Billionaires: That Old Taxes Bugbear
There are, we are told, only two things certain in life: death and taxes. In truth there are one or two other things we could add, and the old saying about death and taxes can easily be changed with many other words, but this is the most relevant one here, and the idea people are most likely to quote. It did not originate with Benjamin Franklin, but can be followed back to 1716 and the actor Christopher Bullock, and, as with many things from Franklin’s pen, has been used out of context for so many other matters, it has completely lost all that he had originally referenced it to: the Constitution of the United States of America.
The Bugbear today, though, is not so much about death, but about taxes, and the fact that there is nothing fair about how they are assessed or who they are assessed against. And here, specifically those people who have rather more in their bank accounts and share portfolios than the average person on the street: Millionaires and Billionaires – not to mention one or two occasional Trillionaires. It has been raised in public and private circles for a considerable period of time, and the idea of implementing taxes on those with a far higher financial worth than others discussed, laughed at, and dismissed.
Not that it was always so. It is only a few decades since those swimming in apparent wealth received tax bills well above what the average worker is expected to pay, but these have been steadily reduced over the years by a succession of governments in various countries and of various political hues who are afraid, apparently, that their small supply of excessively rich will disappear. Surprisingly, many of these super rich still live in the countries where they were highly taxed, and their families, complete with massive bank balances, had lived in them for generations before. The idea of a higher tax rate, historically, does not seem to have bothered too many.
Today we are faced once more with the idea that the super rich will move to other, more lax countries if one or the other decides to raise their basic rate and, to be honest, there are examples of some doing just that. A billionaire who left the United Kingdom, after helping to finance their leaving the European Union, to settle elsewhere has been cited often as an example. What has not been mentioned, however, is the knock-on effect of his departure. As far as the paying of taxes is concerned, there has been none.
The truth of the matter is that if a person is faced with paying higher taxes on an immense amount of wealth and they decide to leave the country for tax haven or similar, the country they are leaving has effectively lost nothing. Financially the country is in much the same position as it was; they have merely not gained more tax revenue. Someone who pays their taxes at the lowest possible rate, or who has accountants ensuring that no taxes are paid who then moves, is no loss to a community or country whatsoever. They might be a loss to the accounting firm assisting them in avoiding the payment of taxes, but no more. And we do not see any complaints surrounding those of a middling worth moving from one country to another, taking their skills and their finances with them. It happens every single day of the week, without any country suffering losses. For many it is not even noticeable.
It’s time to bat down this preposterous idea that someone of massive financial worth – but precious little else – will be a great loss to any society or country. If they are not prepared to contribute to its upkeep, then they have no need to be a part of it and should be allowed – if not encouraged – to move on. But at their own expense, and not that of the normal, law-abiding and honest taxpayer often forced to subsidise them in so many other needless ways.
