Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

More on Inheritance Tax

Some commentators are saying that the Conservative proposals on Inheritance Tax tipped the polls to the point that Labour backed off from having an election in November. Perhaps. But nearly all the politicians and commentators are missing the point. There is a need for clarity.

Inheritance tax should be zero. Nil. Zilch.
Taxes on wages, goods and services should also be zero. Nil. Zilch.

People should be allowed to keep everything they earn from work and pass it on to whoever they want. Governments have no business getting their hands on it.

What needs to be taxed is land values. 100% of the rental value of land and the land element of all property. Why? Land value is created by the presence and actions of the communty. It is not earned. It is a public value and the government should collect it. Some of this revenue should be used for the essential purposes of government ie administering justice, defence (not attack), highways and emergencies. What is left over should be distributed equally to every citizen in the land as a national dividend, sometimes referred to as Basic Income.

Under such a tax regime the price of land would fall to zero. There would be nothing to tax. Windfall land value bubbles would not occur in the first place. Inter-generational injustice is almost entirely related to the inheritance of land, not that vague and ill-defined entity referred to as "wealth". Only land has an enduring value. Everything else wears out, decays or become obsolete.

Land value taxation is a prerequisite for justice from one generation to the next.
Etiketter:

Kommentarer

Skicka en kommentar

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

The Zombie Train that refuses to die

The Guardian has published a couple more articles against HS2, one by specialist rail commentator Christian Wolmar, and another today by journalist Simon Jenkins. The main arguments in favour will doubtless be wheeled out by the commentators: the need for capacity and the disruption caused by upgrading existing routes. HST itself will severely disrupt services to Euston during the construction period. Capacity can be increased at a fraction of the cost by a variety of measures, provided that it is accepted that the additional traffic will run at existing speeds. It is not generally known that the Midland main line is, or was, four track all the way from London to Trent Junction, between Nottingham and Derby. This is because the additional tracks are separate, having been added for coal trains which trundled down to Brent sidings, on the edge of London, from a collection point at Toton in Nottinghamshire, where the Midland Railway build a huge marshalling yard. Beyond Derby, the main l...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...
Skicka en kommentar
Läs mer