Often, there is talk of dreaming about the ”wonderful night” in 1981, as well as ”the century tax reform” ten years later. Both had their basis in the problem that could not wait any longer. How the pressures for change today is more diffused.
described at Tuesday’s DN Debate their points of departure: away with the hassle, no redistribution of income, probably a higher tax ratio to cope with the health and social care. The recipe is to increase the kapitalinkomstskatterna and reduce the tax on work.
There is no axiom that it is not possible to reprioritize in the public sector.
Åsbrink, ’taxes’ purpose is to finance public spending”. But Sweden already has a high tax ratio, compared with our competitor countries. From 1950 to 1980, rose municipal tax from 10 to 30 crowns in the cut, but it started to receive. For high income taxes kill the incentive to work. High taxes on business strikes at the employment and reduce competitiveness. ”Needs” does not change this fact, what the political left than imagine.
money, the defence and the police need to get more. But there is no axiom that it is not possible to reprioritize in the public sector. The alliance government lowered the tax, especially on lower incomes. And it happened without the country broken apart or the care of the elderly was marked, even if it could sound so on the first of may.
Any kind of blocköverskridande solution is needed, because the parliament looks the way it does. A guess is that the tax rate in this case can hardly be upset, not because the English are forever optimal, but that’s not likely to want to lower it and the right wing parties do not raise.
is, in principle, correct. With the budget introduced an earned income tax credit, while the breakpoint for state income tax was raised. Januariavtalet remove värnskatten. All in all encouraged people to work and educate themselves.
the Focus will need to be on capital taxes, but where you have to be careful. But they can not be seen as a homogeneous block. Secondly, they must be managed to avoid undesirable effects.
The uniform 30% tax on capital income is not low in a european perspective, and the level hung together with ränteavdragen as many now want to reduce the. Or should the inheritance tax should be reintroduced, the one that everyone knew was in the practice voluntary? Equity is volatile, and the country cannot afford to scare away everything that is required for investment.
finance minister Magdalena Andersson (S) in the election campaign promised to draw out 1-2 billion dollars on the ”very highest” income, but just wanted to say which taxes would not be raised.
real estate taxes are less of a concern. All the economists love it, because the tax base is stable and does not move abroad. But how many more billions can it provide? The old model was arbitrary and unfair, the new ”fee” is not ideal. Something else must to.
be a part of the discussion. To the left is considered the lower vat on food to benefit the less fortunate. But rather, it is a subsidy to höginkomsttagares greater consumption.
the Purpose of a tax reform is to make the economy more efficient. But it will be necessary to make a variety of tradeoffs. They have to be thought through instead of plottras away.