Forums - Politics Discussion - Fuck taxes! Love ya Belgium .



Gerard Depardieu Causes Media Firestorm With Move to Belgium to Avoid Taxes

With the top rate of income tax in France set to rise to 75 percent next year, the film star becomes the latest celebrity to leave his country.

French movie star Gerard Depardieu has caused a political and media debate late this week after it emerged that he has moved to a town in Belgium just across the French border in an apparent attempt to avoid higher taxes.

French media reported that the star moved to the small Belgian town of Nechin, which is within walking distance of the French border and has a French population of 27 percent. Rich French families, including a well-known supermarket clan, have set up residences there over the years.


Belgian residents, whether they are Belgian nationals or not, pay no wealth tax and no capital gains tax on stock sales. In France, the top rate of income tax will rise to 75 percent next year on income over $1.3 million (1 million euros).

Depardieu didn't publicly comment on his move, but he, along with other celebrities, have opposed the new 75 percent tax on the rich promoted by president Francois Hollande.


Today on 15 december Deapardieu has exchanged with no sadness his French nationality with the Belgian one...



 

Around the Network
The irony is that, you have a 75% tax pressure on most products here.
It's still better then the france tax, but still. If he has any sense, he would now move on to Monaco.

The twins are always ready to party.

well 75% is way too much. So I find it funny they were nto expecting this from the rich people.



 

 

I think anyone earning over $1 million Euros per year can afford to pay 75% tax ON EARNINGS OVER $1 million Euros without it affecting their lifestyle in any real way.

However, I do believe that no matter how many dollars you earn a majority of every earned dollar should go into your pocket. i.e. I think governments should discipline themselves such that their budget can be met with a top income tax rate substantially below 50%. If you have to tax anyone above 50% then you're doing something wrong.

“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

binary solo said:
I think anyone earning over $1 million Euros per year can afford to pay 75% tax ON EARNINGS OVER $1 million Euros without it affecting their lifestyle in any real way.

However, I do believe that no matter how many dollars you earn a majority of every earned dollar should go into your pocket. i.e. I think governments should discipline themselves such that their budget can be met with a top income tax rate substantially below 50%. If you have to tax anyone above 50% then you're doing something wrong.


What?

You think it's ok to take 75% of someone's earnings? You then go on to say 50% is still reasonable. I suppose you think the state knows how to spend people's money better then they do?

At 75% 1,000,000 would become 250,000

That's a big difference.

If you earned that money I think you would want to spend it on what you want instead of losing 75% of it to taxes. Even 50% is far too much.

I mean, wouldn't a tax system and spending system that requires 10% of everyone with no loopholes be fair and work a lot better? It's just as unfair to make the rich pay more as it is to give the lazy free money.



Around the Network
75% TAX???

I would move the hell out of that country to.

It's just that simple.

kain_kusanagi said:
binary solo said:
I think anyone earning over $1 million Euros per year can afford to pay 75% tax ON EARNINGS OVER $1 million Euros without it affecting their lifestyle in any real way.

However, I do believe that no matter how many dollars you earn a majority of every earned dollar should go into your pocket. i.e. I think governments should discipline themselves such that their budget can be met with a top income tax rate substantially below 50%. If you have to tax anyone above 50% then you're doing something wrong.


What?

You think it's ok to take 75% of someone's earnings? You then go on to say 50% is still reasonable. I suppose you think the state knows how to spend people's money better then they do?

At 75% 1,000,000 would become 250,000

That's a big difference.

If you earned that money I think you would want to spend it on what you want instead of losing 75% of it to taxes. Even 50% is far too much.

I mean, wouldn't a tax system and spending system that requires 10% of everyone with no loopholes be fair and work a lot better? It's just as unfair to make the rich pay more as it is to give the lazy free money.

In this case noone actually needs 1 million dollars or even a net 250k 

 

10% is not enough to maintain a welfare state, something the electorate desires



My only surprise is it took this long for a story like this to come out.

non-gravity said:
kain_kusanagi said:
binary solo said:
I think anyone earning over $1 million Euros per year can afford to pay 75% tax ON EARNINGS OVER $1 million Euros without it affecting their lifestyle in any real way.

However, I do believe that no matter how many dollars you earn a majority of every earned dollar should go into your pocket. i.e. I think governments should discipline themselves such that their budget can be met with a top income tax rate substantially below 50%. If you have to tax anyone above 50% then you're doing something wrong.


What?

You think it's ok to take 75% of someone's earnings? You then go on to say 50% is still reasonable. I suppose you think the state knows how to spend people's money better then they do?

At 75% 1,000,000 would become 250,000

That's a big difference.

If you earned that money I think you would want to spend it on what you want instead of losing 75% of it to taxes. Even 50% is far too much.

I mean, wouldn't a tax system and spending system that requires 10% of everyone with no loopholes be fair and work a lot better? It's just as unfair to make the rich pay more as it is to give the lazy free money.

In this case noone actually needs 1 million dollars or even a net 250k 

 

10% is not enough to maintain a welfare state, something the electorate desires

Huh?

Of course you don't NEED more than you NEED. But you DESERVE what you EARN.

10% is more than enough for the state to run. What we need to do is stop allowing welfare lifers and all the other governement waste.

I'll tell you what we don't need. We don't need to pay lazy people to make babies and stay at home to watch TV, smoke and drink.



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:
My only surprise is it took this long for a story like this to come out.

Well, their were a lot of those stories coming out.  The thing is that most are more the typical business men who everyone expect that they do this.   Depardieu on the other hands is more of an symbol.  He is someone many French are proud of and the fact that he is so vocal about it and even go so far that he would change his nationality (something he don't have to do in fact) is what is creating the mediastorm.