France's richest man applies for Belgian nationality to avoid top 75% tax bracket

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
I was strongly in favour of France upping their top income tax bracket to 75% on incomes greater than 1 million euros because I thought it'd make for a terrific lesson for the rest of the world on whether that could actually work. The first newsworthy response I've seen has now taken shape - take a look.

National Post - France’s richest man sets the republic in a tizzy by deserting to Belgium

Bernard Arnault may be France’s richest man — and perhaps the fourth-richest person in the world — but his wealth can’t protect him from the slings and arrows of his outraged compatriots.

The news he has applied for Belgian nationality has been met with outrage, from politicians and journalists of all stripes.

They accuse him of being unpatriotic and avoiding taxes, after President François Hollande announced he planned to sock it to the rich, with a 75% levy on all income over one million euros.

It’s not the first time the boss of luxury goods firm LVMH has pulled this caper. He moved to the United States in the early 1980s during the regime of the last socialist president François Mitterrand. But Belgium is an insult too far, even though pop star Johnny Hallyday blazed the way by moving there.

Arnault has also given the story extra legs by suing the left-wing newspaper Libération for its cheeky headline, “Get lost, you rich bastard.” Here’s the offending front page.

“Even if he defends the move for financial reasons, Bernard Arnault’s application for Belgian citizenship looks like another example of the egotism of the very rich,” the paper adds.

As Daniel Trilling at The New Statesman helpfully explains,

The headline is actually a play on a famous gaffe made by the former president, Nicholas Sarkozy, who muttered “casse-toi, pov’ con” (“get lost, you poor bastard”) at a member of the public who refused to shake his hand. The phrase subsequently became a taunt taken up by Sarkozy’s left-wing opponents.

French politicians are lining up to condemn Arnault. In an interview with Le Point, Marine Le Pen, leader of the far-right National Front, said she was

shocked and accused him of giving “a very bad example … How can we explain to people who want to immigrate and are looking for a French passport only for economic reasons that this is unacceptable when the world’s fourth-richest businessman is doing exactly the same thing?”

Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who ran as the extreme left presidential candidate, told Le Figaro the LVMH head was “a parasite … The rich, important people the powerful have no country but money. They do not love their motherland.”

Bernard Tapié, a businessman and Sarkozy supporter , was similarly outraged in an interview with Le Parisien newspaper:

I can’t believe it … France owes him a lot, but he also owes a lot to France. The state notably helped him financially [in 1984]. When you’re the citizen of a country, you need to know how to enjoy the nice sides, but also to accept those which are less so. As a symbol, this would be a catastrophe.

Thomas Adamson at The Associated Press, believes Arnault’s defection is a blow to France’s amour-propre.

Bernard Arnault — the richest man in Europe — has ignited an uproar in France over taxes, citizenship, patriotism and what policies the government needs to promote growth.

It’s a pretty impressive achievement for one little statement.

Arnault — the CEO of French fashion giant LVMH, owner of houses Louis Vuitton— the richest man in Europe —and Christian Dior — is the symbol of France’s treasured luxury fashion industry.

So when the face of “Made in France” confirmed that he had applied for dual citizenship in Belgium it struck deep chord in France’s national pride.

In a comment piece, The Wall Street Journal wonders why Arnault bothered to move to Belgium.

Far be it from us to wonder why Mr. Arnault—in a borderless single market—would need a Belgian passport to do business or see his relatives in Belgium. His company insists he will continue to pay taxes in France, where the pre-Hollande top income rate was 46.8%, compared to 53.7% in Belgium.

But if the billionaire’s sudden passion for Trappist beer and good chocolate has caught French imaginations, it’s because it reminds them that tax rates matter. French President François Hollande has made no secret of either his personal dislike of the rich or of his desire to squeeze them for all they’re worth. Now the rich are making it clear they don’t intend to get squeezed if they can help it.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Ha certainly everyone making over $1M and thereby having a lot of liquid capital will take this paycut in stride, right?
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
In before "he still has billions left why is he so greedy!"

edit: Also, beware unintended consequences ;)
 

unokitty

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2012
3,346
1
0
Is it a surprise that he is behaving rationally?

People have choices about where they live.

Nations have fixed boundaries.

Welcome to 2012!

