The Autism Spiral? (obligatory loluk thread)

[Zeekar]

At 75% most high earners who can will move to the UK and Switzerland. Huge influx of high earners paying 45% = win for us.

Why not Singapore?

[lt]

Am I wrong assuming that it is 75% of everything above 1 million euro?

[elmicker]

It's not quite as serious for the BoE as you suggest.

will eat my proverbial hat if it's not the tip of the iceberg indicating widespread knowledge/tacit acceptance of the manipulation at the BoE.

Why not Singapore?

Because singapore is a totalitarian police state in the marshy armpit of east asia, with no seasons, where it rains at least every day (plus 3 months of monsoon) and you're eight hours from europe's timezone and who knows how many hours from the US. Meanwhile, London is France's sixth biggest city and is two hours from Paris on the train.

Am I wrong assuming that it is 75% of everything above 1 million euro?

No, that's how taxes work.

[Zeekar]

Why not Singapore?

Because singapore is a totalitarian police state in the marshy armpit of east asia, with no seasons, where it rains at least every day (plus 3 months of monsoon) and you're eight hours from europe's timezone and who knows how many hours from the US. Meanwhile, London is France's sixth biggest city and is two hours from Paris on the train.

So why would banks go there if people working for them dont want to? : >

[elmicker]

That was my point. Most of the hurf and blurf about banks upping sticks and moving is just hurf and blurf, but on a more local level, when we're talking about something like working in London under a 45% income tax rate or working in Paris under a 75% tax rate, there's a serious chance of french executives hopping the channel. I know I'd move 2 hours down the road for a €300,000 pay rise.

[elmicker]

That was my point. Most of the hurf and blurf about banks upping sticks and moving is just hurf and blurf. An investment bank working in the european or american markets can't exactly just shift its operations to east asia, but on a more local level, when we're talking about something like working in London under a 45% income tax rate or working in Paris under a 75% tax rate, there's a serious chance of french executives hopping the channel. I know I'd move 2 hours down the road for a €300,000 pay rise.

[Aurora148]

Why not Singapore?

Because singapore is a totalitarian police state in the marshy armpit of east asia, with no seasons, where it rains at least every day (plus 3 months of monsoon) and you're eight hours from europe's timezone and who knows how many hours from the US. Meanwhile, London is France's sixth biggest city and is two hours from Paris on the train.

So why would banks go there if people working for them dont want to? : >

There isn't exactly a lack of Asian people to fill those jobs.

[GeromeDoutrande]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...-shortage.html

[Zeekar]

Why not Singapore?

Because singapore is a totalitarian police state in the marshy armpit of east asia, with no seasons, where it rains at least every day (plus 3 months of monsoon) and you're eight hours from europe's timezone and who knows how many hours from the US. Meanwhile, London is France's sixth biggest city and is two hours from Paris on the train.

So why would banks go there if people working for them dont want to? : >

There isn't exactly a lack of Asian people to fill those jobs.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-1...-shortage.html

[GeromeDoutrande]

That was my point. Most of the hurf and blurf about banks upping sticks and moving is just hurf and blurf. An investment bank working in the european or american markets can't exactly just shift its operations to east asia, but on a more local level, when we're talking about something like working in London under a 45% income tax rate or working in Paris under a 75% tax rate, there's a serious chance of french executives hopping the channel. I know I'd move 2 hours down the road for a €300,000 pay rise.

Are you assuming "the French 1m Euro+ households" could take their jobs along or would they compete with the natives for existing jobs (i.e. be dirty job-stealing Eurozone immigrants)? Would this exodus happen across all industrial sectors or would there be any particular focus?

[Chrien]

Bob Diamond is being grilled by the parliamentary panel atm.

[Rodj Blake]

Has the discovery of the Higgs boson created a time-warp sending us all back to 2003?

[Hast]

Has the discovery of the Higgs boson created a time-warp sending us all back to 2003?

I was going to post a yes rly pic here, but then I decided not to.

[Sacul]

That was my point. Most of the hurf and blurf about banks upping sticks and moving is just hurf and blurf. An investment bank working in the european or american markets can't exactly just shift its operations to east asia, but on a more local level, when we're talking about something like working in London under a 45% income tax rate or working in Paris under a 75% tax rate, there's a serious chance of french executives hopping the channel. I know I'd move 2 hours down the road for a €300,000 pay rise.

meight even under such limited geographical distances people are reluctant to move. I think its been proven pretty well by now that the entire dogma of every country has to pay all high exec's of any market field competitive wages on a global market to be bullshit. I even wrote a lolpaper about it in uni back in 2004 proving its complelety false(edit: to be fair it was about the neo liberal wave of privatizations in the utilities market from the mid to end '90's).
The cultural and language barriers are huge and for most not a barrier they can take. It is offcourse different for strictly english markets and the anglosaxon culture. For a german to come to lets say denmark or china is still pretty rare and not at all as the propaganda machine would let to believe.

