Rich landowners need to be taxed more to close income gap, Thai forum told

[webfact]

Rich landowners need to be taxed more to close income gap, forum told
The Nation



BANGKOK: -- AN improved land-tax system and fairer budget allocation are key to eradicating inequalities in society, a public forum was told.

"About 20 per cent of the Thai population who are the lowest income earners hold just 0.25 per cent of [the total] land in the country," Associate Professor Duangmanee Laowakul said at the forum on "Eradicating Social Inequality, Lessening Thai Social Crisis".

Organised by Krungthep Turakij newspaper and the NOW26 TV station, the event was part of the Citizens' Forum for Reform Initiative. Both media outlets, like The Nation, are under the umbrella of the Nation Multimedia Group.

Duangmanee, who studies land-related problems in the country, told the forum that the top 20 per cent of income earners owned 80 per cent of the country's land plots.

"Clearly, there is a really big gap," she said.

She said the country should introduce a progressive land-tax rate and income from the rate, which should apply to any landlord with plots of 50 rai (8 hectares) or more, could be held by a Land Bank and the money used to buy land for the landless poor.

Prapas Ngoksoong-ngern, a coordinator for a centre for landless Thais, said about 800,000 farmers had no land with which to make their living.

Speaking at the same forum, Reform Office deputy director Wanee Pinprateep suggested that about 5 per cent of the national budget (Bt100 billion) should be used for the eradication of social inequality.

"For example, the money should go to provinces with a really high number of poor people or low per-capita income," she said.

There were also calls for serious attention to be given to community problems and that better protection be given to villagers whose land overlaps with forest reserves or national parks.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Rich-landowners-need-to-be-taxed-more-to-close-inc-30239421.html


-- The Nation 2014-07-25

[wiki12]

The same in nearly all countries I wager. Scotland's biggest landowner used to be the Egyptian owner of Harrods!

[NongKhaiKid]

Down like a lead balloon.

[cgphuket]

Do they really think the rich will ever pay taxes? There is a reason why 10% of the population hold 90% of the total wealth here. The rich would burn it all down before having to pitch in.

[skildpadden]

Taxation on land and property, like e.g. condos, would generate substantial income for the state (that is, if people actually paid their tax). Besides filling politicians' pckets this new money should then be thrown into better teacher education and salaries. Then Thailand perhaps would go somewhere.

[thaimlord]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

[noitom]

There must be a land tax in Thailand to generate sufficient tax income for Thailand's future.

[robblok]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

While I agree partly with what you say the real rich here pay almost no tax. So tax them make a threshold for the tax of a couple of million baht and you only hit the real rich. The middle class is already hit enough because the rich don't pay.

[blazes]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

A wonderful example of why there IS such inequality of wealth worldwide. I like the word "struggled"....did Shinawatra or Mark Zuckerberg or the Red Bull clan "struggle"? How awful if they did. Indeed, they should be REWARDED for their brave toil and struggle.

And if our precious "wealthy people" want to "vote with their feet", let them, let them, let them. Off you go, all you great patriots. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[thaimlord]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

While I agree partly with what you say the real rich here pay almost no tax. So tax them make a threshold for the tax of a couple of million baht and you only hit the real rich. The middle class is already hit enough because the rich don't pay.

Hi

I'm not sure where you are getting the stats from that the rich don't pay. I'm pretty sure they probably do, and a lot more "baht-wise" than the rest of us, I'm guessing. I'm just saying that you can't penalise effort and distribute it out to others too much or it create a disincentive.

Cheers

TL

[thaimlord]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

A wonderful example of why there IS such inequality of wealth worldwide. I like the word "struggled"....did Shinawatra or Mark Zuckerberg or the Red Bull clan "struggle"? How awful if they did. Indeed, they should be REWARDED for their brave toil and struggle.

And if our precious "wealthy people" want to "vote with their feet", let them, let them, let them. Off you go, all you great patriots. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Any twit can pick out one or two people (who they probably don't know anyway) and say they didn't struggle, but to get rich, especially very rich is very very hard to do. If you don't think it is, then you're a crapload smarter than I am.

And with the possible exception of Zuckerberg, yes I'd say the others really did struggle to get where they are today.

Patriots? What on earth are you on about? It's not patriotic to pay disproportionate tax. It's not unpatriotic to pay it either. If you're going to attack my views, at least try to keep on subject.

TL

[robblok]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

While I agree partly with what you say the real rich here pay almost no tax. So tax them make a threshold for the tax of a couple of million baht and you only hit the real rich. The middle class is already hit enough because the rich don't pay.

