Tax wealth not income

le_loup

opinions4u wrote: »

I'm not sure I do understand it.

I think that o4u woke up with a hangover this morning ... he's not usually so irascible!

Ifts

Saw this article over on The Motley Fool website, reminding me of this discussion:

Should Britain Have A Wealth Tax?

With plenty of user comments at the bottom of the article, I liked this one:

Cliff-TMF wrote:

Before any of us recommend the introduction of new or temporary taxes, we should remember that income tax was introduced in 1799 as a temporary revenue-raising device to pay for the Napoleonic Wars.
It is still with us 213 years later!
Cliff

http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2012/03/09/should-britain-have-a-wealth-tax.aspx

gadgetmind

le_loup wrote: »

I think you will find the starting level is £2 million.

I think you'll find that that'd the *starting* starting level, and once the principle is established, it will keep dropping and dropping.

Unless *everyone* fights both this and our ever-shrinking pension annual allowance, it will end up catching the majority.

goodanna

I think you will find the starting level is £2 million. But

atush

I think there is a case for a sliding scale of property tax, instead of council tax in 'bands'. The banding system seem inherently unfair to me.

That way, the more the property is worth the higher the tax paid. And the individual areas could assess how much tax paid based on the cost of average property in the area. that way Mansions would pay more everywhere.