Samenvatting : Filosofie van Mens en Maatschappij (Tentamen)
10 views 0 purchase
Course
Filosofie van Mens en Maatschappij (360027B6)
Institution
Tilburg University (UVT)
Dit is een samenvatting voor het vak: Filosofie van Mens en Maatschappij.
Het behandelt de hoorcolleges en opgegeven literatuur die behoren tot de leerstof voor het tentamen.
Taal is Nederlands voor de hoorcolleges en Engels voor de literatuur om geen interpretatie fouten te maken in eventuel...
WEEK 8: Erf- en schenkbelasting en rechtvaardigheid?
HC8 – Rechtvaardige erf- en schenkbelasting
Schenkingen en erfenissen ondermijnen rechtvaardigheid wanneer het vermogensongelijkheid
tussen groepen doorheen de tijd bestendigt, ook wel economische segregatie tussen vermogende
families en niet-vermogende families.
Utilitaristisch argument: belastingen moeten productiviteit stimuleren en luiheid afstraffen; in
zoverre erfenissen en schenkingen mensen productiever of luier maken, moet er belasting geheven
worden
Geluksegalitaristisch argument: schenk- en erfbelastingen zijn een vorm van brute luck en daarmee
oneerlijk; inperken via belastingen
Partijdigheidsargument: ouders willen het beste voor hun kinderen en het is hun goed recht om ze te
bieden wat binnen hun machte ligt
Sociaal egalitaristisch argument: erfenissen en schenkingen zijn een belangrijke versterker van
vermogensongelijkheid en economische segregatie en moet gemitigeerd worden door belastingen
Utilitarisme = ethische stroming waarbij morele waarde van een handeling afhangt van de uitkomsten
dat het genereert (nutsmaximalisatie)
-> de meest ethische handeling is die handeling die het grootste goed/geluk voor de meeste mensen
genereert
2 Utilitaristische denkers:
1. John Stuart Mill (1806-1873): Geluk bestaat erin dat men diens hogere capaciteiten kan uitoefenen
-> liberaal denker, tegen paternalisme, maar overheid moet wel mogelijkheden en condities creëren
en barrières weghalen om die capaciteiten te kunnen ontplooien. Niet tegen ongelijkheden perse
maar wel tegen ongelijkheden die voortkomen uit ongelijke kansen
-> regulering eigendom vanuit overheid moet gericht zijn op bieden van de juiste prikkels. Belasting
op onverdiend inkomen en niet/minder op verdiend inkomen.
-> Dilemma m.b.t. erfenissen: vooruitzicht om erfenis achter te laten grote motivator om
productiever te zijn maar vooruitzicht op het ontvangen van een erfenis maakt men lui
Zijn voorstel:
1. Progressieve belasting op erfenissen
2. Een bovengrens aan hoeveel een persoon mag erven; boven deze grens 100% belasting
2. Eugenio Rignano (1870-1930): onderscheid tussen 2 soorten nalatenschap
1. Nalatenschap vermogen geproduceerd door donor (eerste generatie) -> weinig/geen belasting
2. Nalatenschap waarbij de donor ontvanger was van een eerdere schenking/erfenis (meerdere
generaties) -> oplopende belasting per generatie
-> motiveert mensen om ondanks erfenissen alsnog productief te blijven
Geluksegalitarisme:
Brute luck = puur toeval
Option luck = toeval op basis van eigen keuzes
2 problemen binnen het geluksegalitarisme m.b.t. schenkingen en erfenissen:
,- Alle vormen van intergenerationeel nalatenschap verwerpelijk, ook kleine bedragen
- Asymmetrische overdracht moet helemaal afgeschaft worden
Partijdigheidsargument:
- ouders willen het beste voor hun kinderen en het is hun goed recht om ze te bieden wat in hun
macht ligt
2 argumenten jegens de onrechtvaardigheid erfenissen volgens sociaal egalitaristisch argument:
1. Toeval: grootte erfenis hangt allemaal af van de familie waarin je geboren bent
2. Economische segregatie: wanneer groepen op een structurele en hiërarchische manier van elkaar
gescheiden worden op basis van hun ontvangen vermogen
Tekst W8 – The inheritance of wealth: Halliday
Halliday attributes the lack of philosophical research on taxes on the fact that most philosophers find
taxes to be a topic of less sophisticated discussion compares to other topics. Halliday does not agree
with this
2 uses for taxes:
1. Broadly paternalistic purposes (taxes on cigarettes)
2. to solve certain kinds of collective action problems (funding of public goods)
The problem with developing a grand theory of tax justice:
-> it is very difficult to give a plausible set of answers to questions like: how much revenue can the
state extract and how should the burden be distributed?
