child household with taxable annual income of a bit more than 2.22 million euros ($2.75 million) now has after-tax take-home pay of about 1.1 million euros ($1.35 million) under France’s current tax system.

    That household would end up with 780,000 euros, or $966,000, if the Hollande tax took effect, Mr. Horton says. (The same family, with comparable income in Manhattan, would take home $1.55 million, the dollar equivalent of 1.25 million euros, after paying federal, state and city income taxes, he calculated.)

    Taxes are high in France for a reason: they pay for one of Europe’s most generous social welfare systems and a large government. As Mr. Hollande has described it, the tax plan is about “justice,” and “sending out a signal, a message of social cohesion.”

    That struck a chord with voters angry about the wealth divide. And it is supported by some economists, including Thomas Piketty, a professor at the Paris School of Economics, who has conducted studies indicating that high earners will not work less hard if taxed more. But some say France could send out the wrong signal.

    “People have an acceptable amount of taxes they are willing to pay,” said Mr. Horton, the accountant, “and if it goes above that, they will move somewhere that’s more reasonable.”

    “The thing French politicians don’t seem to understand or care about is that when you tax away two-thirds of someone’s earnings to appeal to voters, productive people who can enrich businesses and the economy won’t come — or they will just leave,” said Diane Segalen, a corporate headhunter.

    She said she had been close to sealing a deal for a seasoned executive in London to join one of France’s biggest companies earlier this year, when Mr. Hollande made his 75 percent vow.

    “When the guy heard that, he said, ‘I’m not coming,’ and withdrew from the process,” said Mrs. Segalen, the head of the Segalen et Associés, a consulting firm.

    For Mrs. Segalen, the proposal is the latest red flag in a country that has long labored under the image of being a difficult place to do business. France has a 33 percent corporate tax rate — the euro zone’s second-highest, after Malta’s 35 percent. That contrasts with the 12.5 percent rate in Ireland, which has deliberately kept a lid on corporate taxes as a lure to businesses.

    “It is a ridiculous proposal, but it’s great for us,” said Jean Dekerchove, the manager of Immobilièr Le Lion, a high-end real estate agency based in Brussels. Calls to his office have picked up in recent months, he said, as wealthy French citizens look to invest or simply move across the border amid worries about the latest tax.

    “It’s a huge loss for France because people and businesses come to Belgium and bring their wealth with them,” Mr. Dekerchove said. “But we’re thrilled because they create jobs, they buy houses and spend money — and it’s our economy that profits.”
    “If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush
  • BigBadBrian
    TOASTMASTER GENERAL
    • Jan 2004
    • 10625

    #2
    Liberals, Bleeding Hearts, and other morons on the left, is this what you want?
    “If bullshit was currency, Joe Biden would be a billionaire.” - George W. Bush

    Comment

    • Nickdfresh
      SUPER MODERATOR

      • Oct 2004
      • 49570

      #3
      No, I want them to pay what middle class earners pay and have their bullshit tax shelters rescinded...

      Besides, it's only a "proposal," not becoming law....

      Comment

      • binnie
        DIAMOND STATUS
        • May 2006
        • 19145

        #4
        I am certainly on the left, but I think any tax rate above 50% on individuals is too much.

        In the UK it works like this (I may be slightly out here as the bands move quite a lot):

        £ 0-8,300 : no tax.
        £ 8,300 - 43,000 : 22.5% tax
        £ 43,000 - 150,000 : 40% tax
        £150,000 and more: 45% tax (previously 50% but recently lowered).

        Admitedly, that doesn't take into accout national insurance. Consequently, the more you earn the more you pay in tax (in theory) and those at the very lowest incomes pay little tax. To put it into persepctive, the average full time wage in the UK is £26,000 per year, which equates to around £3982 in income tax and a further £1942 National Insurance. It's only really when you start to get over £43,000 that it starts to hurt. Personally, I have no problem with the 40-50% tax rate. I do, however, think that the boundary for the 40% is too low - £43,000 doesn't go too far these days given house prices etc. But it's not likely to be raised any time soon.

