by Eric Pichet, La Revue de Droit FiscalVol. 14, p. 5, April 2007
Abstract:
Despite efforts to ‘liberate’ the Impôt de Solidarité sur la Fortune (‘Solidarity Wealth Tax,’ the French wealth tax) during the last legislature (2002-2007), ISF production had increased in 2006, jumping from €2.5 billion in -2002 to 2002 € 3.6 billion. The analysis of the economic effects of this ISF wealth tax suggested the following conclusions: The cost of tax collection remains low (about 1.6% of profits); Not raising the limit in line with inflation between 1998 and 2004 created a revenue windfall for the French State of €400 million in FY 2004 alone; ISF fraud mainly involving undervaluation of assets has stabilized over time at around 28% of total revenue, which equates to; (if the legal framework remains unchanged) there was a State deficit of 700 million euros in 2004; The largest flight since the establishment of the ISF wealth tax in 1988 is equal to ca. €200 billion; The ISF creates an annual deficit of 7 billion euros, or almost twice what it produces; The ISF wealth tax has probably reduced GDP growth by 0.2% per year, or about 3.5 billion (about the same as it produces); In the open world, the ISF wealth tax consumes France, shifting the tax burden from wealthy taxpayers who leave the country to other taxpayers.
HT2 Tyler Cowen.
by Scott Lincicome, Cato at LibertySeptember 16, 2024.
Quote:
Yeltsin, who two years later became Russia’s first freely elected leader, wandered through the halls of the small Randall’s market that day and marveled at the variety and accessibility of the products on display. According to various reports, this visit – not to NASA – caused Yeltsin’s exit from the Communist Party and his departure from the Soviet economic model. Built in 2007 New York Times The obituary tells this story:
During his visit to the United States in 1989 he was more convinced than ever that Russia has been seriously damaged by its centralized economic system, where people stand in long lines to buy the basic necessities of life and more often than not find empty shelves. He was surprised by what he saw in a Houston supermarket, with the variety of meats and vegetables available to ordinary Americans.
Lincicome also cites this in New York Times Yeltsin’s obituary:
Leon Aron, quoting Yeltsin’s friend, wrote in his autobiography, “Yeltsin, A Revolutionary Life”…: “For a long time, on the plane to Miami, he sat motionless, his head in his hands. ‘What have they done to our poor people?’ he said after a long silence.” He added, “On his return to Moscow, Yeltsin would confess the pain he felt after the Houston trip: ‘the pain of all of us, of our country so rich, so talented and tired of endless exploration.'”
He wrote that Mr. Yeltsin added, “I think we have committed a crime against our people by making their standard of living incomparably lower than that of the American people.” The aide, Lev Sukhanov is reported to have said that it was then that “the last vestige of Bolshevism fell” within his boss.
DRH note: This last quote reminds me of something Nikita Khrushchev said, something quoted from Red Abundance. Here is what I wrote on “Many Things,” my review of it Red Abundance:
The book ends with a sympathetic demonstration of Nikita Khrushchev in 1968. Khrushchev, who was forced to retire in 1964, looks back, with sadness and anger, on the great amount of blood that was shed for the communists. He thought that losing was good for him because he and his colleagues were creating paradise. But here are his actual words, which Spufford told us in the footnotes of the tapes that Khrushchev recorded but which his son had smuggled into the West withheld from history:
“Paradise is a place where people want to be perfect, not a place they escape to. What kind of socialism is that? What kind of s**t is that, if you have to put people in chains? What kind of social order? What kind of paradise is it?”
by Elizabeth Nolan Brown, The reasonSeptember 18, 2024.
Quote:
I can’t speak to whether the allegations against Combs are true. But from reading the case book, there are a few things I can comment on. The first is how—again—the Mann Act rears its ugly head, criminalizing what shouldn’t really be a crime. The second is how federal prosecutors (re)expanded the use of sex-trafficking laws to go beyond the type of activities they were pushed to target. And the third is how a perjury case opens up the government to take more property than it would otherwise be allowed to take.
by Christian Britschgi, The reasonSeptember 17, 2024.
On Thursday, a group of Republican senators led by Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) introduced the Renewing Opportunity for the American Dream (ROAD) in Housing Act, which proposes a fund to hold reforms in the federal housing system.
Unlike the federal YIMBY (Yes in my backyard) bills that have been introduced in recent years, Scott’s bill does not attempt to force, manufacture, or bribe local and state governments to loosen their zoning codes. “Housing policy is local, and state legislatures should promote local solutions to local problems,” reads a press release on the bill.
However, the bill includes at least one idea to increase housing supply.
That includes repealing a federal law that requires manufactured homes to sit on a permanent steel chassis.
by Rainer Zitelmann, The Wall Street JournalSeptember 17, 2024.
Quote:
In 1942 Hitler defended the planned Soviet economy to his inner circle: “One must have an undeserved respect for Stalin. In his own way, this guy is smart. . . and his economic planning is so comprehensive that it is surpassed only by our Four Year Plan. I have no doubt that there are no unemployed people in the USSR, compared to capitalist countries like the USA”
In July 1941, Hitler said: “The rational employment of national power can only be achieved through an organized economy from above.” And: “Regarding economic planning, we are still very much at the beginning and I think it will be a very good thing to create a German and European economic order.” Statements like these confirm Hayek’s basic thesis.
Also:
Hayek’s book introduces a second important assumption: The loss of economic freedom precedes the loss of intellectual and political freedom. Critics of his concerns point to the UK, which after World War II introduced very high taxes and imports. Although the economic consequences were disastrous—and reversed decades later by Margaret Thatcher, who was a great admirer of Hayek—political freedom was not lost.
The critics are onto something. The loss of economic freedom does not immediately lead to the loss of political and intellectual freedom. But Hayek was more right than wrong. Look at the recent example of Venezuela, which lost economic freedom first. Political freedom disappeared next.
Source link