Taxes on castles in the air: fictional profits as an attack on small assets?

The idea of taxing fictitious profits on real estate or securities is often sold as a modern, just and seemingly elegant way to fill the state’s coffers, in fact it is a frontal attack on the substance of small fortune. Not real value fluctuations, but only on paper, are declared tax events, although no one sells anything,has no cent in his hands and the alleged prosperity can turn into the opposite at any time. Those who taxes in this way finally separates tax law from economic reality and treat book values like hard income, although they are not. This is not a modern tax policy, but a cold expropriation in the guise of technocratic cleverness, which primarily affects those whohave laboriously gained a little property.

Fluctuations in value as permanent trap

What is particularly perfidious is that fluctuations in value in volatile markets become a permanent trap when only rising book values are taxed, but those who are falling only half-heartedly or not at all are taken into account. In such logic, every intermediate increase becomes a tax joy festival for the tax authorities, while subsequent losses remain silent with the owner. This is how one is createdAsymmetrical world where the state always wins, even if the investor loses economically. Anyone who has to live with resetters and fluctuations will be punished twice because they bear the full risk of the market and, in addition, the arbitrariness of a tax that only picks out the raisins. This construction is nothing more than a systematic grip in the pockets of those whodo not have professional tax departments and sophisticated design models.

Private investor as guinea pig

The practice of only aggressively recording increasing book values and tangling or ignoring losses in complicated rules is particularly affecting private investors who do not have a lobby. They should save dutifully, take responsibility for their age, buy real estate, hold funds and build up reserves, but as soon as they have done it, they become a game of nested tax experiments.Every movement of the price, every revaluation of a property threatens to result in a tax burden, although in everyday life nothing of this alleged profit comes. While large institutional actors adapt their structures to use or circumvent these systems for themselves, small and medium-sized wealthy people remain with a thicket of modest, forms and incomprehensible calculationsback. A group is punished, which is politically permanently admonished to save while at the same time serving as a slightly milking source of income.

Destruction of long-term savings

Such regulations destroy the foundation of long-term savings because they turn the holding of assets into a tax risk operation. If you don’t know what kind of burdens that still harmless tomorrow will arise for today, you will lose all planning security and start aligning your decisions with meaning and need, but by tax traps. The idea of aFinancing a small house, buying an apartment as an age module or holding securities with a steady hand over many years is undermined if the tax office can skim virtual profits at any time. Long-term, which should actually be politically desirable, is transformed into short-winded tactics by pure tax pressure. This is economically destructive and socialFire hazard because it undermines the basic trust in property.

Multiple taxation of the same increase in value

The risk of multiple taxation of the same increase in value is built in when prices rise over time, fall and rise again. Any intermediate status can become a new tax point of contact, so that the same development is repeatedly accessed, although there is no economically proportional increase. In the end, it can happen that an investor afteryears of net assets that has hardly grown or even shrunk on the starting point, while the state has nevertheless skimmed significant amounts from the interim movements. The tax then eats up through the course, not the result, and ignores the fact that markets are not one-way streets. Anyone who constructs this openly shows that it is not about fairness, but aboutMaximum fiscal exploitation of any conceivable constellation.

Property owners under permanent suspicion

The attack on small assets in real estate that is not intended as a speculative object but as a basis for life becomes particularly clear. If rising land values or market prices provide the basis for fictitious taxation, although nobody sells, the owner is held hostage in a market that he himself does not actively play at all. people who own a housePaying off to live in it is treated as if you were constantly realizing profits, although in fact you only shoulder higher insurance premiums, stricter conditions and rising costs. In extreme cases, it must be sold to bear the tax burden based on a value that only exists in tables. This is the inverse of any healthy logic: The roof over the head willto the tax risk item that pushes its owners on the defensive.

Private old-age provision as an illusion

Anyone who seriously expects citizens to take responsibility for their age at the same time cannot create tax instruments that turn assets into a minefield in the long term. Fictional profit taxation destroys the simple equation that creates step-by-step security from saving. Instead of calm and stability, the movement of values brings new uncertainty, every political reformNew fear of repercussions, every wave of assessment concerns about additional burdens. The message is devastating: whoever saves is stupid, whoever consumes lives easier, whoever has nothing has the least to lose. A society that treats its owners in this way saws its own supporting beams and drives people into cynicism and resignation.

Alienated Technocratic Debate

The political debate about such models usually takes place in a technocratic parallel world in which formulas and model calculations are more important than the concrete reality of life for small investors. In committees and committees, complicated terms are handled, transition models, assessment dates and assessment bases are discussed, while no one is in simplerLanguage can explain what that means for the pensioner with a small depot or the craftsman with a paid-off apartment. This alienation is not an accident, but part of the problem, because it allows you to hide hard interventions behind technical jargon. Anyone who expresses criticism is quickly considered uninformed or backward, although they simply feel that something is not fundamentallytrue. This creates a dangerous distance between legislators and those who have to bear the consequences.

Transitional Shadows and Legal Uncertainty

Earlier reforms have shown that models with fictitious gains can lead to legal and practical chaos. Transitional regulations, retroactive fictions and complicated evaluation questions create a permanent uncertainty in which no one knows exactly which values apply and which exceptions exist. Disputes are piling up, courts are bombarded with detailed questions,Tax consultants spend countless hours interpreting contradictory regulations. For the ordinary citizen, the main thing is to feel at the mercy of a system that can subsequently define different rules of the game at any time. Anyone who can only handle property with a professional escort does not live in a citizen-friendly constitutional state, but in a maze that onlyCross the strong and well-connected safely.

Political loss of control camouflaged as justice

The advocates of such taxation models like to hide behind the catchphrase justice and claim that they only want to use those who benefit from increases in value. In truth, this type of policy documents a loss of control over one’s own expenses, which is concealed by increasingly aggressive hits on every conceivable basis of assessment. Instead of the courageTo speak about priorities, waste, inefficient structures and sprawling apparatus, one resorts to seemingly clever solutions that are implemented on the back of those who have no means of power. Taxing fictitious profits means denying real problems and passing on their costs to those who cannot defend themselves. This is not justice, butstate-organized imbalance.

Distrust as a new base currency

Anyone who witnesses how intensively the state is trying to access air bookings loses the confidence that ownership and provision are safe in this system. Distrust becomes the new basic currency with which citizens react to every reform because they intuitively suspect that in the end it is not the great ones who are asked to pay, but themselves. This erosion of trust has farBeyond tax law, it weakens the willingness to invest, to set up, to take risks and to take on responsibility. A policy that hunts fictional profits gradually destroys the bond between the state and the citizens and creates a climate of defense. At the end there is a society where everyone is just trying to make themselves invisible because visibility is the point of attackhas become for new taxes.