        The issue with higher rate tax payers is that there are so many loopholes to avoid paying it. The French can try and implement 75% at the higher end, but they'll find that many people who earn that kind of bank - over $1million for fuck's sake - suddenly register their companies elsewhere, or re-negotiate their contracts so that they are not employees but consultants.
        The Power Of The Riff Compels Me

        Comment

        • WACF
          Crazy Ass Mofo
          • Jan 2004
          • 2920

          #5
          Wow....22.5% then a jump to 40%...that is nuts.

          People below the poverty line should be exempt from tax.

          Comment

          • Angel
            ROTH ARMY SUPREME
            • Jan 2004
            • 7481

            #6
            Originally posted by WACF
            People below the poverty line should be exempt from tax.
            I agree 100%. I'm not paying any taxes right now, but that's only because I'm in school.
            "Ya know what they say about angels... An angel is a supernatural being or spirit, usually humanoid in form, found in various religions and mythologies. Plus Roth fan boards..."- ZahZoo April 2013

            Comment

            • jhale667
              DIAMOND STATUS
              • Aug 2004
              • 20929

              #7
              Originally posted by BigBlandBrianna
              Blah, blah blah, I'm a miserable fuckbag filled with hatred of myself and others...
              Here's a question for the heartless zealot conservatard idiot... are you OK with Wrongney's plan to raise YOUR taxes to give yet another tax break to the wealthy?
              Originally posted by conmee
              If anyone even thinks about deleting the Muff Thread they are banned.... no questions asked.

              That is all.

              Icon.
              Originally posted by GO-SPURS-GO
              I've seen prominent hypocrite liberal on this site Jhale667


              Originally posted by Isaac R.
              Then it's really true??

              The Muff Thread is really just GONE ???

              OMFG...who in their right mind...???
              Originally posted by eddie78
              I was wrong about you, brother. You're good.

              Comment

              • binnie
                DIAMOND STATUS
                • May 2006
                • 19145

                #8
                Originally posted by WACF
                Wow....22.5% then a jump to 40%...that is nuts.

                People below the poverty line should be exempt from tax.
                The question is what defines the poverty line? At what point does someone's income drop them into that category?

                It works the other way, too. At what point does someone become 'rich'? Many people who I consider to be 'rich' probably wouldn't consider themselves to be. Let's use the UK £26,000 average income as an example - if someone earns double that (£52K, 200% of the average) are they 'rich'? Certainly be a statistical definition, but not a social one, surely? Treble it - £76K, 300% of the average. It's a high wage by anyone's definition, but still not as much as the most basic doctor gets paid. So are all doctors 'rich'? I'm guessing that they wouldn't think so, or the lawyers and accountants who make similar amounts.

                The point I'm making is that everyone can agree with 'tax the rich' and 'exempt the poor' becomes 'rich' and 'poor' are emotive terms. But those statements don't really mean all that much when you break it down. The definitions are purely arbrtrary.
                The Power Of The Riff Compels Me

                Comment

                • vandeleur
                  ROTH ARMY SUPREME
                  • Sep 2009
                  • 9865

                  #9
                  What boils my piss about tax , and it's a shitty subject at the best of times is two fold .. One ,this is the biggy .these companies like voda phone , Barclays etc ... Enormous companies paying little taxes ... But they have sleazed themselves so far into the systems hierarchy that they daren't touch them . And two these fuck off millionaire celebrities who are using loop holes that aren't designed for working people so were obviously designed to allow these people to squirrel away there filthy lucre ..... And the Ones that are caught are the tip Of the ice burg , And I know the argument is u would do it if you could get away with it but am not sure I would .
                  Everyone is screaming the economic system is in melt down and there isn't any money to fix it but the solutions are apparent except no government has the courage to face it .
                  fuck your fucking framing

                  Comment

                  • Satan
                    ROTH ARMY ELITE
                    • Jan 2004
                    • 6664

                    #10
                    Originally posted by BigBadBrian
                    Liberals, Bleeding Hearts, and other morons on the left, is this what you want?
                    If a Devil remembers correctly, the US was doing rather well, economically speaking, when your Republican President Mr. Eisenhower had a tax rate of 91% on the rich. Built the Interstate Highway System, didn't he?

