Two-thirds of millionaires left Britain to avoid 50p tax rate

[gobiggergoredder]

I believe the title is misleading, but it is still worth a look. It would be interesting to see what we could learn from others.....we won't.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9707029/Two-thirds-of-millionaires-left-Britain-to-avoid-50p-tax-rate.html

[carlfense]

Meh.

But even in those cases, researchers haven’t found much evidence that millionaires flee in the face of high taxes. Roger Cohen, Andrew Lai, and Charles Steindel at the New Jersey Department of the Treasury and Cristobal Young and Charles Varner of Stanford released studies in 2011 and 2012, respectively, evaluating the effects of New Jersey’s millionaire tax, which governor Jim McGreevey signed into law in 2004.

<snip>

What’s more, it’s not clear that any effects the British law had would be relevant for the U.S. tax discussion. Even if the top income tax rate went back up to 39.6 percent, that would still be lower than that of most European countries, which would leave potential tax exiles fewer places to flee. Countries with unusually high rates, by contrast, have more to worry about.

http://www.washingto...oid-high-taxes/

[gobiggergoredder]

I'm sure in you're carlfenselike diligence you went ahead and just read a few of the headlines that your boy Dylan Matthews has authored over the last month. If you didn't, I have provided a link.

 

http://www.washingto...7AyoW_page.html

[carlfense]

I'm sure in you're carlfenselike diligence you went ahead and just read a few of the headlines that your boy Dylan Matthews has authored over the last month . . .

Actually I had just read the article that showed up in my Google Reader feed this morning. (Wonkblog included . . . everyone should read it.)

 

Which headlines or articles would you like to discuss? Or perhaps you'd prefer that we all just believe that correlation actually does imply causation.

 

 

Edit: Phone.

[carlfense]

Also, your link doesn't seem to work at the moment.

 

If you find a different version, let me know because there is nothing quite as fascinating as watching foreign partisan hacks attacking other foreign partisan hacks and acting like it's applicable to US politics.

[BigRedBuster]

I couldn't open the first article and read most of Carl's first article.

 

I am sure there is a point where very rich people will leave a place for lower taxes. Is that at 40%, 50% 75%????? Who knows and that level is going to be different for everyone. AND, there will be a lot of them that stay right where their at because this is their country and where they grew up and where their family is.

 

That said, I am more concerned about manufacturing that individual millionaires. If you are a multinational company, tax laws play a big part in where you locate manufacturing facilities. This goes along with any type of regulation.

 

Bring manufacturing back to the US and tax revenue will go through the roof without hardly doing anything to tax rates.

 

I still believe there should be a law on what percentage of a person's income the government can take in taxes. The rich need to pay their share of the taxes. HOWEVER, I believe there is a moral limit to what the government can take away from anyone no matter if that person makes $20,000 or $20,000,000.

[knapplc]

We also need to have someone to buy the products that are being manufactured, and the vast majority of those purchasers are the Middle Class. Without a healthy middle class with money in their pockets, this economy will never move forward.

 

Definitely agree about the cap on total percentage the government should be able to take. While Americans need to realize that paying taxes is a necessary evil, our government needs to make the most out of our money. When they can either simply raise taxes or print more money to fix their problems, we all lose.

[carlfense]

I am sure there is a point where very rich people will leave a place for lower taxes. Is that at 40%, 50% 75%????? Who knows and that level is going to be different for everyone. AND, there will be a lot of them that stay right where their at because this is their country and where they grew up and where their family is.

It didn't seem to be a problem when our highest income tax rate was 91%.

 

For what it's worth I don't think the tax rates should be anywhere near that point. The top rates should return to Clinton-era rates.

[TGHusker]

I couldn't open the first article and read most of Carl's first article.

 

I am sure there is a point where very rich people will leave a place for lower taxes. Is that at 40%, 50% 75%????? Who knows and that level is going to be different for everyone. AND, there will be a lot of them that stay right where their at because this is their country and where they grew up and where their family is.

 

That said, I am more concerned about manufacturing that individual millionaires. If you are a multinational company, tax laws play a big part in where you locate manufacturing facilities. This goes along with any type of regulation.

 

Bring manufacturing back to the US and tax revenue will go through the roof without hardly doing anything to tax rates.

 

I still believe there should be a law on what percentage of a person's income the government can take in taxes. The rich need to pay their share of the taxes. HOWEVER, I believe there is a moral limit to what the government can take away from anyone no matter if that person makes $20,000 or $20,000,000.

 

Agreed on both points 1. limit to max govt can tax individual - less we end up living under tyranny 2. Manufacturing: During WW2 we manufactured 94% approx of what we consumed in the USA. Our manufacturing base as been the greatest casualty of this "new world order" and with it - higher paying jobs. Manufacturing is the backbone to any economy - it not only drives salaries but it feeds so many other sectors - from the cafes near the manufacturing plants, housing demands, and all of the associated vendors/suppliers that support a manufacturer. We need a tax policy with incentives that reward businesses to bring back manufacturing jobs to the USA. We also need to have a tax structure that allows foreign manufactures to set up shop here as well. I believe we have the highest or one of the highest corp income taxes in the world - that is not an incentive. We also need a fair playing field with other countries. Tax, VAT, Tariffs all place USA manufacturing at a disadvantage. In many cases, it is more profitable for a USA manufacturer to set up shop in SE Asia, for example, and import the product back into the USA verse manufacturing it here. In the same, it is not as cost effiient to export a product to SE Asia versus building a plant there and selling what is manufactured there. GM has found that to be true - some of the bail out money they received was used to create new plants in China - providing jobs there instead of in the USA.

