France: President calls for 75% tax rate for rich

[rational_democrat]

Any thoughts and opinions?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/business/global/frances-les-riches-vow-to-leave-if-75-tax-rate-is-passed.html?_r=2&hpw

[JaneyVee]

1. Hollande should consider lowering the threshold to $500k/yr. That would put a good dent in deficits.

[still_one]

2. That is wrong also. The fairest tax system is a percentage, where everyone pays let's say 10%

Unless you are at poverty level then no taxes.

Also, no deductions or tax loopholes

You make x dollars and it is above some minimum level you pay a fixed percent

It will never happen

The rich won't accept it without loopholes, and they pay off congress to keep it that way

[white_wolf]

3. A flat tax hurts the poor the most.

The rich can afford to pay higher taxes. If you are making 35,000 a year 10% will hurt you a lot more than it will for a millionaire.

[still_one]

5. You didn't read my post, I said low income don't pay taxes, you have to make a certain amount before

You are taxed

[white_wolf]

12. I did read your post, it doesn't solve the issue of revenue.

We are running in debt as it is. We need more money, we need to raise revenue, and we need to raise taxes to do that.

[still_one]

14. it is a start, and then get out of all the trillion dollar wars,would be another start.

[JaneyVee]

17. What would the threshold be for the flat tax? Look at it like this:

Why should someone who makes $1Million a year pay the same tax rate as someone that makes $43Million a year? That's how our system is currently set up and it's killing our revenue stream.

[DocMac]

26. The system is set up to fight wars.

Look at the defence budget. Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

[stevenleser]

36. It would be better than what we have now, we have a reverse progressive tax right now.

The wealthy, like the Romney's, pay less than a 15% effective rate because different types of income are taxed differently.

I prefer a progressive tax system where all kinds of income are treated the same. The Romney's should have the majority of their income taxed at the highest rate.

The fact is though that a flat tax would be fairer than what is happening now.

[tsuki]

40. I am for Eisenhower'ing their asses. nt

[Stinky The Clown]

10. A flat tax is one of the worst schemes ever

[geckosfeet]

19. It's a scam. It sounds good, and it is very good for the rich but is debilitating for everyone else.

But it sounds so fair and equitable that any "reasonable" person would advocate for it. Turns out reasonable people don't think very much about such things.

[geckosfeet]

18. No. That's not fair.

[still_one]

32. why not. You make x dollars you pay a percentage. no loopholes except low income people do not pay

any taxes

I didn't read the article from the OP on this thread, but the headline is misleading.

It isn't 75%, it is 75% on money above a certain base level of 1 million euros

[geckosfeet]

41. Flat tax not fair in any manifistation. Sweetening the deal with exemptions

does not cure the rest of the problems.

The higher your income the higher percentage of income taxes should be paid. It's that simple. At some level,combination of income, dependents, medical etc. no taxes would be paid. But any income above say $150, $200k should be subject to a scaled tax rate. That is, for each incremental increase in income the tax rate increases proportionally.

[Politicalboi]

4. We need something like that out here

When assholes like The Dick Cheney say deficits don't matter, raise the tax rate. If they raised the tax rate with the increase of the deficit, I think deficits would matter to the Repukes then. That is what is needed out here. Obama should make it clear that the Repukes put us in this position, and this is how it's going to be paid back.

[Dkc05]

6. over $200,000. rate should be 50% or more.

How my h do the wealthy really need. Over 200,000 50% seems fair. Over 500,000 then 70% would be fair. Over 1,00,000 go to 75%

The rich need to help the rest of us in the community. Install the fairness doctrine.

[Ruby the Liberal]

7. Thanks for bringing over Drudge's current headline.

Don't know what we would do without your concern.

[Zalatix]

30. Your response made no sense whatsoever.

We need to talk about 75% taxation for the rich, here in America.

Who cares what Drudge has to say?

[DontTreadOnMe]

8. no flat tax, that hurts the poor.

But 75% is really high. just make it 25% and NO LOOPHOLES.

Loopholes is what really hurts overall revenues.

[Politicalboi]

9. Raise it to 50%

For those who make 1 million or more and each year the deficit goes down, the taxes get lowered by 1%. But stop it at 35% if economy can allow it.