                    Your country is in desperate need of infrastructure building on that level right now, but the money isn't there to pay for it, because corporations and bastards like Willard Mittens Romney are not paying their fair share.
                    Eternally Under the Authority of Satan

                    Originally posted by Sockfucker
                    I've been in several mental institutions but not in Bakersfield.

                    Comment

                    • Satan
                      ROTH ARMY ELITE
                      • Jan 2004
                      • 6664

                      #11
                      Eternally Under the Authority of Satan

                      Originally posted by Sockfucker
                      I've been in several mental institutions but not in Bakersfield.

                      Comment

                      • WACF
                        Crazy Ass Mofo
                        • Jan 2004
                        • 2920

                        #12
                        Originally posted by binnie
                        The question is what defines the poverty line? At what point does someone's income drop them into that category?

                        It works the other way, too. At what point does someone become 'rich'? Many people who I consider to be 'rich' probably wouldn't consider themselves to be. Let's use the UK £26,000 average income as an example - if someone earns double that (£52K, 200% of the average) are they 'rich'? Certainly be a statistical definition, but not a social one, surely? Treble it - £76K, 300% of the average. It's a high wage by anyone's definition, but still not as much as the most basic doctor gets paid. So are all doctors 'rich'? I'm guessing that they wouldn't think so, or the lawyers and accountants who make similar amounts.

                        The point I'm making is that everyone can agree with 'tax the rich' and 'exempt the poor' becomes 'rich' and 'poor' are emotive terms. But those statements don't really mean all that much when you break it down. The definitions are purely arbrtrary.
                        I guess what I am looking at for brackets is that £43000 is a tad under $67000 CDN....40% is high.

                        I totaly understand higher incomes can take a higher tax threshold but....a jump like that attacks people that may have made a choice of being a police officer, fire fighter, nurse, miners ect...versus working at the lumber yard 9-5.

                        I just don't agree with it being so high.

                        These are Canada's Federal rates for 2012

                        •15% on the first $42,707 of taxable income, +
                        •22% on the next $42,707 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income over $42,707 up to $85,414), +
                        •26% on the next $46,992 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income over $85,414 up to $132,406), +
                        •29% of taxable income over $132,406.

                        Much more palatable for my tastes...

                        As far as determining what the poverty line is I don't have a good answer.

                        If you remove low income people from the tax roll though you may create less working poor...and like Angel commented...students trying to get ahead.
                        There is a situation too where some people at the bottom end just do not see the point of working...we need to give a hand up rather than push down.

                        You posed a good question.

                        Comment

                        • vandeleur
                          ROTH ARMY SUPREME
                          • Sep 2009
                          • 9865

                          #13
                          Canuck brackets seen fairer than uk ones ...... But am guessing the grass is always greener
                          fuck your fucking framing

                          Comment

                          • binnie
                            DIAMOND STATUS
                            • May 2006
                            • 19145

                            #14
                            Originally posted by WACF
                            I guess what I am looking at for brackets is that £43000 is a tad under $67000 CDN....40% is high.

                            I totaly understand higher incomes can take a higher tax threshold but....a jump like that attacks people that may have made a choice of being a police officer, fire fighter, nurse, miners ect...versus working at the lumber yard 9-5.
                            .
                            I agree, but the money has to come from somewhere and I'm a lot better off than most (at the moment).

                            For reference, in the UK you would have to be a pretty senior nurse to make that kind of bank. Also, a middle-ranking police officer or fire fighter would be at that level, but not lower levels. Teachers wouldn't make it unless they went into management at some level.

                            But yes, higher taxes do penalise those who are successful. That being said, I think most people can stomach 40% because of what we get back re: healthcare and other government services.
                            The Power Of The Riff Compels Me

                            Comment

                            • binnie
                              DIAMOND STATUS
                              • May 2006
                              • 19145

                              #15
                              Originally posted by vandeleur
                              Canuck brackets seen fairer than uk ones ...... But am guessing the grass is always greener
                              I think that's the case.

                              What pisses me off about UK tales more than anything else are sales taxes. They are unfair because they hit lower earners disproportionately, and I think it makes the price of life ridiculous. Lower VAT and fuel duties would be my 'magic wand' moment.....
                              The Power Of The Riff Compels Me

                              Comment

                              Working...