Hi

I'm not sure where you are getting the stats from that the rich don't pay. I'm pretty sure they probably do, and a lot more "baht-wise" than the rest of us, I'm guessing. I'm just saying that you can't penalise effort and distribute it out to others too much or it create a disincentive.

Cheers

TL

I get my stats from the fact that people who are not earning wages seldom are taxed. They make constructions to stay out of taxation. Its a common known fact that this is happening, if you don't then I suggest its you who read up on things. I am a tax accountant and I hate taxes but in this country the rich (talking real rich) make sure they almost pay no taxes. Land tax would be a great way to get some money from them.

In general if you read my other post you would know I hate taxation of for instance the middle class (salary slaves) who are taxed while company owners (not LTD's) are often making much more and not paying taxes it all goes off books. Same goes for the real rich they avoid taxes. While they may pay more baht wise its the middle class who pays more percentage wise and that is wrong.

[blazes]

Sorry if I confused you, Thaimlord.

Speaking from my own experience, I know that if I possess $100k, it is comparatively easy on the stock market to increase that 100k to.... (fill in your "winnings" from trading in the market). But let's say I buy 1000 shares of Company X at $100 at 9.30 am in NY.

If that share increases in value to $101 by lunchtime, I will have made precisely $1000 in 3 hours without the slightest bit of "struggle".

Now, if I only have 10k to trade with, accumulating wealth will take a much much longer time, but even if I do eventually convert my 10k into, say, 20k, the word "struggle" will not apply to this series of transactions.

And if my government wants to increase my capital gains tax to spread the wealth around a bit, I am not going to be heading towards any exit. What is wrong with the concept of taxing those who can well afford it so that the country as a whole may benefit from increased revenue?

The answer to that question will situate a person on his private view of a citizen's "duty" to society.

Edited July 25, 2014 by blazes

[thaimlord]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

While I agree partly with what you say the real rich here pay almost no tax. So tax them make a threshold for the tax of a couple of million baht and you only hit the real rich. The middle class is already hit enough because the rich don't pay.

Hi

I'm not sure where you are getting the stats from that the rich don't pay. I'm pretty sure they probably do, and a lot more "baht-wise" than the rest of us, I'm guessing. I'm just saying that you can't penalise effort and distribute it out to others too much or it create a disincentive.

Cheers

TL

I get my stats from the fact that people who are not earning wages seldom are taxed. They make constructions to stay out of taxation. Its a common known fact that this is happening, if you don't then I suggest its you who read up on things. I am a tax accountant and I hate taxes but in this country the rich (talking real rich) make sure they almost pay no taxes. Land tax would be a great way to get some money from them.

In general if you read my other post you would know I hate taxation of for instance the middle class (salary slaves) who are taxed while company owners (not LTD's) are often making much more and not paying taxes it all goes off books. Same goes for the real rich they avoid taxes. While they may pay more baht wise its the middle class who pays more percentage wise and that is wrong.

Whatever. I can see we're on different pages of the book.

Laws or no laws, if we don't treat a person who can live anywhere in the world right, then they'll leave, totally defeating the purpose of trying to get money from them. Treat the rich well and make many incentives to accumulate wealth and you'll have the foundation for a rich country. Do the opposite and you'll get the opposite. It's been tried all over in the world, time and again; we don't need to theorise.

TL

[Loptr]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

A wonderful example of why there IS such inequality of wealth worldwide. I like the word "struggled"....did Shinawatra or Mark Zuckerberg or the Red Bull clan "struggle"? How awful if they did. Indeed, they should be REWARDED for their brave toil and struggle.

And if our precious "wealthy people" want to "vote with their feet", let them, let them, let them. Off you go, all you great patriots. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Any twit can pick out one or two people (who they probably don't know anyway) and say they didn't struggle, but to get rich, especially very rich is very very hard to do. If you don't think it is, then you're a crapload smarter than I am.

And with the possible exception of Zuckerberg, yes I'd say the others really did struggle to get where they are today.

Patriots? What on earth are you on about? It's not patriotic to pay disproportionate tax. It's not unpatriotic to pay it either. If you're going to attack my views, at least try to keep on subject.

TL

Yeah, Zukerberg did it the old fashioned way, he stole it...

Edited July 25, 2014 by Loptr

[robblok]

While I agree partly with what you say the real rich here pay almost no tax. So tax them make a threshold for the tax of a couple of million baht and you only hit the real rich. The middle class is already hit enough because the rich don't pay.

Hi

I'm not sure where you are getting the stats from that the rich don't pay. I'm pretty sure they probably do, and a lot more "baht-wise" than the rest of us, I'm guessing. I'm just saying that you can't penalise effort and distribute it out to others too much or it create a disincentive.

