Top

Nick Clegg calls for UK wealth tax


Updated on 24 September 2012 | 23 Comments

The Liberal Democrats want to bring in a 'wealth tax'. But Nick Clegg's plans would hit homeowners the hardest.

Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minster, has called for Britain's richest to pay more in tax.

Denying claims that his party wants to 'soak the rich', Clegg repeated his belief that those earning over £50,000 a year should contribute more to British society through higher taxes.

In addition, Clegg insisted that the Lib Dems would not allow any further spending cuts "on the backs of the poor". In a BBC interview, the Deputy Prime Minister said that the Lib Dems would not agree to more welfare savings unless their coalition partners also agreed to tax increases for the well-off.

The main problem with Clegg calling for higher taxation of those earning above a mooted £50,000 a year is that this group is relatively small. Indeed, only around one in 25 British workers (4%) earns above £1,000 a week (£52,000 a year). This puts roughly 1.2 million Brits into this category, out of a total workforce approaching 30 million.

Warning that he wants the rich to "make a fair contribution to this huge national effort of balancing the books", Clegg indicated that the Lib Dems would push for higher taxes on unearned wealth, such as property profits and capital gains.

Paying your fair share

Clegg's argument has some appeal: those Brits with the largest assets should "pay their fair share". However, as with all proposed new taxes, the devil is in the detail.

The Lib Dems have already proposed a 'mansion tax' on expensive properties, possibly at a flat rate of 1% on homes valued at £2 million or more. But with a mere 75,000 or so properties in this category, any mansion tax would be just a drop in the ocean. Hence the Lib Dems' plan to go further by introducing a tax on other personal wealth beyond property.

Hinting at other ways to collect more tax from richer Brits, Clegg said, "We have already illustrated through Capital Gains Tax, through Stamp Duty, through tax avoidance and many other measures ... the top 10% pay more and we can do more of that."

Working out a wealth tax

Although the Lib Dems have suggested increasing Council Tax on high-value properties, plus an end pension tax relief for high earners, these changes would not raise enough tax revenue to make any real dent in the budget deficit.

On the other hand, wealth taxes look conveniently attractive and tempting. According to the latest wealth survey by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), British households and non-profit institutions serving households had total wealth of £7 trillion in 2011. This averages almost £143,000 for each of the UK's 49 million adults.

Here's how this enormous asset pile breaks down:

  • Property: £4.3 trillion (61% of our net wealth)
  • Life insurance, pension funds, shares and other assets: £3 trillion (43%)
  • Currency and other deposits: £1.2 (17%)
  • Debt: £1.5 trillion (-21%)
  • Net wealth: £7 trillion (100%)

We collectively own £8.5 trillion in assets, but our net wealth falls to £7 trillion thanks to £1.5 trillion of debt -- mostly home loans.

Were this £7 trillion to be subject to a yearly wealth tax of, say, 1%, this would raise £70 billion a year for the Treasury. At a stroke, this would slash the UK's budget deficit by more than half (it was almost £120 billion in 2011/12), setting our nation's finances on course for recovery.

However, a 1% wealth tax would have severe consequences for most households in Britain. With average wealth of £143,000 per adult, we would each have to find an average of £1,430 a year -- nearly £120 a month -- to pay this extra tax from our earnings. What's more, with property our biggest asset by far, homeowners would pay considerably more wealth tax than tenants.

Clearly, imposing such a tax bill on already-stretched Brits would crash consumer spending, sending the UK economy tumbling back into a deep recession. Therefore, any wealth tax would have to be introduced gradually, starting at a low level of, say, 0.2% a year and then perhaps rising by 0.1% a year until it reached the desired level.

Property taxes abroad

Recognising that those with considerable assets should shoulder a steeper tax burden, many other countries already have wealth and/or property taxes in place. For example, these countries all levy yearly property taxes: Italy (0.6%), Spain (1.1%), Portugal (1.2%), France (1.5%), USA (2%) and Switzerland (2.3% in some cantons).

What's more, any property tax would be far easier to administer than a tax on general wealth. With savings interest steadily accruing and share prices bouncing around, taking a snapshot of your total assets at any one point in time would be an administrative nightmare. That's why a property tax which rises in line with increasing property values or inflation would be easier to manage.

