A majority of lawmakers supported the proposition from the far-left LFI party, despite warnings from the incumbent government.
  • vin@lemmynsfw.comEnglish
    2·
    3 hours ago

    would apply to anyone who is a tax resident in France or who has assets in France.

    Awesome!

  • dogslayeggs@lemmy.worldEnglish
    58·
    11 hours ago

    What’s the downside? If they move away, you haven’t lost anything because they weren’t paying taxes anyway. If they stay, you have just gained tax revenue. And it isn’t like you are going to lose a lot of sales tax money or real estate tax money, since they are not going to stop visiting Paris and buying luxury goods and are not going to sell their properties (that’s why they are so wealthy in the first place).

    Also, if they move away then you have fewer billionaires fucking up politics.

    • leftytighty@slrpnk.netEnglish
      14·
      9 hours ago

      Capitalist threats of leaving are hilarious. Oh no the non-contributors will leave. The workers are the economy. If capital flight becomes a problem that’s only a problem within a larger capitalist framework.

      Let them all leave, then we can own our own labour output.

    • Dem BosainEnglish
      10·
      10 hours ago

      But billionaires are the only source of jobs and if nobody is there to buy yachts how will the trickle-down economics work?

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldMEnglish
    552·
    11 hours ago

    I like the “they’ll just move somewhere else” arguments about these wealth taxes. First of all, no they won’t. They like their luxury penthouses in Paris and their mansions on the Riviera. Secondly, that’s just an argument for having this tax everywhere else too.

    And you know, if Russia (or wherever) doesn’t want to have a wealth tax and all the billionaires move there, I’m not really seeing the downside.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      7·
      6 hours ago

      You can implement exit taxes. I think some countries have that already. If you are a billionare, you will have to give up a fixed percentage of your wealth if you move.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldMEnglish
        2·
        6 hours ago

        Hey, no one is saying they get to take their assets with them when they move to Russia to avoid those billionaire taxes.

    • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      19·
      9 hours ago

      We had a famous actor Gérard Depardieu move to Russia and renounce his French citizenship because of a 75% tax on earnings over 1 million P/A.

      Unsurprisingly he also has been charged with rape and is a Putin lapdog. So getting rid of him was a net positive.

    • VieuxQueb@lemmy.caEnglish
      10·
      10 hours ago

      They already don’t pay taxes anyways, so pay up or leave is perfectly ok but remember to pay you sales tax when you sell your mansions and cottages.

  • atro_city@fedia.io
    302·
    11 hours ago

    French lawmakers on Friday voted in favour of a new levy that would tax assets above the €1 billion threshold at 2%.

    2%? 🤣🤣🤣

    Oh well, it’s something…

    • killingspark@feddit.orgEnglish
      19·
      11 hours ago

      It’s a first step. One thing this will (hopefully) provide is more accurate data on exactly how much wealth is being hoarded. The current data is being assumed to be underestimating the actual numbers

    • anon6789@lemmy.worldEnglish
      101·
      10 hours ago

      I know 2% is fairly laughable when we’re talking normal people money, but this is 20 million per 1 billion.

      when simply considering the 10 biggest fortunes in France, the tax would bring in no less than €13bn for the state.

      A country can do a decent bit of good for people with 13 billion.

        • anon6789@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          9 hours ago

          That would be amazing! No need for 2% to be the end goal instead of just a good start. A good government serves all its citizens, not just the ones with big bank accounts.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldMEnglish
            3·
            6 hours ago

            And I would suggest that by starting at 2%, it will be easier to get to 6% later, whereas if you try to start at 6%, you may get too much opposition.

    • solrize@lemmy.worldEnglish
      8·
      11 hours ago

      It’s a wealth tax and not an income tax? Interesting. Is it annual, or just once, or what?

  • Supervisor194@lemmy.worldEnglish
    12·
    10 hours ago

    Le Coq suggested that when simply considering the 10 biggest fortunes in France, the tax would bring in no less than €13bn for the state.

    A 2% tax on billionaires. Give me a break.

    The point isn’t to bring in money, the point is to eliminate these blights on society by any means necessary. How bad will the world have to get before something that looks like this happens? When the world was more civilized - the world conservatives constantly pine for - the ultra-wealthy were taxed over 90%, because we knew that too much power in the hands of a single person was immensely dangerous. We knew this intrinsically from generations of being ruled by kings, but we got firsthand experience with it from them constantly fucking up the economy.

    There was shame in being wealthy. Hell, there was shame in being rich when I was growing up - it was understood that you couldn’t get mega-rich without stepping on the necks of the working class and being horrible people. It’s nearly Christmas - go rewatch It’s a Wonderful Life for crying out loud. 1946!