The Tax Justice Network said trillions could be raised with a ‘featherlight’ tax on the 0.5% of richest households, copying a current Spanish tax

The Tax Justice Network said trillions could be raised with a ‘featherlight’ tax on the 0.5% of richest households, copying a current Spanish tax

Governments around the world copying Spain’s wealth tax on the super-rich could raise more than $2tn (£1.5tn), according to campaigners calling for the money to help finance the climate transition.

As a growing numbers of countries consider raising taxes on the ultra-wealthy, the Tax Justice Network campaign group said in a report that evidence from a “featherlight” tax on the 0.5% richest households in Spain could help raise trillions of dollars globally each year.

The Spanish government, under the socialist prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, introduced a temporary “solidarity” wealth tax in late 2022, which is collected in 2023 and 2024, on the net wealth of individuals exceeding €3m (£2.6m). It is estimated to apply to the richest 0.5% of households.

  • Five@slrpnk.netEnglish
    111·
    25 days ago

    The MBFC is not any part of any solution, and failing to acknowledge how the bot is harming media literacy on Lemmy undermines any future solution you might implement.

    • Rooki@lemmy.worldEnglish
      111·
      25 days ago

      Having nothing and being a “trust me bro, this source is lit and unbiased” is better?

      • source: Trust me bro
      • Five@slrpnk.netEnglish
        101·
        25 days ago

        Yes.

        One of the basics of media literacy is that no source is unbiased. This is one of the flaws with MBFC - rating biased news corporations at the center of its spectrum as ‘least-biased’ sources. This is not a credible position for an organization that wants to be considered something other than a propaganda mill.

        Many of your readers are interpreting political bias to mean credibility, and are rejecting sources that might expand their political horizons. MBFC conflates these two things as well, exacerbating the problem. Dave M Van Zandt rates left-leaning publications as less factual than alt-right outlets with even higher and more egregious problems with factual reporting.

        If a reader is curious of the bias of a publication, it’s better they do their own research rather than poisoning the well before they see the article. Giving them bad information is worse than leaving them to their own devices and letting them develop media literacy on their own.

        And it may not be hard to develop something better. But it’s difficult to focus attention on that when we’re distracted trying to quell the bleeding wound that is MBFC.