Despite being greeted with horror by the 17.5 million British households that own their own homes, property taxes would get those with considerable personal wealth to pay more. Whether these taxes take the form of an annual property tax or the introduction of Capital Gains Tax (CGT) on profits from selling your main home remains to be seen.

More on tax:

Ten ways to avoid Capital Gains Tax

How to get a tax refund

How to make sure you’re on the right tax code

Six easy ways to pay less tax

Rent A Room: make tax-free cash from your spare room

Most Recent


Comments



  • 27 September 2012

    There is a lot of good comment in this thread. Thank goodness most get the importance of reducing government spending. I read an article that claimed Brazil now had a law making it illegal for their government to borrow money to fund spending, making it necessary for them to balance their budget. If that is true, what a great law to introduce into the UK. Government spending is now the major problem facing the west. Governments are turning to Central Bank(st)ers to fund their out of control spending habits, and they are obliging them, thus facilitating capital misallocation on a grand scale.When it looks like those massive loans are in danger, they create inflation and lobby for government bail-outs to avoid their loans going bad. The common man and woman pays the price, and these debts are mounting up to affect generations of our children yet unborn. It is the rapacious appetite of government ministers for our hard earned cash that we should fear the most, and the 'tax the rich' mantra is a big red herring. We'd do better to turn the equation on it's head. Reward cash rich people for spending money in the UK on UK made goods. Choose the industries you wish to help, and incentivise the purchase of their products. Reduce NI (tax on jobs). Reduce PAYE ( another tax on jobs). Give full tax relief to anyone who buys certain UK made goods, say like luxury yachts/cars/houses/pick yours!...thus promoting those industries. Limit government to 35% of GDP and demand a balanced budget. Tell the EU that you will begin reducing payments to zero unless their books are properly audited and the annual missing 20 billion Euro spending gap accounted for. The list goes on. More taxes is plain stupid, and misses the point entirely of what has caused the problem. Government spending completely out of control.

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 26 September 2012

    What is the state and what should pay for it. Possession is nine-tenths of the law but in todays Britain the fruits of this ownership contribute very little toward the state that protects it. Another function of the state is to promote the Ponzi scheme of unfunded liabilities and inter-generational transfers. Lifted from the brilliant John Kay this morning. "Mr Palmer reported that the present value of unfunded liabilities of US medicine and social security is $137tn"; yes this is ten times total US GDP. "Social security is a means of inter-generational transfer. The only bread fit to eat is bread baked today: but why should today’s bakers feed the retired bakers of yesteryear? Why should we look after old people, who can no longer do anything for us?" The old who shout about tax should be careful what they wish for. Most old people own their own homes but are expecting the working young to fund their continued existence - the same young who have been denied basic property ownership rights (average age of first time buyers is now over 37).

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

  • 25 September 2012

    Hardtruth, did you read my post? And I do appreciate that some people posting here are very young, but please stop blaming GB for the current problems. He may not have helped but I afraid that the fault goes back to darling Maggie, even the MP expenses "scandal"!

    REPORT This comment has been reported.
    0

Do you want to comment on this article? You need to be signed in for this feature

Most Popular

Copyright © lovemoney.com All rights reserved.

 

loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) with Firm Reference Number (FRN): 479153.

loveMONEY.com is a company registered in England & Wales (Company Number: 7406028) with its registered address at First Floor Ridgeland House, 15 Carfax, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1DY, United Kingdom. loveMONEY.com Limited operates under the trading name of loveMONEY.com Financial Services Limited. We operate as a credit broker for consumer credit and do not lend directly. Our company maintains relationships with various affiliates and lenders, which we may promote within our editorial content in emails and on featured partner pages through affiliate links. Please note, that we may receive commission payments from some of the product and service providers featured on our website. In line with Consumer Duty regulations, we assess our partners to ensure they offer fair value, are transparent, and cater to the needs of all customers, including vulnerable groups. We continuously review our practices to ensure compliance with these standards. While we make every effort to ensure the accuracy and currency of our editorial content, users should independently verify information with their chosen product or service provider. This can be done by reviewing the product landing page information and the terms and conditions associated with the product. If you are uncertain whether a product is suitable, we strongly recommend seeking advice from a regulated independent financial advisor before applying for the products.