Moral generalizations about taxes Halliday uses:
1. Publicity; it must be generally easy for people to understand what their tax liability is going to be
-> failure to meet this requirement: when some people can avoid certain taxes whilst others can’t
2. Heuristics; the amount of false positives/negatives should be as low as possible
-> failure to meet this requirement: taxes on generally harmful products also put extra burden on
people who needs these products for medical purposes
Avoidance objection: when an inheritance tax stimulates the behaviour of transferring wealth at some
point prior to one’s death
Hayek: “parents prevented from making wealth transfers would resort to nepotism, this would cause
a waste of resources and injustice greater than the inheritance of property”
-> response from halliday:
- so called substitution effect is not bad per se. It is better for people to transfer money while they’re
alive because this may reduce the mindset of trying to die rich whilst benefitting children.
- it can also help offset the threat of disinheritance, which is sometimes a major source of power
parents have over their adult children
-> ultimately Halliday is not in favour of wealth transfers alive or death because both still cause
intergenerational differences in wealth
- avoidance objection cannot be dismissed but it’s difficult to measure the expected results of this
-> effective avoidance can be countered by taxing gifts during live with the same tax rate as
inheritance tax
, PAWAT: a proposal to make tax liability an increasing function of the amount of time that a person
holds wealth -> inheritance from grandpa to grandchild is taxed more than inheritance from parent to
child
- inheritance tax will be easier to monitor for the government than gift taxing because inheritance
comes with certain documentation which is easy to register for the government (registering a
person’s death, handing out inheritance, etc.)
The Rignano scheme as an Anti-Avoidance Device:
A Rignano scheme = any form of wealth transfer tax that links liability to the length of any series of
transfers of which the taxes transfer is the latest member, or more weakly, to consistent presence of
wealth up the family line of the parties whose finances are included in the tax base
-> If an donor has received 1000 dollars in inheritance himself, the first 1000 dollars he gives as
inheritance will be taxed severely, only the extra amount of money he gives up for inheritance will be
taxed with a soft rate
Opponents of inheritance tax: taxes on intergenerational transfers have failed because they have
never raised much revenue
-> they overlook one important aspect: the possibility that the tax has played a role in higher levels of
charitable bequests
Conclusion Halliday: inheritance taxes should probably leave substantial exemptions for charitable
bequests
Wealth tax:
Piketty’s solution: tax fortunes much more frequently, thought at only moderate rates, by way of a
periodic wealth tax
-> he proposes this solution because inheritance tax on its own is not enough anymore to break up
generational wealth.
Halliday:
- inheritance is more easily taxes than wealth -> the worth is more easily determined and wealth is
often hidden away in certain assets which probably have to be sold to be able to pay the wealth tax
- wealth tax can have great effect on social justice
Hypothecation: levying certain taxes for specific purposes and offering citizens transparency in this
process
-> doesn’t happen in the real world because governments don’t want to surrender their ability to
decide where to spend the money on
-> Halliday: hypothecation can lead to more acceptation of taxes from people and less demonstrating
by certain lobby groups
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller joesvanderstok. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $3.73. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