Uno
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,486
2,363
136
You can't judge success/failure of the policy based on a single example. There will be people like this, no surprise here. However, the only thing that will matter is the total tax receipts at the end of the year. If they're higher at the end of the year, then the policy succeeded in bringing more revenue, if not, then it failed. Pointing out to a single man trying to evade taxes is not an argument worth bringing to the table.
 

waterjug

Senior member
Jan 21, 2012
930
0
76
Honestly, why wouldn't he do this (and anyone in this situation). You don't get wealthy on accident, even if you inherit it you have to be smart to keep it. So you have two options

A) Continue on as before, lose 75% of what you make from here forward
B) Continue on as before, with different citizenship, lose, 30 or 40% to taxes going forward. Why on Earth would ANYONE with that much money to lose choose option A?
 

OverVolt

Lifer
Aug 31, 2002
14,278
89
91
@yllus

This is the danger of globalism. If you raise taxes, say capital gains taxes. The money just flows somewhere else. There is always some country somewhere with unsustainable tax rates for the rich to flee to, and the country is all to happy to welcome their money. So long as there is a funds inflow, they can keep their unsustainable low taxes until the rate dries up. Then they have to raise taxes, rinse and repeat.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,645
9,951
136
Maybe patriotic French nationals will take his place.

Out with the old, in with the new?
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
Ha certainly everyone making over $1M and thereby having a lot of liquid capital will take this paycut in stride, right?

@yllus

This is the danger of globalism. If you raise taxes, say capital gains taxes. The money just flows somewhere else. There is always some country somewhere with unsustainable tax rates for the rich to flee to, and the country is all to happy to welcome their money. So long as there is a funds inflow, they can keep their unsustainable low taxes until the rate dries up. Then they have to raise taxes, rinse and repeat.

We're really just watching what's already happening with corporations, aren't we? Various nations and their provinces/states already compete to win locations of big business by offering tax incentives.

From the readings I've done of economists' papers, individuals are less likely to displace themselves than corporations, but the ultra-rich are probably outliers. I suppose everything depends on whether a "fair" top tax bracket is palatable to the ultra-rich.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
@yllus

This is the danger of globalism. If you raise taxes, say capital gains taxes. The money just flows somewhere else. There is always some country somewhere with unsustainable tax rates for the rich to flee to, and the country is all to happy to welcome their money. So long as there is a funds inflow, they can keep their unsustainable low taxes until the rate dries up. Then they have to raise taxes, rinse and repeat.

What makes a certain tax rate unsustainable?
 

emperus

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2012
7,824
1,583
136
It just amazes me. Are we now putting money over patriotism? We can ask soldiers to go die for their country, but we can't give up part of our money for it?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
It just amazes me. Are we now putting money over patriotism? We can ask soldiers to go die for their country, but we can't give up part of our money for it?

Yes the not paying our ridiculous tax means you are unpatriotic bit. Funny how the democrats are sounding more and more like neocons everyday.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,569
3,762
126
You can't judge success/failure of the policy based on a single example. There will be people like this, no surprise here. However, the only thing that will matter is the total tax receipts at the end of the year. If they're higher at the end of the year, then the policy succeeded in bringing more revenue, if not, then it failed. Pointing out to a single man trying to evade taxes is not an argument worth bringing to the table.

I think it would be inappropriate to only look at a single year. 2-3 years minimum to see how this plays out.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,645
9,951
136
Yes the not paying our ridiculous tax means you are unpatriotic bit. Funny how the democrats are sounding more and more like neocons everyday.

Neocons cross party lines, hence they get !@#$ done. Romney knows a thing or two about that.
 

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
Honestly, why wouldn't he do this (and anyone in this situation). You don't get wealthy on accident, even if you inherit it you have to be smart to keep it. So you have two options

A) Continue on as before, lose 75% of what you make from here forward
B) Continue on as before, with different citizenship, lose, 30 or 40% to taxes going forward. Why on Earth would ANYONE with that much money to lose choose option A?

No reason at all. Which is why France/US whoever should make it so if you renounce your citizenship you are never allowed back in.
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,452
2
0
Didn't read thread, but based on title: Good! When will countries start looking at its residents as Citizens, and not Taxpayers
 

emperus

Diamond Member
Apr 6, 2012
7,824
1,583
136
Yes the not paying our ridiculous tax means you are unpatriotic bit. Funny how the democrats are sounding more and more like neocons everyday.

I think leaving your country and becoming a citizen of another one means you are unpatriotic. I thought that was the definition of unpatriotic.
 

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
I think leaving your country and becoming a citizen of another one means you are unpatriotic. I thought that was the definition of unpatriotic.

Not when it's about money. Money is more important than anything else. For greedy bastards with no morals.