If a wealth tax brought in zero revenue to the government, would people still support it? If yes, why?

[percypiggy200]

I’m curious and I’d love to know people’s reasoning.

I never said someone else would recieve it? I'm talking about how the government chooses to spend tax money.

More houses need to be built in this country. It’s that simple. Yes we need to restrict immigration but it is vital that we build more housing as this is the only way house prices will come down. Any other ‘solution’ is just tinkering.

Why do we have such a low tax take from median earners? Because median earners pay so much to house themselves they have no money left to pay tax. Why is the housing benefit bill so whopping? Because house prices. Why is the birth rate plummeting? Again, house prices.

Build, build, build, build, build and half of the problems this country faces will disappear overnight. (Oh but the pensioners think they have done well in life purely due to the value of their houses, so we can’t build more as that would bring prices down!)

The bus I saw was ‘we want to pay more we won’t leave’ with loads of social media validation in the comments.

They didn’t have the caveat small print, well not really not yet bit of a cop out.

Ok, I'm talking about the movement and discourse as a whole, not just what was written on the side of a bus. Maybe you should point out to them that they can just pay more tax now if that's literally all they are trying to achieve, they must just be total idiots to waste their time campaigning for permanent and enforced change

But Patriotic Millionaires claim themselves to be non-partisan.

How does that square with your assertion?

It squares just fine, why wouldn't it?

Yep they could do both. Show they mean it, and campaign for change. Why not?

This is not public information

Because paying more tax now doesn't achieve their goal? I already answered this upthread

Which government are they waiting for before they relieve themselves of their own millions?

Yes you have mentioned the cop out part. Although they’re not taken seriously just getting SM likes.

Your title is a bit extreme but for policies that have an adverse effect like chasing away high earners or deter setting up of business,etc the answer to your question is that it is an ideology, as simple as that, why would you do something that has the consequences of losing the country growth in the long run?.

I never said it had raised more than expected

I bet. Funny that.

Ok, so they claim to be non-partisan, and yet at least one of their governing board writes in the Guardian.

Got it.

The idea that searching for dynamic place to live is compatible with Dubai is so laughable I can barely remember the original question.

A PP did.

I've checked and I quoted a PP, not you directly

It’s all rather academic, at the moment - even Reeves knows a high level wealth tax would be economic suicide. These Patriotic Millionaires are a rounding error compared to the proper money.

A successful lawyer and a green industrialist have both called on the chancellor to raise taxes on "the super-rich" - including them - in the Budget.
Dale Vince, who founded a renewable energy firm, says he is in "the top 100 tax payers in Britain", however he still believes he "should pay more".
He, along with Gloucestershire solicitor Stephen Kinsella, have joined the campaign group Patriotic Millionaires UK, which is calling for a 2% tax on wealth over £10m.
But Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the UK does not need "a standalone wealth tax".

‘Struth

Can somebody clarify?
There's a group of non-partisan patriotic zillionaires who are campaigning to pay more tax?
But, they don't want to pay the extra tax now, because they don't like the current government and don't approve of what it might be spent on?

So:
When are they proposing that this extra tax is paid?
There's a black hole, we have a Labour government, the cost of living is biting everyone - how could now not be the best time to put their £zillions where their mouth is?

And more generally how come they're the arbiters of the right time, the right government and the right things to be spent on and yet people are supposed to be impressed by the goodness that's in their hearts?

The number and amounts of donations to the government and the debt management office are published. They are anonymised but, even if you assume every single donation is from Patriotic Millionaires members, they aren't paying much. £1,478 from lifetime donations in 2024 in total.

One which makes tackling inequality a priority I could not have explained that anymore clearly. Ok I will try

Say I think it's so important that all cats have tiaras. But the government don't care about that, they're just giving tiaras to dogs. I COULD just give them more money and hope they give tiaras to cats, but I don't think they will, so instead I'll donate to a charity that gives cats tiaras.

But actually, I think it would be so much more effective if the government gave tiaras to cats, rather than leaving it to charities. So I'm going to campaign for the government to give tiaras to cats, and to tax me more to fund it. Giving the extra money now wouldn't result in any cats getting tiaras. It also wouldn't make any permanent change or make others do the same.

So what you’re saying is, it’s ok for the wealthy to pick and choose when to pay tax. Yet workers should just keep paying more and accept it? Is that right?

Brilliant, thanks.

Funny old game, isn’t it? Virtue signalling, I mean.

The total net worth of the Patriotic Millionaires will be a comparative rounding error versus those who do not want to pay more.

So it’s just masturbation.