Cheers

TL

I get my stats from the fact that people who are not earning wages seldom are taxed. They make constructions to stay out of taxation. Its a common known fact that this is happening, if you don't then I suggest its you who read up on things. I am a tax accountant and I hate taxes but in this country the rich (talking real rich) make sure they almost pay no taxes. Land tax would be a great way to get some money from them.

In general if you read my other post you would know I hate taxation of for instance the middle class (salary slaves) who are taxed while company owners (not LTD's) are often making much more and not paying taxes it all goes off books. Same goes for the real rich they avoid taxes. While they may pay more baht wise its the middle class who pays more percentage wise and that is wrong.

Whatever. I can see we're on different pages of the book.

Laws or no laws, if we don't treat a person who can live anywhere in the world right, then they'll leave, totally defeating the purpose of trying to get money from them. Treat the rich well and make many incentives to accumulate wealth and you'll have the foundation for a rich country. Do the opposite and you'll get the opposite. It's been tried all over in the world, time and again; we don't need to theorise.

TL

I bet you made your money (if you have some) by being a comedian. There are enough rich Thais and they don't contribute nearly enough to the system. Even the Thai politicians like Abisith agree on this. If every country int he world taxed rich then they could not run and hide. Now they can hide here. So a global initiative to tax the rich 70% would work and invalidate your arguments. (not that I would want that) But giving as an excuse that they can just move up to sunny pastures so they should not be taxed is equally crazy.

Most rich don't struggle at all and most have not build up their on wealth. Usually it comes from family and connections. I know I worked at a stock trading firm with rich clients.

[blazes]

Hi

I'm not sure where you are getting the stats from that the rich don't pay. I'm pretty sure they probably do, and a lot more "baht-wise" than the rest of us, I'm guessing. I'm just saying that you can't penalise effort and distribute it out to others too much or it create a disincentive.

Cheers

TL

I get my stats from the fact that people who are not earning wages seldom are taxed. They make constructions to stay out of taxation. Its a common known fact that this is happening, if you don't then I suggest its you who read up on things. I am a tax accountant and I hate taxes but in this country the rich (talking real rich) make sure they almost pay no taxes. Land tax would be a great way to get some money from them.

In general if you read my other post you would know I hate taxation of for instance the middle class (salary slaves) who are taxed while company owners (not LTD's) are often making much more and not paying taxes it all goes off books. Same goes for the real rich they avoid taxes. While they may pay more baht wise its the middle class who pays more percentage wise and that is wrong.

Whatever. I can see we're on different pages of the book.

Laws or no laws, if we don't treat a person who can live anywhere in the world right, then they'll leave, totally defeating the purpose of trying to get money from them. Treat the rich well and make many incentives to accumulate wealth and you'll have the foundation for a rich country. Do the opposite and you'll get the opposite. It's been tried all over in the world, time and again; we don't need to theorise.

TL

This is a very accurate re-statement of the "trickle-down" theory. The rich, if you leave them alone, will spend their money left right and centre, thus providing employment for the great unwashed.

It was Reagan who (along with Thatcher) put this theory into practice. If you read the much-respected commentary of David Stockman, Reagan's Director of Budget, you will see that he, in a position to know better than most of us, says there was never ANY evidence that the taxes avoided ever managed to "trickle" down.

[craigt3365]

A few posts have been removed from view. Let's keep the monarchy out of this, OK?

[thaimlord]

Sorry if I confused you, Thaimlord.

Speaking from my own experience, I know that if I possess $100k, it is comparatively easy on the stock market to increase that 100k to.... (fill in your "winnings" from trading in the market). But let's say I buy 1000 shares of Company X at $100 at 9.30 am in NY.

If that share increases in value to $101 by lunchtime, I will have made precisely $1000 in 3 hours without the slightest bit of "struggle".

Now, if I only have 10k to trade with, accumulating wealth will take a much much longer time, but even if I do eventually convert my 10k into, say, 20k, the word "struggle" will not apply to this series of transactions.

And if my government wants to increase my capital gains tax to spread the wealth around a bit, I am not going to be heading towards any exit. What is wrong with the concept of taxing those who can well afford it so that the country as a whole may benefit from increased revenue?

The answer to that question will situate a person on his private view of a citizen's "duty" to society.

Hi Blazes

Some fair points:

1. It may not be a struggle to make 1% by lunchtime on the stockmarket, however getting your $100k in the first place may well have taken you all your life to-date and lost you three marriages, etc, etc. Who knows, but it's not right to say that they haven't struggled, because we don't know anything except they have managed to accumulate $100k. Hint, that already indicates struggle, people don't throw money at you.

