How do other countries tax investment income?

[yurbud]

Like capital gains, dividends, and whatever you call what hedge funds make?

I suspect it's a hell of a lot more than what we do.

[BrklynLiberal]

1. chart at link better than my cut and paste

http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/Europe/capital-gains-tax/

France 33.30%
Denmark 32.00%
Netherlands 30.00%
Norway 30.00%
Russia 30.00%
Sweden 30.00%
Finland 28.00%
Portugal 25.00%
Hungary 25.00%
Latvia 23.00%
Estonia 21.00%
Ireland 20.00%
Serbia 20.00%
Cyprus 20.00%
Luxembourg 19.48%
Spain 18.00%
UK 18.00%
Lithuania 15.00%
Bulgaria 15.00%
Czech Rep. 15.00%
Macedonia 12.00%
Malta 12.00%
Moldova 10.00%
Slovenia 10.00%
Ukraine 1.00%
Italy 0.00%
Liechtenstein 0.00%
Monaco 0.00%
Poland 0.00%
Romania 0.00%
Slovak Rep. 0.00%
Andorra 0.00%
Austria 0.00%
Belgium 0.00%
Turkey 0.00%
Croatia 0.00%
Montenegro 0.00%
Germany 0.00%
Greece 0.00%





Europe: Capital gains taxes (%).

In arriving at effective capital gains tax rates, the Global Property Guide makes the following assumptions:

* The property is directly and jointly owned by husband and wife;
* They have owned it for 10 years;
* It is their only source of capital gains in the country
* It has appreciated in value by 100% over the 10 years to sale
* The property was worth US$250,000 or 250,000 at purchase.
* It is not their sole or principal residence.


These assumptions are critical. In many countries a holding period of less than 5 years results in capital gains being taxable. But a longer holding period often results in no capital gains tax being payable. For more details see the Data FAQ

[A HERETIC I AM]

2. Here ya go;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_gains_tax

This Wiki entry contains a partial list of other countries and how they tax Dividend income;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dividend_tax

[FreakinDJ]

3. Stock Transaction Fees of $.15 to $.25 per share

some thing we could certainly use here in America to curtail speculators and Day Traders from manipulating the markets

[yurbud]

4. I strongly agree with that. I think the total taxes on Wall St. every year should equal the bailout

just for the poetic justice of the thing.

[FreakinDJ]

12. Most Western Countries already have such a fee

The USA is behind the curve

[yurbud]

14. we're ahead of the curve in corruption

[RB TexLa]

9. Why would you want to curtail speculation from the market?

Unless you desire to damage the market.

[FreakinDJ]

11. You don't honestly beleive that do you

True "Capitalism" is based on an investment, but the investment represented working capitol to manufacture goods and or services.

The current form of Wall St. is so self absorbed with pure speculation the product became secondary and it's net value merely hypothetical. Hence the current financial crisis

[RB TexLa]

13. All markets have to have speculation. It's vital to the health of any market.

[FreakinDJ]

19. Here if the Company is worth more then it's stock - We RAID them

We don't produce goods nor continue to pay dividends for generations to come. We buy a majority share (with the 401K funds of working Americans) and dissolve the corporation

Do you call that speculation ?????

[muriel_volestrangler]

28. A fruit and veg market works fine without speculation

Seriously, markets do not need speculation. They just need the ability for genuine supply and demand to alter prices.That might come through speculators (though at a cost to the actual suppliers and consumers), or it might come through linking suppliers and consumers directly to bargain.

[Statistical]

30. um they do have speculators.

You always have both suppliers and purchasers who want to hedge their bet.

The flipside of a hedge is speculation.

When someone hedges their price (either suppler or purchaser) in effect they are selling risk. They are locking in a price and selling off risk.

Now risk works both ways. It might save them a lot or it might save them nothing but they are trading off that potential.

So if a farmer wants to lock in say $5 per bushel he is selling off risk. If prices go to $7 per bushel he doesn't get any benefit however if prices go to $3 per bushel he is still protected.

The farmer is essentially selling risk. For every seller there is a buyer. The farmer can't sell risk unless someone else is willing to buy it and that person is a speculator.

Without hedging:
Price at harvest: $3/b Net for Farmer $3/B
Price at harvest: $5/b Net for Farmer $5/B
Price at harvest: $7/b Net for Farmer $7/B

With hedging:
rice at harvest: $3/b Net for Farmer $5/B Net for Speculator: $2/B LOSS
Price at harvest: $5/b Net for Farmer $5/B Net for Speculator: break even
Price at harvest: $7/b Net for Farmer $5/B Net for Speculator: $3/B GAIN

In essence the farmer is selling the potential gain or loss above or below $5/B to someone who wants that risk.

Hedging is a valuable function in markets. People do it all the time (even if the market is informal. Without speculation there is no hedging.

[muriel_volestrangler]

31. No, at my local market, there are no people buying *and* selling the same goods

One lot come to sell their goods; another come to buy. Some may sell one type (eg vegetables, to make money) and buy another (eg meat for their dinner), but they do not speculate. The sellers keep an eye on what their competitors are selling the close equivalent goods for, and how quickly their own stock is selling, and adjust their prices as a result. The buyers walk around, comparing the goods and prices available. Sometimes, a buyer and seller will negotiate about quantity and price, and change the offered price as a result. But I do not think this is 'speculation'. No-one is quickly buying and selling the same goods to obtain a profit due to price movement.

You describe a situation in which speculation can be used. I said a market does not need it, in reply to a claim that "all markets have to have speculation. It's vital to the health of any market". It is not 'vital'.