[Frug]

That was my point. Most of the hurf and blurf about banks upping sticks and moving is just hurf and blurf. An investment bank working in the european or american markets can't exactly just shift its operations to east asia, but on a more local level, when we're talking about something like working in London under a 45% income tax rate or working in Paris under a 75% tax rate, there's a serious chance of french executives hopping the channel. I know I'd move 2 hours down the road for a €300,000 pay rise.

meight even under such limited geographical distances people are reluctant to move. I think its been proven pretty well by now that the entire dogma of every country has to pay all high exec's of any market field competitive wages on a global market to be bullshit. I even wrote a lolpaper about it in uni back in 2004 proving its complelety false(edit: to be fair it was about the neo liberal wave of privatizations in the utilities market from the mid to end '90's).
The cultural and language barriers are huge and for most not a barrier they can take. It is offcourse different for strictly english markets and the anglosaxon culture. For a german to come to lets say denmark or china is still pretty rare and not at all as the propaganda machine would let to believe.

I think what France is doing now is interesting purely because it will test this hypothesis.

How could you otherwise prove that people won't move unless you actually do what france is doing now? Are there other examples of such a big hit on high income earners that you can cite as examples?

[Zeekar]

USA:

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/his...ome-tax-rates/

[cheeba]

meight even under such limited geographical distances people are reluctant to move. I think its been proven pretty well by now that the entire dogma of every country has to pay all high exec's of any market field competitive wages on a global market to be bullshit. I even wrote a lolpaper about it in uni back in 2004 proving its complelety false(edit: to be fair it was about the neo liberal wave of privatizations in the utilities market from the mid to end '90's).
The cultural and language barriers are huge and for most not a barrier they can take. It is offcourse different for strictly english markets and the anglosaxon culture. For a german to come to lets say denmark or china is still pretty rare and not at all as the propaganda machine would let to believe.

eh? Financiers are (unsurprisingly) the most fickle people ever when it comes to money. Raise taxes and they are gone in a flash. My ex works at a bulgebracket IB - when the tax laws changed a year ago or so she simply up'd sticks with 20 people from her office to switzerland. They all paid six figures in tax a year - and gained a large chunk of that back by moving to swiss-land. English is the language of business, all big banks have international offices and they are very happy to shuffle people around to avoid taxes. Moving is incredibly easy.

I think what France is doing now is interesting purely because it will test this hypothesis.

How could you otherwise prove that people won't move unless you actually do what france is doing now? Are there other examples of such a big hit on high income earners that you can cite as examples?

Aye - one to watch. France is taking the 'left' path to recovery, the UK more to the right. I have no idea which will work better though I innately prefer austerity.

However, my gut feeling is that both countries will flounder along over the next 2-3 years with equal success/failure.

[Celedris]

Real rich people in the US typically pay about 11-15%, and those are the ones that aren't cheating on their taxes.

I believe the proposed French taxes would actually be well over 75% with other taxes included as well, making it effectively more like 85-90%.

[kzig]

At 75% most high earners who can will move to the UK and Switzerland. Huge influx of high earners paying 45% = win for us.

What makes you think they'll pay anything like headline rate? If they're rich and venal enough to relocate purely for tax reasons, I would bet that they're almost certainly the same people who put their income into K2-style schemes, non-dom spouses or tax havens.

[tekai]

Am I wrong assuming that it is 75% of everything above 1 million euro?

No, that's how taxes work.

Oh really? Why shouldn't it?
how about this:

As part of France’s austerity measures, a surcharge is being imposed on high incomes for income received in 2011 and 2012 as follows:

• income between €250,000 and €500,000 – 3%
• income over €500,000 – 4%

I couldn't find any English sources which explain the 75% tax in more detail except for this: http://www.french-property.com/news/...lande_reforms/

i. Tax Rates - The creation of two new rates of tax:

• 45% for those with income higher than €150,000.
• 75% for those with income higher than €1 million.

The other existing bands and rates will remain in unchanged.

however, if I get it right, if you don't live alone you'll have to earn multiple millions to actually pay the 75%. But still 75% is imho crazily stupid high.