Never let facts or reality get in the way of a baseless and idiotic identity politics agenda. Nowadays it seems feelings and intentions are more important that facts and outcomes.
Peter Moron, sorry Martin, is the economics editor of The Age. One wonders what economics qualifications and understanding one needs to write on economics for the Age, but it is his references that count most. After all, according to Bernard Keane:
Writing today for Fairfax on the case for gender based tax rates, yes, the case to tax men and women differently, Moron, sorry Martin wrote:
Someone who earns $1000 from wages pays twice as much as someone who earns $1000 by making a capital gain selling an asset. Income from capital gains is taxed more lightly in accordance with what’s known as optimal taxation theory.
No they don’t and no it isn’t you idiot.
Someone who made $1,000 from a capital gain did not earn it in 1 single year unlike the person who earned $1,000 from wages. By definition, a capital gain is earned over more than 1 year.
So if Moron’s, sorry Martin’s, hypothetical person generated their capital gain over 5 years (at an average of $200 per year), should they pay the same amount of tax in year the asset is sold as the person who earned it all in the same year, and possibly earned $5,000 over the same 5 years? And should the person liable for capital gains tax also pay tax on the tax that is inflation?
It is because of the recognition of the multi period generation of the capital gain and the the administrative overhead of adjusting for inflation that capital gains tax rate is different to the income tax rate.
Should a farmer who took a peppercorn salary for 20 years to build his business from zero to $5 million be charged the same amount of tax on business sale as someone who earns a $5 million salary? Spartacus reckons not. Peter Moron, sorry Martin, seems to think that he should.