Leftists demand 100 percent tax on the rich
Published: 01 Feb 2013 10:25 GMT+01:00
“We are suggesting that no-one should earn over 40 times the societal minimum,” said The Left's co-leader Katja Kipping in the party's draft election platform, which was seen by regional newspaper the Mitteldeutsche Zeitung.
The party paper said the total tax on those taking home over €40,000 per month would be used to fund social welfare and investing in the country's future.
“Explosive inequality is threatening democracy,” said co-leader Bernd Riexinger. “I call capping income at half a million euros a democracy tax.”
The upcoming campaign for Germany's election in September was going to be one focused on wealth redistribution, said Riexinger.
The Left, born from a merger of former East German communists and disgruntled trade unionists, has struggled to raise its profile under its new leadership after failing to make political capital from the global financial crisis. It sits in the Bundestag and several state parliaments, but failed to win representation in Lower Saxony last month.
Tacking hard to the left with its 100 percent tax idea could mean the party has given up all hope of tempting the centre-left Social Democrats into a coalition at the federal level after this September's general election.
French President Francois Hollande tried recently to impose a 75 percent tax on top earners, but was struck down by the country's courts.
DPA/The Local/jcw


Your comments about this article
What! They just don't get it. Their system collapsed. It is human instinct to want to do better for ones self. Whether it be gathering grain and meat to save for the bad times. Or making more money to put away for the bad times. Or to hand down to your heirs.
As I recall. The heads of the communist/socialist parties throughout history always treated them selves rather nicely. But we must not talk about that. Communists/ socialists always operate on a theoretical ideal. And minus the innate human drive to do more to secure the future of ones self. This communal everybody shares equally might work. But I dare them to show a point in history that it has actually worked.
No you are not.
You are suggesting that the state loot and redistribute every euro fairly earned by anyone capable of doing so above an arbitrary limit of 40 times the minimum wage, which is also an arbitrary amount. Well, not quite every euro. A big chunk of euros will feed the bloated state bureaucracy that runs this highway robbery.
There is nothing new in state looting of successful individuals. Nothing good, either.
This will simply accelerate the departure of the most able, the future employers, job creators and innovators to more tax-friendly countries.
Another own goal from the left wing. Well done.
Doh! Got caught again.
Typical Marxist, wants to take everything away from those who actually produce to distribute to those they themselves deem more deserving and calling it "fair" and in the name of "democracy". Asinine. Just remember there was no democracy in the "equal" DDR.
"As I recall. The heads of the communist/socialist parties throughout history always treated them selves rather nicely. But we must not talk about that. "
Throughout history ?, the very first would be Russia in 1917 hardly along time although your other points are valid .
Personally having read Marx ,I find very little difference between that and "love thy neighbours as yourself" do unto others as you would have them do to you.
Just because the people who implemented got it very wrong does not mean that the principle and the theory is incorrect.
Obviously, this will never be enacted, but the day it does, that is the day that the German economy completely collapses and Siemans, VW, Daimler, and every other German firm loses its entire upper management to American or even, Chinese and Russian firms. 500.000 Euros sounds like a massive sum if you are a Hausmeister making 20.000 Euros a year. If you are a heart surgeon making 300.000 Euros a year, 500.000 isn't that far off. We're not talking about 5.000.000 Euros a year, which still -- obviously -- should not be taxed at 100% or anything close to it.
This is so laughable in its pathetic populism, it wasn't even worth publishing.
history. "the study of past events" That would apply to even a minute ago. :)
I disagree with the premise that those in the past just got it wrong. It went wrong due to human nature. But you are correct in that the theoretical idea of "from each according to their means. To each according to their needs"
Sounds great for sure. But until you totally eliminate the instinctual human trait of trying to better ones self and "getting ahead" Or the corrupting influence of power. It will never work.
I might ask the communist/socialist next door the following.
Did you go to collage or learn a skill? If so why? Did you do it "just because". Or was it to better yourself by gaining knowledge or to get a better job. If everyone gets paid equally. Why would you want to go through 8 years or more of higher education to become a Dr. and then get paid the same as an unskilled laborer.
That's why the theoretical ideals of communism won't work. And always has to be forced upon the population. Look at modern China. How did they as communist's become so successful? Easy. The communist government backed off the pure hard line commy ideals and adopted capitalist policies. OPPS!
Looking at modern China ,I would put down most of the growth to Western companies who are prepared to sacrifice workers jobs in search of a quick profit,that and the fact China pays so poor wages and totally unsafe working conditions that production cost attract greed minded capitalist with no interest in the long term well being of anyone or anything but themselves.
I would also point out that according to your ideas none of the world religions can work and only the one with the biggest gun can dictate the lifestyle of the rest .
Which is probably true but a damming indictment if one were needed on mankind.
With unemployment high in the uro zone and not likely to go down because of no job creation and outsourcing that would be a better OPPS! ;-(
With a low tax rate ,"they have fled to other countries to organize industries that outsell and bankrupt yours."
It is called selfish greed in my book.
If anyone has read any economics course, or has common sense, would see why this would be a terrible mandate. Also, what is not clear is that if it only applies to people? And how much is corporate tax is going to be affected by the mandate. However, a 100% taxation on income after a certain threshold will discourage hardworking and geniune people from working and creating social value through their businesses. There is limited data on how many persons make such money. It is to be noted that it may work some very smart people from joining specific area of work. For example, if the same mandate is applied to income from financial institutions (or capped to per say a million euros), it will actually drive smart people to other industries (small businesses, technology), which may create increased value in socity as compared to banks. (read more at http://laymanfinance.com)
The UK Labour part tried this in the 1970s by imposing a 97% tax rate on the very wealthy and of course most of the wealthy just up sticks and moved. Not a very bright idea...