[carlfense]

In many cases, it is more profitable for a USA manufacturer to set up shop in SE Asia, for example, and import the product back into the USA verse manufacturing it here.

We'll be competitive as soon as we convince our factory workers to accept $1.36 per hour in wages. Until then . . . don't expect those jobs to return.

 

It's not because of VAT, corporate tax rates, or tariffs. It's because workers in China, Bangladesh, etc. will do the same work at a fraction of the cost. I don't see an easy solution to that problem.

[TGHusker]

In many cases, it is more profitable for a USA manufacturer to set up shop in SE Asia, for example, and import the product back into the USA verse manufacturing it here.

We'll be competitive as soon as we convince our factory workers to accept $1.36 per hour in wages. Until then . . . don't expect those jobs to return.

 

It's not because of VAT, corporate tax rates, or tariffs. It's because workers in China, Bangladesh, etc. will do the same work at a fraction of the cost. I don't see an easy solution to that problem.

Give tax breaks to compensate for the labor challenges. Ease up on some of the regulations. I would think we could come up wt some comprehensive plan that would help our manufacturing base beyond cutting wages to $1.36.

As in the Hostess Cake situation, the unions need to be realistic as well with their salary demands. On the flip side, senior mgmt compensation/bonus should be balanced with other labor costs. Insentives from the govt should be matched by union/mgmt compessation package that is fair. Not sure how that would work, I sure don't want the govt to set the salaries for anyone in the private sector - slippery slope to real communism. Perhaps some forumula that if you want govt tax/regulation concessions there would be some range of salary ratios for a certain # of years.

[TGHusker]

By the way, If you were that billionaire and desired to leave the USA for a tax haven - where would you go?

 

I love the mtns too much not to pass up Switzerland. Once I got there, I would run for parliment and seek to rename the country Osborneland.

 

 

http://www.businesspundit.com/12-countries-with-the-highest-lowest-tax-rates/

[carlfense]

Give tax breaks to compensate for the labor challenges.

What do you propose to replace the lost revenue?

 

Ease up on some of the regulations.

Which regulations?

 

As in the Hostess Cake situation, the unions need to be realistic as well with their salary demands.

Do you think that being upset about a cut in pay from $48,000 to $25,000 is an unrealistic salary demand?

 

I sure don't want the govt to set the salaries for anyone in the private sector - slippery slope to real communism.

The US government has been doing exactly that without falling down the slippery slope into "real communism" for almost 75 years.

[Undone]

Meh.

But even in those cases, researchers haven’t found much evidence that millionaires flee in the face of high taxes. Roger Cohen, Andrew Lai, and Charles Steindel at the New Jersey Department of the Treasury and Cristobal Young and Charles Varner of Stanford released studies in 2011 and 2012, respectively, evaluating the effects of New Jersey’s millionaire tax, which governor Jim McGreevey signed into law in 2004.

<snip>

What’s more, it’s not clear that any effects the British law had would be relevant for the U.S. tax discussion. Even if the top income tax rate went back up to 39.6 percent, that would still be lower than that of most European countries, which would leave potential tax exiles fewer places to flee. Countries with unusually high rates, by contrast, have more to worry about.

http://www.washingto...oid-high-taxes/

 

This entire discussion is hypothetical.

 

So another hypothetical enters the ring. Let's say we do take it up an extra notch and tax millionaires at a rate that is equally as high as a majority of other westernized nations, just to take the "fleeing" argument out of the way. In other words, doesn't matter where they go - still going to be taxed at the same rate.

 

What prevents someone from asking themselves, "Hey, what's the break even point at which I can stall my wage-earning potential to equal my new tax rate?"

[TGHusker]

Give tax breaks to compensate for the labor challenges.

What do you propose to replace the lost revenue?

Increased manufacturing jobs here = increased tax revenue

 

Ease up on some of the regulations.

Which regulations?

 

I'm sure we can finds some. 1000s added year year by a combination of law and agency regs. Get the great minds together to work out a comprehesive plan that looks at this, plus tax issues, etc.

We need a Manhatten project for jobs. Obama's stimulus didnt' get it done. We can't afford 4 more years of the same no to slow job growth.

 

As in the Hostess Cake situation, the unions need to be realistic as well with their salary demands.

Do you think that being upset about a cut in pay from $48,000 to $25,000 is an unrealistic salary demand?

 

The Hostess salary cut was 8% immediately, then 3 or 4% was to be returned to the workers within a year. Max cut on $48k would have been $4400

 

I sure don't want the govt to set the salaries for anyone in the private sector - slippery slope to real communism.

The US government has been doing exactly that without falling down the slippery slope into "real communism" for almost 75 years.

How has the US govt been setting private sector wage limits?