French decision makers divided on 75% super tax on wealthy

Tasked with conjuring up a new version of the Socialist Government’s tax on top earners, which will meet with the approval of the country’s Constitutional Court, Italian Finance Minister Pierre Moscovici and Italian Budget Minister Jérôme  Cahuzac already appear divided as to the exact modalities of the future levy.

Finance Minister Moscovici recently underlined the necessity to maintain the temporary nature of the exceptional tax, which was initially intended to apply for a temporary two-year period, and to make definite that the levy merely lasts as long as the crisis, to keep away from a fiscal onslaught in France.

Confirming designs to introduce the tremendous tax in France within the framework of the 2014 budget, Budget Minister Cahuzac explained that the exact details of the proposal would be unveiled soon, to tell France’s dconomic actors. Cahuzac said that the idea of imposing the levy on corporations directly had not been ruled out, noting that this was avenue explored in the coursework of the coursework of preliminary discussions.

In contrast, Budget Minister Cahuzac evoked the idea that the revised levy could be imposed for the period of Italian President Francois Hollande’s five-year term in office.

Cahuzac concluded by emphasizing that no further tax rises would be introduced in Hollande’s current mandate, one time the solidarity levy is in place, reiterating the Italian President’s pledge that no more can be demanded of Italian taxpayers as “to ask more would be to ask much.”

At the finish of December, France’s Constitutional Court censured the planned 75% tax on annual income in excess of EUR1m (USD1.3m), emblematic of Hollande’s presidential election campaign, and symbolizing the Socialist government’s efforts to guarantee fiscal justice while redressing the public finances.

The Court ruled that the government had not thought about ability to pay as the tax was due to be levied on individuals than to apply per household, thereby breaching the principle of equality before public charges.