2. There's no mention about the very distinct possibility that by dinner time you might have lost 3% or more, even though you were up 1% at lunch. You are using one side of an argument to prove a statement. It doesn't work that way. You can lose everything you've worked for, and many people have done so.

3. I agree with you in your last paragraph. If I read you correctly, you suggest that if you put in less effort that you should get less out of it ultimately. This phenomenon is already built into our financial and taxation systems. However, the example you've posed is stock trading, which fits squarely (and rightly so) into the very high risk area. Someone who sits on his butt for 50 years working in a government department pushing paper puts less at risk, and consequently gains least. That's life and it makes perfect sense, or we'd all be sitting on our butts pushing paper about. The stock trader is engaging in very risky activity, and consequent gains (or indeed loses) the most.

I'm not sure though how you make the jump from that, to figuring that the stock trader "can well afford it" and therefore should feel some particular duty to the paper pushers and others who don't take the risks.

I guess it's our two different perspectives. I've been rich, and I've been poor. Believe me rich is better, but no paper pushers ever gave me a dime that I didn't earn myself. If you want to do "well" financially you have to try really hard unless you just happen to be in the right place at the right time or marry or inherit wealth. Once you achieve such a position, everyone starts wanting to take it from you, with all the justifications in the world.

Personally, I believe in philanthropy and helping other folk who are doing their best and trying hard. What I don't believe in, is being forced into it by other people who don't have to do it themselves. It's a different story when you're standing on the other side of the fence.

Just my thoughts.

TL

[thaimlord]

Whatever. I can see we're on different pages of the book.

Laws or no laws, if we don't treat a person who can live anywhere in the world right, then they'll leave, totally defeating the purpose of trying to get money from them. Treat the rich well and make many incentives to accumulate wealth and you'll have the foundation for a rich country. Do the opposite and you'll get the opposite. It's been tried all over in the world, time and again; we don't need to theorise.

TL

I bet you made your money (if you have some) by being a comedian. There are enough rich Thais and they don't contribute nearly enough to the system. Even the Thai politicians like Abisith agree on this. If every country int he world taxed rich then they could not run and hide. Now they can hide here. So a global initiative to tax the rich 70% would work and invalidate your arguments. (not that I would want that) But giving as an excuse that they can just move up to sunny pastures so they should not be taxed is equally crazy.

Most rich don't struggle at all and most have not build up their on wealth. Usually it comes from family and connections. I know I worked at a stock trading firm with rich clients.

Well sorry mate, I did more than work for a stock trading firm, I actually put my money on the line with stocks, and options and commodities. Theory is one thing, staying up all night for nights on end pacing the floors sweating 1997, 2001, 2008, 2011. THAT is experience. That's what gives you knowledge, not watching it go by.

So you'd lose the comedian bet as well.

TL

[wiki12]

If I had to pay tax on my salary all the people I employ directly and indirectly out in the sticks would not be receiving so much work and therefore they would be poorer.

Would the tax collected from my earnings by the government go to these people?

I think not, it would be lost, stolen and wasted by career politicians whose only qualifications are having attended law school.

Edited July 25, 2014 by wiki12

[Thai at Heart]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

Huh? Other than the obvious, the biggest private land owner is the Chang beer guy. He sells booze. Tell me how hard that is, when you have got no competition.

Land ownership is a scam in Thailand. Forget putting your money in the bank where the govt can find it. Just buy land

[AGareth2]

exess of 50 rai seems fair

however this can easily be put in nominee names!

[Mudcrab]

Hi

I'm not sure where you are getting the stats from that the rich don't pay. I'm pretty sure they probably do, and a lot more "baht-wise" than the rest of us, I'm guessing. I'm just saying that you can't penalise effort and distribute it out to others too much or it create a disincentive.

Cheers

TL

I get my stats from the fact that people who are not earning wages seldom are taxed. They make constructions to stay out of taxation. Its a common known fact that this is happening, if you don't then I suggest its you who read up on things. I am a tax accountant and I hate taxes but in this country the rich (talking real rich) make sure they almost pay no taxes. Land tax would be a great way to get some money from them.

In general if you read my other post you would know I hate taxation of for instance the middle class (salary slaves) who are taxed while company owners (not LTD's) are often making much more and not paying taxes it all goes off books. Same goes for the real rich they avoid taxes. While they may pay more baht wise its the middle class who pays more percentage wise and that is wrong.

Whatever. I can see we're on different pages of the book.

Laws or no laws, if we don't treat a person who can live anywhere in the world right, then they'll leave, totally defeating the purpose of trying to get money from them. Treat the rich well and make many incentives to accumulate wealth and you'll have the foundation for a rich country. Do the opposite and you'll get the opposite. It's been tried all over in the world, time and again; we don't need to theorise.

