Someone crazy person just proposed an 8,5% wealth tax to replace income tax. And then says:

> Young people with high incomes now often spend on luxury, because saving for a house seems unfeasible. "If they can build wealth faster, they will postpone that expensive journey for a while," says Kooiman.

How do you build wealth if it's taxed at 8.5% per year? Sounds to me like this forces everyone (even more) to get a mortgage, because a home is taxed less than every other asset and won't pay net worth tax until you've repaid the house.

https://www.accountancyvanmorgen.nl/2025/04/17/vervang-alle-heffingen-door-een-vermogensbelasting/

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

In other words, this scheme only allows you to save for a down payment, and prevents you from investing in any other asset class - since nothing has a risk-free return of 8.5% plus inflation, let alone enough to actually accumulate.

also they will introduce the wealth tax and keep the income tax because that’s how reality (often) works

#porquesnodos

It's boiling frog communism. 8.5% confiscation per year is 50% in 8 years. Hopefully this would not prevent from saving in assets with unregistered ownership. Ideally in one that allows for easy transport accross borders.

Fwiw this isn't going to happen.

A perfectly logical reasoning. However, your premise is flawed. You assume politicians have the common good in mind, but that's false.

This isn't a politician I think.

You're right, I didn't read the article. It is not a politician but a state's bodyguard as Rothbard calls them. The kind of people that write the kind of things politicians want to hear and provide the justifications that they need to do all kinds of horrible things. A state's bodyguard doesn't have the common good in mind.

And not just taxation. How do you even raise money in inflation?

Great idea, so I just take loans to buy a fuck load of property, pay no tax because I don’t have wealth, only debt and then rent out those properties and pay zero income tax?

Pretty much, and then they'll make a rule to counter than and before you know it you have all the complexity back, which was the main argument for this change in the first place.