• geissi@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    each tax means a new adviser

    That is evidently untrue and I doubt they want to tell us that French companies need 300+ tax advisors. Yes, more taxes can mean more complexity. So do more laws, more employees, more customers or more product lines.

    This is a completely pointless truism than does not prove anything.
    They just claim that it’s bad without anything substantial to back it up.

    The statement that you can raise the same tax revenue with fewer taxes shows that they don’t understand why different taxes exist in the first place.

    Also it conflates taxes, fees, social security contributions, all of which may follow different legal and budgetary rules.

  • huppakee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    Tldr; France had barely any reforms, Germany had two big ones. Both Germany and France have a higher tax burden compared to the UK, amount of taxes ≠ amount paid in tax. The more taxes, the more complex the system. A complex system decreases international attractiveness for (large) businesses, so it would be good if UK looked more like Germany when it comes to taxes.

      • huppakee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        There is a bunch of charts in the article that might answer that question, but i honestly have no clue how they compare to each other. I wrote that based on what i read in the article:

        […]

        France raises a lot of tax: €1,321bn, equal to 45.3% of GDP, compared to 37% in the UK. […]

        […]

        Germany is different. It is not a low-tax country: in 2024 it raised €1,817bn, equal to 42.2% of GDP. […]

        […]

        • geissi@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I may have overlooked it, but I did not see a single chart nor any mention in the text addressing the tax burden for an individual worker.
          Which would be a far more meaningful discussion that the pure number of taxes.

  • KatherinaReichelt@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    What kind of framing is this? The number of taxes really doesn’t matter and it also makes sense for a country to have a lot of taxes in its books. Taxes can totally steer people into a desired direction and it makes sense for a country to have a lot of taxes. Not to finacne the government, but to make undesired stuff like cigarettes or alcohol. Maybe you could finance your country with VAT only, but that would also mean that cigarettes would be dirt cheap and that your citizens will die of cancer

    • huppakee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      From the article:

      Does it matter?

      We think it does. We usually focus on complexity within individual taxes, but “number of taxes” is also a sign of complexity. When you’re a company looking to do business, each tax means a new adviser, a new set of advice, and a new list of things you can and can’t do.

      The article goes on, explaining the differences between two extremes withing the EU (France on the one end and Germany on the other). It’s not saying all taxes are bad, or a low tax burden is good - it is arguing why complex tax systems hurt business. I agree with you that expensive cigarettes increase the population their overall health, i have no reason to believe the author thinks different.

    • glasratz@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      The point is that everyone who does any kind of business needs to be aware of the taxes that are important to that tiny corner of business. The more individual ones exist, the more complicated it gets and the easier it is for everyone in the system to make mistakes - and that includes tax offices. For example: Germany has at least five different taxes for alkohol and alcoholic drinks. They include a tax for beer, one for sparkling wine and one for mixtures made from soft drinks and alcoholic drinks. Now you need someone to classify each beverage by category and maybe a lawsuit or two to figure out exactly which is which.

      • KatherinaReichelt@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s a perfect example:

        • There is the general alcohol tax
        • There is this sparkling drinks tax introduced to finance the Kaisers navy. Which really is stupid to have and maybe should be abolished
        • There is the “Alcopop” tax which totally managed to kill this category of drinks as intended

        So yeah, a little bit mixed. And i kind of disagree that this is too complicated. If you’re a supermarket or some kiosk, your supplier will provide you with the necessary information about the product. The Schaumweinsteuer, Biersteuer and Alcopop-Steuer are taxed directly at the producer level. Yes, you may need to deal with the beer tax when operation a brewery, but that really is not that complicated.

    • Captain Baka@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Because governments love taxes from workers. Germany actually does love taking taxes from working class people, but obviously hates taking taxes from businesses and the rich people. Thats my perception as a german.

        • pulsey@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          because not all taxes are equal. High taxes for rich can lead to higher equality and a better wealth distribution.

          Current taxes ,which focus on income instead of wealth, will burden workers higher.

        • lath@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Because it’s about taxes. Can’t talk about taxes without class nuance. They’re joined at the hip. I don’t know why you would feel it is out of context…

        • abc@suppo.fi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Political discussions & Lemmy. You’re likely to get a pretty skewed opinions here whether you asked them or not.

    • SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Do they also love hospitals, roads, social services…?

      But what have the Romans done for us lately?

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Because governments love taxes.

      I mean, they’re talking about the number of different taxes rather than the total tax load.