▲ | HeckFeck 12 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You do realise they were taxing the entrepreneurs before their companies made a profit? What sort of "justice" is that? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | emn13 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Anybody earning a wage pays tax on revenue, not profit. Property taxes can be even be on value, not revenue or profit. For any given tax burden, I don't see the "justice" problem by shifting more of that towards value and revenue and less towards profit. You could argue that in a vacuum that it is more just because it slightly incentivized investment over saving. And I'm sure you could argue the reverse too. However, to me this mostly looks like a practical issue, and the traditional dogma that a broader tax base is a better one likely holds here too. Taxes should be on all three categories, and for both legal and real persons - and thus each specific category lower (and in particular thereby reducing the height of specific niche corners cases such as this one, and also reducing the opportunity to game the system). Also, it's interesting to listen to anecdotes like this, but caveat lector; the article's author's experience may not be the norm; and the issues they experienced may be due to the specifics of norway's taxation system or their personal choices, not the principles behind it; and last but not least as long as money can flow mostly freely between tax systems it's not enough for a system to be fair and well designed in a vacuum; it also need to consider how shifting wealth/income/profits across borders will affect outcomes. To my mind, this is all pretty orthogonal to justice. Clearly, you see that differently. Why does this smack of injustice to you? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | psd1 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You can avoid profit indefinitely - just ask uber. That's if we're sticking to the customary definition of "profit". So that you know, the practice in question is to open a line of credit on the value of your stock. This enables you to put large amounts of money in your pocket without "realising" your gains. It's a blatant tax dodge. "going into debt" lol no. Close the loophole. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
▲ | exe34 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Norway imposes a wealth tax that taxes unrealized gains at approximately 1% annually. Calculated on the full market value for publicly traded assets and the book value of private companies. On New Year's Eve, whatever your net worth - including illiquid assets - is subject to this tax. It doesn't matter if you're running a loss-making startup with no cash flow, if your investments have tanked after the valuation date, or even if your company has gone bankrupt—you still owe the tax. "unrealised gains". gains, not losses. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|