[Statistical]

32. The global food market goes way beyond your local market.

Farmers routinely uses commodity hedges to protect their interest.

Sure people (and business) can operate completely without hedges however that create a huge level of risk.

A farmer who does everything right, has good weather, good yield, good crop only to see wheat prices fall 90% right before harvest would be wiped out in a single season.

Most (not all and certainly not the smallest ones) farmers hedge by selling risk to someone else (the basis for futures markets).

Buyers do the same thing. Bread company buys future contracts to ensure price of grain won't go above x (because if it is their contract lets them buy it at x). Airlines buy oil contracts to ensure when they sell a ticket at a certain price (and that price is based on oil at z) they don't end up having to fly that passenger at a loss becuase oil shot up 30% between time ticket was sold and time flight actually used the fuel.

[muriel_volestrangler]

33. You are still confusing some examples of what is currently done with "all markets *must* ..."

Markets do not have to have hedging. There are now, and have been in the past, many markets without future contracts. Yes, some producers or buyers like to lessen risk; but they do have to pay for that. I doubt that 'most farmers hedge by selling risk'; the majority of farmers are subsistence farmers, or ones who sell a small amount of their produce at small markets. Perhaps you meant "most American farmers'.

[Statistical]

34. Yes I did mean most American farmers.

The reality is that farming output and pricing is highly volatile.

Farmer (even good successful multi-generational ones) rarely have the financial resources to survive multiple bad years. Without hedging that would be another risk piled on them making it very difficult to succeed in the long run. While they may have a couple (or even a dozen) good years in the long run they will get destroyed.

I never stayed markets MUST have hedging just that markets DO have hedging and also markets are more efficient with hedging.

Hedging is a valuable resource to both suppliers and consumers of a commodity resource. The flip side of hedging is speculators.
You can't have one without the other. Speculators aren't going away unless we move to a command economy and leave producers at the whims of the market and all the risk that entails.

[annabanana]

21. Until "The Market" starts working better for more Americans

It deserves a kick in the slats.

The specualtion is spoiled trust fund babies playing with other peoples lives and hardly a thought as to the damage they can do to those lives.

[lumberjack_jeff]

35. What social good does day trading provide? n/t

[Statistical]

16. What country has a stock transaction fee of $0.15 to $0.25 per share? n/t

[FreakinDJ]

18. Most of Europe (excluding UK) and Japan

Doesn't seem to adversely effect the markets in those countries

"SEC Fee" — Section 31 Transaction Fees

When you sell a stock, you may have noticed that a small transaction fee, often just a few pennies, appears on your confirmation slip. Although some broker-dealers have described this charge as an "SEC Fee," the SEC does not actually impose this fee on individual investors.

The SEC does not impose or set any of the brokerage fees that investors must pay. Instead, under Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, self-regulatory organizations (SROs) -- such as the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and all of the national securities exchanges (including the New York Stock Exchange) -- must pay transaction fees to the SEC based on the volume of securities that are sold on their markets. These fees recover the costs incurred by the government, including the SEC, for supervising and regulating the securities markets and securities professionals.
http://www.sec.gov/answers/sec31.htm

[Statistical]

22. Which country has a fee of $0.15 to $0.25 per share?

Not sure why you quoted the SEC. That is the SEC transaction fee in the United States.

So one last time which countries have a $0.15 to $0.25 per share transaction fee? I'll give you a hint: None.

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. The UK has a stamp duty of 0.5% on buying shares

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/Taxes/TaxOnSavingsAndInvestments/DG_10013514

It's true that it's not a flat fee per share, but that wouldn't make much sense anyway - some shares have much higher prices than others, and there's no reason for the buyers of those to pay less, proportionately.

[Unruly]

5. The more something is taxed, there less there will be . . .

Incentives matter.

[Scuba]

6. Get real.

If I can make a million bucks and be taxed at 30% I'm way ahead of making $100,000 taxed at 15%.

[Unruly]

7. Doesn't matter . . .

. . . those with a million dollar in investment income will take it elsewhere if the taxes on it are increased. That's reality. They are always looking for the highest NET return.

[Scuba]

17. Wrong again....

...if you earn a million because of the American economy you can hardly take it elsewhere.

[Unruly]

20. There are always . . .

. . . alternatives. Businesses and individuals will seek out the highest NET return.

[Scuba]

23. So if I'm making billions on Wall Street, I'll quit and go to...

...Saudi Arabia if my taxes go up? Unlikely.

[Unruly]

25. Why would you quit?

Raising taxes in one area of the economy raises relative after-tax income in other areas of the economy. Firms will simply reallocate their investments to areas of the economy, or the world, where the after-tax returns are relatively higher.

Nobody has to quit or move. The investments move.

[Scuba]

26. Can't work on Wall Street if you're not ON Wall Street.

[Statistical]

27. LOL. Really?

So the entire global financial system (with combined GDP of roughly $11 trillion) only works from one street in New York?

Wow.

[Odin2005]

8. Wrong, high corporate taxes force businesses to reinvest their earnings into infrastructure...

...in order to avoid the taxman. That is part of why the US economy was so strong before the 70s. When corporate and capital gains taxes are low, as they are now, corporations will tend to gamble the money on Wall Street.

[Unruly]

10. Businesses . . .

. . . and individuals, invest to yield a profitable return. Taxing the return reduces the net profit/return and the money goes where the net return/higher is higher. Simple.

[Unruly]

24. n/t

[yurbud]

15. so you'll refuse to do something that will turn a profit because you'll get to keep less than 100%?