France’s Hollande gets court nod for 75% millionaire tax

Todman

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 7, 2004
8,348
7,176
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Paris: French president Francois Hollande received approval from the country’s constitutional court to proceed with his plan to tax salaries above €1 million at 75% for this year and next.
Under Hollande’s proposal, companies will have to pay a 50% duty on wages above €1 million ($1.4 million). In combination with other taxes and social charges, the rate will amount to 75% of salaries above the threshold, the court wrote in a decision published on Monday.
The companies that pay out remuneration above €1 million will, as expected, be called upon for an effort of solidarity on remuneration paid in 2013 and 2014, the economy ministry said in an emailed statement.
Hollande, who once said he didn’t like the rich, announced the 75% tax in February 2012 as part of his presidential campaign to appeal to his Socialist base. It has become a symbol of his government’s record-high taxation rate.
A first proposal to put the change into law was turned down by the constitutional court in December last year because the tax applied to individuals and not households. The country’s top administrative court said any rate above 66% would be rejected as confiscatory.
Hollande revived the plan this year, making it apply to salaries and be paid by employers rather than individuals. The total amount is limited to 5% of a company’s revenue.
The court examined the proposed tax after more than 60 members of parliament and more than 60 senators filed their opposition, it said. Bloomberg

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/Zv...de-gets-court-nod-for-75-millionaire-tax.html
 
I can imagine the $ flowing across to Monaco, Luxembourg, Switzerland and even Russia.

I think it is pretty funny gerard depardieu has declared himself a Russian for tax purposes.



The sad reality is France has built up a welfare system based on wealth stolen during its colonial era. They now find themselves trying to live a lifestyle they can no longer afford.

Rather than learning to live within their means they resort to what they know best which is pillage.
 
People should laugh at this because going forward in this country taxes will only head in an upward direction. The best way to balance the budget and maintain services is to increase taxes, the elternative is increased unemployment.
Taxes are already low by OECD standards, and under Rudd (of all people) reduced as a % of GDP.

We have a minor problem with tax collection in Australia (although nowhere near Greek levels) which can definately help replenish general revenue, and inevitable bracket creep - even under the low inflation outlook we're expecting in the next few years - will help drive increased tax collection without undue hardship.
 
Jan 13, 2001
15,892
6,917
Waiting at the door for the pub to reopen
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
Man City
Taxes are already low by OECD standards, and under Rudd (of all people) reduced as a % of GDP.

We have a minor problem with tax collection in Australia (although nowhere near Greek levels) which can definately help replenish general revenue, and inevitable bracket creep - even under the low inflation outlook we're expecting in the next few years - will help drive increased tax collection without undue hardship.
Whilst the revnue will increase we need to keep in mind what will be happening with government expenditure. People are starting to reach a point where the constant degredation of government services means that our standard of living is continuing to slip and as a country we are going backwards.

Our Health & Education systems need a massive overhaul and without fresh injections of money will fail to cover basic needs. Our transport infrastructure needs upgrading and our utilities are still working off the same system they were 30 years ago. We as a nation have massively underinvested in our own future over the last 30 years in the name of tax cuts and a desire for a constant budget surplus. We are now starting to see the consequences of this and the government still won't do anything about it, as a country we are closer to becoming like Italy and Spain than most people think.

All I can say is that if you can access a dual passport then make sure you do so, because in 20 years this country won't have much to offer.
 

medusala

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts
Aug 14, 2004
37,209
8,423
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
blackcat

IIRC Vercingetorix had a brief win over the Romans before being taken in chains to Rome and executed.

Slax

what constant degradation of public services? We could cut spending and have better services, just need to cull useless public servants. We don't have a lack of revenue problem, we have a spending problem.
 
medusala you might be in for a shock but on a federal level there is no longer the room to make the cuts that were made in the 90s.
We have culled numbers from ~360k in the mid 90s to ~250k currently in terms of staffing numbers, yet increased the function of government as proivatisation requires extra regulation to ensure delivery of sercives (as many privatised entities ie Telstra have licence conditions placed upon them to ensure continuity of service to people in remote areas).