[Dkc05]

15. the rich have plenty

75% is not too much.

[byeya]

37. A marginal rate of 75% without loopholes sounds right to me

Plus a tax on stock and bond sales.

[Dkc05]

39. 50% on the sale of Stocks or Bonds would help the economy

If they sell the stock or bond tax them 50% and it will fix the defict real fast.

[limpyhobbler]

11. we need it here. nt

[SDjack]

13. Hope France goes after stored wealth. 10% a year would be a good.

e

[L0oniX]

16. Jury says leave it alone. Another waste of the jury system.

Why would anyone alert on this? The sources for this news are many and this news is old and it's not exclusive to Drudge. The alert must have come from some sympathetic 1% who has it in for this new DU member ...and MIRT??? WTF


Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Show me this dude actually tossing around right-wing BS, and I'll vote to hide that. Posting links asking for opinion is harmless.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Link is to the New York Times. I don't see a problem with it. Maybe this is a job for MIRT, I am only looking at this post.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Abuse of alert system. Topic subject has been posted many times over the past months with many links other than Drudge ...Informationclearinghouse.org for one.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

[rational_democrat]

20. ........

lol you have to go through a jury process to post on this site?


oh my god

[strategery blunder]

24. No. Some troll alerted on the post.

The post was then referred to a jury, who determined the alert was frivolous and let the post stand.

You do not need to have your posts "pre-approved" by a jury. Juries only get involved after someone thinks that a post violates the rules and clicks the alert button.

Welcome to DU.

[Zalatix]

31. I don't see how Drudge Report had anything to do with the OP.

This alert WAS on the OP, right?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

21. Les riches sont des cry-babies

Please note that it's NOT 75% of their total income, as the right-wing likes to pretend.

Here's a quote from the article:

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.)

In other words, les pauvres petits would have only $966,000 to live on, only $80,000 a month (which is WAY more than I earn in a year).

My heart does NOT bleed for them. And please, no Upper East Side types whining that $1.55 million is NOTHING in New York. They can tell that to their cleaning lady.

[customerserviceguy]

22. I expect if it goes through

It will prompt an exodus of the well to do to Switzerland.

[cherokeeprogressive]

25. Or Brussels. n/t

[MrSlayer]

23. 75% once you reach half a billion is fine.

It's waaaay too high at 250k.

[rDigital]

29. A lot of people

don't realize that 250k a year doesn't make you a rich person. Especially, after taxes.

[Trillo]

27. With sufficient loopholes, it can just be a stunt to fool the gullible.

That said, I don't know how France's tax ranks in that regard. But if the uber rich won't release their tax records when running for a U.S. public office, then why would they release them at any other time, to the public? If governments keep the information private, by law, then who knows if a progressive income tax code, or any other tax scheme, would actually capture a fair share of the super rich's taxes.

[railsback]

28. I don't see anything wrong with it

We used to have a high top marginal tax rate on something like over $3 million. Then Reagan came along and turned this country up side down, going from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation.

[kenny blankenship]

33. We had a higher rate for decades.

We had top marginal rates that high or higher, during WWI and then later in the late 1930s to the 60s.

We seemed to fare pretty well as a nation during that stretch of time, compared to other nations and compared to our own record from other periods. France will not regret it, though billionaires weep.

[pampango]

34. Higher taxes in Europe are an integral part of their social democracy model that

has resulted in the most equitable distribution of income in the world.

It is nice to see France, through its new socialist president, getting back to that model and away from Sarkozy's conservative way of doing things.

[Ganja Ninja]

35. I think a 90 % tax rate for the next 5 years on the super rich plus ...

a wealth tax on all assets at home or abroad and a inheritance tax that reduces their heirs from billionaires to millionaires is what we need. The super rich have declared an economic war on America and we need to make sure they lose and lose so bad that they never try it again.

[FSogol]

38. This country once had a tax rate on the rich around 75%..

The rate isn't what they pay. After all their exceptions, loopholes, etc, they pay around 28%. Over the years (well since Reagan), the US tax on the rich was reduced to 35%, however all the loopholes and exceptions remained meaning guys like Romney pay less than 13%.