22 Jan 13
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266331/Nicolas-Sarkozy-Carla-Bruni-dodge-new-French-tax-hike-moving-London-setting-1billion-fund.html
Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Carla Bruni are moving to London to avoid France's 75% top tax rate.
Is there more significance to a former President moving abroad to avoid taxes than an out of work actor doing it?
22 Jan 13
Originally posted by sasquatch672Sarkozy has a Hungarian background and as far as I am concerned
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266331/Nicolas-Sarkozy-Carla-Bruni-dodge-new-French-tax-hike-moving-London-setting-1billion-fund.html
Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Carla Bruni are moving to London to avoid France's 75% top tax rate.
Is there more significance to a former President moving abroad to avoid taxes than an out of work actor doing it?
the majority of the French people will be glad to see the back of
of the little b****************>................................
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
22 Jan 13
Originally posted by sasquatch672The significance may be that some people are willing to actually relocate to their tax haven.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266331/Nicolas-Sarkozy-Carla-Bruni-dodge-new-French-tax-hike-moving-London-setting-1billion-fund.html
Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Carla Bruni are moving to London to avoid France's 75% top tax rate.
Is there more significance to a former President moving abroad to avoid taxes than an out of work actor doing it?
22 Jan 13
Originally posted by johnnylongwoodyWhat's wrong today buddy? You're not usually this worked up.
Sarkozy has a Hungarian background and as far as I am concerned
the majority of the French people will be glad to see the back of
of the little b****************>................................
22 Jan 13
Originally posted by sasquatch672If anything less, the chance of the politician doing it to score a political point is larger.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266331/Nicolas-Sarkozy-Carla-Bruni-dodge-new-French-tax-hike-moving-London-setting-1billion-fund.html
Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Carla Bruni are moving to London to avoid France's 75% top tax rate.
Is there more significance to a former President moving abroad to avoid taxes than an out of work actor doing it?
22 Jan 13
Originally posted by sasquatch672Just one of those moods where you get real annoyed and speak your mind.
What's wrong today buddy? You're not usually this worked up.
Some might say in vino veritas but I have not been drinking.
So,........to reiterate......Screw Sarkozy and screw Lance Armstrong too.
Hey Sasquatch, did you hear there has been another shooting in a school in Houston?
23 Jan 13
Originally posted by TeinosukeWhat is funny is that we've heard over and over from the left that no one leaves their country to avoid high tax rates. They are proud to pay because it is considered fair to pay higher and higher tax rates the richer you are.
It's funnier. But that's probably not what you were asking...
We have heard about two "names" in the international press because people know who they are. How many others have left?
23 Jan 13
Originally posted by spruce112358Let's face it though, the only people leaving are those who can afford to leave.
What is funny is that we've heard over and over from the left that no one leaves their country to avoid high tax rates. They are proud to pay because it is considered fair to pay higher and higher tax rates the richer you are.
We have heard about two "names" in the international press because people know who they are. How many others have left?
There aren't too many left leaning socialists who have the money to leave.
If they did they would also fall into that tax rate and then they too would leave.
23 Jan 13
1 edit
Originally posted by spruce112358Can you provide any example of someone on the left claiming that "no one" leaves their country to avoid high tax rates?
What is funny is that we've heard over and over from the left that no one leaves their country to avoid high tax rates. They are proud to pay because it is considered fair to pay higher and higher tax rates the richer you are.
We have heard about two "names" in the international press because people know who they are. How many others have left?
People may go elsewhere if they can expect a roughly comparable social structure and standard of living. Plenty of rich Frenchmen might well follow Sarkozy to London. Not many are going to follow Depardieu to Russia.
Might be an argument for tax harmonisation across the EU.
23 Jan 13
Originally posted by TeinosukeLet's start with no1m and normbenign's ongoing debate about high marginal tax rates in the 1950's in the US. no1m claims they led to prosperity. normbenign says no one paid such rates (I am paraphrasing, but bear with me.)
Can you provide any example of someone on the left claiming that "no one" leaves their country to avoid high tax rates?
People may go elsewhere if they can expect a roughly comparable social structure and standard of living. Plenty of rich Frenchmen might well follow Sarkozy to London. Not many are going to follow Depardieu to Russia.
Might be an argument for tax harmonisation across the EU.
So today France tries high marginal tax rates, and next we hear that Johnny Halliday, Gerard Depardieu, and Sarkozy are all leaving the country to avoid them. Probably countless others are following (yes, because they have the means) but who are not getting any press because no one recognizes their names.
So in the face of this evidence, will you agree that normbenign was most probably right and that therefore the scheme is doomed to failure because very few are going to stick around to pay such rates?
23 Jan 13
Originally posted by spruce112358My wife and I moved out of New Jersey, and then Allegheny County, PA (home to Pittsburgh) for one reason: high taxes. We've fled high taxes twice. On a national level, not much Americans can do about it, but on a state and local level - you bet, it's happening.
Let's start with no1m and normbenign's ongoing debate about high marginal tax rates in the 1950's in the US. no1m claims they led to prosperity. normbenign says no one paid such rates (I am paraphrasing, but bear with me.)
So today France tries high marginal tax rates, and next we hear that Johnny Halliday, Gerard Depardieu, and Sarkozy are all leavi ...[text shortened]... the scheme is doomed to failure because very few are going to stick around to pay such rates?
23 Jan 13
Originally posted by spruce112358First off, all I've heard so far are anecdotes. A couple of high profile people leaving the country. I've yet to see any statistics that tell us how many in that tax bracket are actually leaving. A small minority can make a lot of noise.
So today France tries high marginal tax rates, and next we hear that Johnny Halliday, Gerard Depardieu, and Sarkozy are all leaving the country to avoid them. Probably countless others are following (yes, because they have the means) but who are not getting any press because no one recognizes their names.
So in the face of this evidence, will you a ...[text shortened]... re the scheme is doomed to failure because very few are going to stick around to pay such rates?
Second, you usually pay taxes in the country where you earn your income. This means that persons who are somehow bound to France for their income (working for a company in the country for example) will not gain a tax advantage by moving, so they won't. What Sarkozy, Depardieu and Halliday have in common is that they'll have no problem making a living outside of France due to their international fame.
23 Jan 13
Originally posted by spruce112358I think no1 may have been more right about the past and norm may have a point about the present. It was probably easier to administer very high tax rates in the 1950s, when people were less mobile and less likely to be able or willing to relocate to another country. After all, if you were an American in the 1950s, you were self-evidently living in the most prosperous, most successful country in the modern world. Where were you going to go to avoid those taxes? If you were a European, you were much more likely then than now to be monolingual, and while you could perhaps relocate from France to French-speaking Belgium or Flanders to the Netherlands or Germany to Austria, the options open to you were seriously limited.
Let's start with no1m and normbenign's ongoing debate about high marginal tax rates in the 1950's in the US. no1m claims they led to prosperity. normbenign says no one paid such rates (I am paraphrasing, but bear with me.)
So today France tries high marginal tax rates, and next we hear that Johnny Halliday, Gerard Depardieu, and Sarkozy are all leavi ...[text shortened]... the scheme is doomed to failure because very few are going to stick around to pay such rates?
The question of the effectiveness of higher taxation policies in the twenty-first century is part of a larger question about the effectiveness of national governments in a globalised world.