In my experience, those calling for culls of staffing numbers are doing so from ideological and not evidence-based positions.
 

Chameleon75

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2013
8,044
18,132
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
We have culled numbers from ~360k in the mid 90s to ~250k currently in terms of staffing numbers, yet increased the function of government as proivatisation requires extra regulation to ensure delivery of sercives (as many privatised entities ie Telstra have licence conditions placed upon them to ensure continuity of service to people in remote areas).

In my experience, those calling for culls of staffing numbers are doing so from ideological and not evidence-based positions.

The ideological narrative has lead to a reduction in public service positions but without the cuts to programs. End result is that those positions have been out sourced to private consultants at a higher rate. It's claytons savings.
 
The ideological narrative has lead to a reduction in public service positions but without the cuts to programs. End result is that those positions have been out sourced to private consultants at a higher rate. It's claytons savings.
Yup - most of the debate seems to focus on permanent numbers and ignores rolling contracts - although IO will point out that regulatory work has been progressively scaled back in recent years due largely to the a combination of cuts and the required annual 'efficiency dividend'
 

blackcat

Irving's godfather and handle
Dec 29, 2003
28,361
14,116
Beverly Hills 90210 Antifa bracket
AFL Club
Richmond
Yup - most of the debate seems to focus on permanent numbers and ignores rolling contracts - although IO will point out that regulatory work has been progressively scaled back in recent years due largely to the a combination of cuts and the required annual 'efficiency dividend'
also is easier for gov't to defacto cut jobs without having a Holden workforce slashed public service and voter backlash
 

medusala

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts
Aug 14, 2004
37,209
8,423
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
There is massive scope to cut numbers at state and federal level. Entire departments could be wiped out and duplication of services eliminated (see DVA, HREOC, office for women etc etc). And that is before we even get to tax expenditure like family payments and super rorts.

There is nothing ideological about that. It is simply stating the bleeding obvious.

Anyone who has ever worked in the PS (if they are honest) will admit you could sack a large % in numerous areas and still deliver much BETTER services.

Mofra

how can privatisation require large numbers? You must be kidding. Permanent federal numbers haven't been slashed either.
 

blackcat

Irving's godfather and handle
Dec 29, 2003
28,361
14,116
Beverly Hills 90210 Antifa bracket
AFL Club
Richmond
Anyone who has ever worked in the PS (if they are honest) will admit you could sack a large % in numerous areas and still deliver much BETTER services
does this not contradict your pov on the PS?

even if they are smaller, they still would be incompetent, pro rata. so, p'raps less incompetent, as on the smaller scale. And more competent on a utilarian scale, because less resources burned.

I'll give you the last point, more competent viewed thru a utilarian prism.

But your position has the premise that few staff could be more talented and have higher productivity. Surely a slash to the PS, you will not be able to only keep your talent, and extricate the fat like Ryan O'Connor. You will lose roughly the average individual makeup of your workforce. You never had a caveat on keeping the your top 22, and delisting the bottom 16 and rookie list.
 

medusala

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts
Aug 14, 2004
37,209
8,423
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Defeatist thinking BC. Sounds like you are assuming voluntary redundancies which are an extraordinarily idiotic thing to do. The best ones leave then often come back on contracts at a much higher rate (and they get huge (bigger than Texas huge) payouts to boot)

Re caveat: have mentioned this before.

Goldmans system. Bottom 5-10% get the flick every year.

NB flexitime was great. I enjoyed every second Friday off. I am sure it was a great deal for Oz taxpayers too, knowing a public "servant" was working on his troublesome slice off the tee.
 

medusala

Cancelled
30k Posts 10k Posts
Aug 14, 2004
37,209
8,423
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
KP enjoys flexi time as well. Why should KP have to practice? KP gets all the practice he needs in the middle

KP wouldn't need to work for 35 hours to knock up all the necessary runs and send down a few overs of spin full of bounce, dip, guile and genius.

Msr Hollande would appreciate the KP work ethic.
 
Back