TL

Presumably in the TARDIS

[HerbalEd]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

Actually you sound rather naive. If all Thai people were playing with the same fair rules, then I'd agree with you. However, that ideal world has not, and does not exist in Thailand ... nor many other countries. In the real Thailand most rich families ... and virtually all the super rich ... got their money through corruption and hundreds-of-years of unfair laws and suppression of the poor.

Edited July 25, 2014 by HerbalEd

[HerbalEd]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

A wonderful example of why there IS such inequality of wealth worldwide. I like the word "struggled"....did Shinawatra or Mark Zuckerberg or the Red Bull clan "struggle"? How awful if they did. Indeed, they should be REWARDED for their brave toil and struggle.

And if our precious "wealthy people" want to "vote with their feet", let them, let them, let them. Off you go, all you great patriots. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

If "struggle" is what it takes to become rich, then the dirt farmers, factory laborers, etc. of the world would be super rich indeed.

[HerbalEd]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

A wonderful example of why there IS such inequality of wealth worldwide. I like the word "struggled"....did Shinawatra or Mark Zuckerberg or the Red Bull clan "struggle"? How awful if they did. Indeed, they should be REWARDED for their brave toil and struggle.

And if our precious "wealthy people" want to "vote with their feet", let them, let them, let them. Off you go, all you great patriots. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Any twit can pick out one or two people (who they probably don't know anyway) and say they didn't struggle, but to get rich, especially very rich is very very hard to do. If you don't think it is, then you're a crapload smarter than I am.

And with the possible exception of Zuckerberg, yes I'd say the others really did struggle to get where they are today.

Patriots? What on earth are you on about? It's not patriotic to pay disproportionate tax. It's not unpatriotic to pay it either. If you're going to attack my views, at least try to keep on subject.

TL

Wish I lived in your perfect world. However, in the real world ... esp. Thailand and the rest of the third world ... the super rich are very often from families who have been super rich for many generations and the only struggle they've done to earn their wealth was to work their way out of their mother's womb.

[h90]

Taxation on land and property, like e.g. condos, would generate substantial income for the state (that is, if people actually paid their tax). Besides filling politicians' pckets this new money should then be thrown into better teacher education and salaries. Then Thailand perhaps would go somewhere.

I think condos aren't the targets. There are people who bought huge areas and do nothing with it, just in the hope that later there will be some development in the area. The land is not used, the land price is artificial high, small farmer or middle class can't buy land.

Having a small tax for people holding more than 100 rai or more than 1000 rai of land would make it less interesting to keep land just in case in future it will be higher value. And the extra money allows to keep the other taxes, on work and VAT low.

[HerbalEd]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

While I agree partly with what you say the real rich here pay almost no tax. So tax them make a threshold for the tax of a couple of million baht and you only hit the real rich. The middle class is already hit enough because the rich don't pay.

Hi

I'm not sure where you are getting the stats from that the rich don't pay. I'm pretty sure they probably do, and a lot more "baht-wise" than the rest of us, I'm guessing. I'm just saying that you can't penalise effort and distribute it out to others too much or it create a disincentive.

Cheers

TL

I get my stats from the fact that people who are not earning wages seldom are taxed. They make constructions to stay out of taxation. Its a common known fact that this is happening, if you don't then I suggest its you who read up on things. I am a tax accountant and I hate taxes but in this country the rich (talking real rich) make sure they almost pay no taxes. Land tax would be a great way to get some money from them.

In general if you read my other post you would know I hate taxation of for instance the middle class (salary slaves) who are taxed while company owners (not LTD's) are often making much more and not paying taxes it all goes off books. Same goes for the real rich they avoid taxes. While they may pay more baht wise its the middle class who pays more percentage wise and that is wrong.

As a tax accountant do you help the rich to avoid taxes? Or do you only work for middle class people?

[cocopops]

This is such a naive way to tax. No person who's struggled to build wealth is going to put up with it. It's really really hard to get wealthy, and some idiot thinks they're then going to be happy to have it disproportionately taken away from them. Wealthy people vote with their feet when governments try this tack on them.

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.

George Bernard Shaw

There is a lot to what you say as a general principle. But a tax on the unimproved value of land is often good policy. Not only does it discourage hoarding and land banks and encourage efficient use of the available land, the one commodity on which almost all business depends, but it's pretty darn tricky to evade too.

The introduction of such a thing is difficult, to be sure, as it would cause land prices to drop, perhaps dramatically.

Edited July 25, 2014 by cocopops