Japan must avoid rise in property tax for commercial land: LDP exec

his point was that adding taxes to the poor ends up forcing employers to pay their lowest paid workers more to cover the cost to the taxes.

Sorry, but some people simply don’t have jobs.

... then? Need secure source of funds to help them = broad based low rate consumption tax.

Spend some time studying economics

.... Yessir!

It would be much fairer, and possibly bring in more revenue to help the needy, to scrap consumption tax altogether and progressively increase income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax.

A bit hypothetical. Broad based low rate taxes have a good track record.

As I said, the rich pay loads of consumption tax.

Again, factually incorrect. Do you understand Adam Smith's First Maxim of Taxation? I will share it with you:

" The subjects of every state ought to contribute toward the support of the government, as nearly as possible in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state. The expense of government to the individuals of a great nation is like the expense of management to the joint tenants of a great estate, who are all obliged to contribute in proportion to their respective interests in the estate. In the observation or neglect of this maxim consists what is the equality or inequality of taxation."

In addition to this Smith wrote regarding taxes on the necessities of the poor:

"The high price of necessities for the poor must be compensated by an increase in their wages.. It must always be remembered, that it is the luxurious and not the necessary expence of the lower class that should be taxed."

Without regurgitating paragraphs of his writing his point was that adding taxes to the poor ends up forcing employers to pay their lowest paid workers more to cover the cost to the taxes. Effectively it is the employers who end up paying the full cost of taxes on the poor. Spend some time studying economics before making blanket statements that are factually incorrect.

A person with zero income, needs financial assistance. Not a blanket consumption tax rate cut - that benefits them in no way at all.

A person with low (not zero) income isn’t helped by having taxes levied on the necessities of life. It isn’t ‘muddling’ anything to point out that the lower one’s income, the greater the bite of regressive taxation.

The only reason consumption tax is earmarked for social welfare is that the lawmakers needed an excuse to up the rate. It would be much fairer, and possibly bring in more revenue to help the needy, to scrap consumption tax altogether and progressively increase income tax, capital gains tax and inheritance tax.

From each according to his means, to each according to his needs.

That is incorrect.

No, it wasn’t.

As I said, the rich pay loads of consumption tax.

I’m talking in absolute amounts, and that’s because consumption tax is about securing tax revenues.

As soon as you start talking about proportion paid in comsupyion tax, you’ve fallen in to the trap of muddling the two things I said not to muddle.

A person with zero income, needs financial assistance. Not a blanket consumption tax rate cut - that benefits them in no way at all.

The tax side is only the revenue collection side. The redistribution side is where the needy are assisted, and the tax they too pay can easily be compensated for when that happens.

Those who pay the most consumption tax are the rich, as they paid loads of tax when they buy new cars and houses etc, not to mention all the food that they pay tax on too.

That is incorrect. The greater one's income, the less of that income is lost to the state in the form of a sales or consumption tax. The poorest among us tend to use the greatest proportion of their income to buy goods and services subject to sales taxes. If you are lucky enough to be poor in Florida the state even applies sales taxes to your rent! Sales taxes are considered by economists everywhere in the world to be among the most regressive taxes possible. The wealthy spend a smaller proportion of their income on goods and services subject to consumption or sales taxes. Here are Adam Smiths thoughts on the subject:

"Any rise in the average prices of necessaries, unless it is compensated by a proportionable rise in the wages of labour, must necessarily diminish more or less the ability of the poor to bring up numerous families, and consequently to supply the demand for useful labour.

…

Taxes upon necessaries, by raising the wages of labour, necessarily tend to raise the price of all manufacturers, and consequently to diminish the extent of their sale and consumption.

…

The middling and superior ranks of people, if they understood their own interest, ought always to oppose all taxes upon the necessaries of life."

Nice to see Amari and the LDP always looking out for the little guy. Making sure no one forgets the needs of property developers and private equity firms .

""Japan must avoid any increase in property tax for commercial land ""

What companies need is a decrease NOT an increase, or even NO change. Many companies are already on their knees, and all they got is a 2,000,000 jpy subsidy cash which can only support the business for a month or two.

@Robert Maes

I hope you are thinking of getting out of this sinking ship....

My ability to pay 10% added tax on my food has diminished.

Abolish tax on food!

Kutan,

I do, indeed, own 3 companies in Japan, and one in Italy and one in Bahrain.

but I am very happy to learn from you on taxes, do let me introduce you to my Japanese COA so you can teach him

Do ldp pay property tax? If so, we should help them.

Amari seems not to realise that consumption tax hits the worst off worst.

Dont look at consumption tax in isolation. It is the revenue side for the social welfare system. The “worst off” are the top beneficiaries of the social welfare system.

Those who pay the most consumption tax are the rich, as they paid loads of tax when they buy new cars and houses etc, not to mention all the food that they pay tax on too.

There are two basic points:

1) The point of the social welfare is to assist the needy. It is not the point of the tax system to assist them and a tax rate on whatever can never assist someone who has no income at all.

2) The point of the consumption tax is to secure stable sources of tax revenues to fund the social welfare programs that help the needy, without causing economic distortions that would shrink the economic pie that we all depend on.

Those two basic points should not be muddled.

If we wish to help people with no to low income, we give them more money through the social welfare payments.

Don’t fiddle with the tax rates that even rich people pay when they consume stuff. That money is funds for the social welfare system.

“It’s a tax that is linked to Japan’s social welfare system,” Amari said of the consumption tax. “It shouldn’t be used as a policy tool (to spur growth),” he was quoted as saying, adding that distributing payouts to households and companies was an easier way to ease the pain from COVID-19.

Mr. Amari seems not to realise that consumption tax hits the worst off worst.

Giving ¥100,000 to every member of every household was profligate, as much of that lies idle in the risk-averse Watanabes' bank accounts.

Slashing consumption tax for a limited period will get cash out of those bank accounts, and spreading the love to everyone.

"I own 3 companies in Japan and I have to pay “ residence “ tax on my offices, every month. Never heard something that stupid. That is for the privilege of paying office rent, Including tax, so we can work to pay corporate tax, and tax on salaries. And personal taxes."

Florida applies their sales tax to rent. Depending on the city that is an additional 7% to 8.5% on top of your rent each and every month. The landlord has to collect it and remit it to the state with paperwork.

If you indeed own 3 companies you should know how to reduce your tax by now.

Good point. I deduct just about everything. Have less than 1 million yen taxable income.

I own 3 companies in Japan and I have to pay “ residence “ tax on my offices, every month. Never heard something that stupid. That is for the privilege of paying office rent, Including tax, so we can work to pay corporate tax, and tax on salaries. And personal taxes.

Serious? What’s the Japanese name for that tax?

I own 3 companies in Japan and I have to pay “ residence “ tax on my offices, every month. Never heard something that stupid. That is for the privilege of paying office rent, Including tax, so we can work to pay corporate tax, and tax on salaries. And personal taxes.

If you indeed own 3 companies you should know how to reduce your tax by now.

I own 3 companies in Japan and I have to pay “ residence “ tax on my offices, every month. Never heard something that stupid. That is for the privilege of paying office rent, Including tax, so we can work to pay corporate tax, and tax on salaries. And personal taxes.

Lot of concern for companies, none for workers. *I bet somehow personal tax will increase to lessen the burden companies bare.