An unhealthy obsession pollutes Spanish politics: tax phobia. The allergy to taxation affects in particular PP and citizens, but also manifests itself in PSOE; And it cobras special virulence in any autonomous government. The perfect example of this phobia is runaway race between autonomous communities to eliminate inheritance tax. There are no technical reasons for such viciously. The Poor Catechism Antisucesiones is summed up in a litany: capital received by heir has already been taxed in life of donor. But it is forgotten that tax has a social function (to correct inequality which socially ratifies an inheritance); That tax act of heir is different from tributary act paid by person who generated transferred capital and that any capital or income is subject to more than one imposition in practice, since when income taxable is spent, y support Indirect taxes.
The Antisucesiones phobia is better explained by congenital weakness of autonomous governments with pressure of great fortunes. Eighty percent of heirs don't pay for success. As soon as capital is divided between several people, system of tax reductions and bonuses comes into play and payment decreases or disappears. The idea of heirs who cannot pay tribute is, in general, false. Inheritances are often rejected because y involve payment of mortgages or or debts; Approximately 13% of heirs cannot pay. A detailed analysis of property tax shows that in Spain re are 6,480 people with great fortunes, whose descendants in future, more or less near, would be called to inherit about 107,785,000,000 (excluding exempted patrimony), 29.2% of Declared non-exempt net worth. These people would be main beneficiaries of a lowering or suppression of ISD; 0.01% of Spanish population of 2014. That no one arguya that suppression of tax favors a large majority of heirs.
The same autonomous governments that dispense of successions are those that later whine in Ministry of Treasury asking compensations for lost collection (about 2.5 billion in Spain) and complain that autonomy have more powers than Resources. The Committee of Experts for Regional Finance warned that tax should not be abolished or depreciated; That it was necessary to agree on a minimum of homogeneous taxation in all communities and to impose after taxes between 4% and 5% or 10% and 11% according to degree of kinship. But it is more comfortable to dissolve without ton or tax system.
Counterpoint: When Trump processed his delirious tax regression, 400 U.S. millionaires from Responsible Wealth club called on Congress to reject any legislation "that exacerbates even more inequality." Among or things, George Soros and his colleagues denounced that reform would allow richest "to transfer massive legacies to ir heirs without paying taxes." What a difference! Is re any doubt that inheritance tax is objectively fulfilling a social function, which is to curb intergenerational tendency to concentration of wealth?
You can follow country opinion on Facebook, Twitter or subscribe here to Newsletter.