A Radical Reformist Redesign of Taxes

Objective: Do not tax people for working, producing, saving through effort, or taking initiative. Tax instead the passive control of scarce assets, inherited privilege, monopoly rents, land value, idle property, and socially costly externalities.

In that worldview, taxation would move away from punishing labour and enterprise, and toward charging society’s “rent” on assets whose value is created by location, infrastructure, public investment, scarcity, legal privilege, or inherited ownership.

A Reformist Tax Model: “Tax Rent, Not Work”

1. Core philosophy

The current tax model in many countries often taxes the wrong things:

• labour is taxed before the worker even receives income;
• small businesses are burdened with compliance and penalties;
• consumption taxes hit the poor disproportionately;
• honest economic activity is monitored heavily;
• immovable assets often remain undertaxed, undervalued, hidden, or politically protected;
• inherited wealth grows quietly while work is taxed aggressively.

A reformist system would reverse this logic. The guiding principle would be:

Work should be free. Initiative should be free. Basic consumption should be protected. Passive ownership of scarce assets should carry the main fiscal responsibility.

2. Taxes to reduce or abolish

2.1 Tax on labour

A radical reform would aim to eliminate or drastically reduce personal income tax on wages, especially for low and middle-income workers.

A possible model:

Treatment of different types of income

Type of income	Treatment
Minimum wage / low wages	0% tax
Average wages	Very low tax or 0%
High professional income	Moderate social contribution only
Very high managerial income	Taxed, but less than passive rent income

The idea is that a person who works, teaches, repairs, codes, nurses, drives, builds, cleans or produces should not feel punished for being active.

2.2 Payroll taxes

Payroll taxes are especially damaging because they make employment expensive.

A reformist model would:

• reduce employer payroll taxes;
• make hiring cheaper;
• remove penalties on formal employment;
• finance social protection from property and asset-based taxes instead.

This would help small businesses, young workers, freelancers and family firms.

2.3 VAT on basic goods

VAT is simple to collect, but it is often unfair. Poor households spend a larger share of their income on consumption.

A fairer model would be:

VAT treatment by category of consumption

Category	VAT treatment
Bread, milk, basic food	0% or very low
Medicines	0%
Books, education, childcare	0%
Public transport	0% or low
Luxury consumption	Normal or higher VAT
Speculative luxury goods	Higher tax

This protects dignity and basic living standards.

2.4 Excessive small-business compliance

A reformist system should also reduce humiliation by simplifying taxes for small businesses.

For example:

• one-page digital filing;
• presumptive tax for micro-businesses;
• no punitive penalties for minor first-time mistakes;
• automatic pre-filled declarations;
• no repeated inspections without cause;
• taxpayer ombudsman;
• appeal rights before enforcement.

The point is to make tax administration civilised, not intimidating.

3. Taxes to increase: immovable assets and economic rents

3.1 Land value tax

The cleanest reformist tax is a land value tax.

This taxes the value of land itself, not the building, not the work, not the business activity.

Why land?

Because land value usually comes from society:

• roads;
• schools;
• urban planning;
• tourism demand;
• public safety;
• infrastructure;
• zoning permissions;
• proximity to markets;
• public investment.

The owner did not create most of that value alone.

A land value tax says:

“You may own the land, but the socially created value of location must partly return to society.”

This is different from taxing productive investment. If someone improves a building, restores a house, opens a hotel, builds a workshop or renovates an apartment, that productive effort should not be punished. The tax should fall mainly on the underlying land/location value.

3.2 Progressive property tax

A second layer would be a progressive tax on immovable property.

Example structure:

Progressive property tax treatment by property type

Property type	Tax treatment
Modest primary residence	Low or protected
Ordinary family home	Low annual tax
Second home	Higher
Empty apartment in urban/tourist area	Higher
Luxury villa	Higher
Commercial rental property	Moderate to high
Large undeveloped urban land	High
Speculative land banking	Very high

This encourages productive use of property and discourages hoarding.

3.3 Empty property tax

In many countries, people own apartments or land that remain unused while young families cannot afford housing.

A radical reform could introduce:

• tax on long-term empty homes;
• higher tax on undeveloped urban land;
• tax on vacant tourist-zone property;
• exemption if property is under renovation, legally disputed, or genuinely unavailable.

The message:

“Use it, rent it, sell it, develop it — but do not freeze the city for speculation.”

3.4 Windfall zoning tax

If the state changes land status and a private owner suddenly becomes much richer, part of that gain should return to the public.

Example:

Agricultural land becomes construction land because of a public planning decision. Its value rises dramatically. The owner benefits not because of labour, but because of public authority.

A reformist system would tax part of that windfall.

3.5 Inheritance of large assets

If the goal is to liberate labour, then inherited passive wealth should carry more responsibility.

A fair system could exempt normal family inheritance but tax very large transfers.

Example:

Treatment of different types of inheritance

Inheritance type	Treatment
Modest family home	Protected
Small family business	Protected if activity continues
Agricultural family land	Protected with use conditions
Very large real estate portfolio	Taxed
Offshore/passive inherited wealth	Taxed more strongly

The goal is not to punish families. It is to prevent the permanent concentration of economic power through inheritance alone.

4. Could we imagine a world with minimum tax only on savings and assets?

Yes, but with an important correction:

A tax system based only on savings and assets is theoretically possible, but it should not heavily tax ordinary savings. It should mainly tax large net wealth, land, immovable property, monopoly rents and idle assets.

Taxing normal savings too much is dangerous because it punishes prudence. A worker who saves €20,000 should not be treated like a rentier owning €20 million in land and property.

So I would distinguish:

Protected savings

These should be tax-free or nearly tax-free:

• emergency savings;
• pension savings;
• savings for education;
• first-home savings;
• small bank deposits;
• productive reinvestment in a small business.

Taxable assets

These should carry the fiscal burden:

• valuable urban land;
• second and third homes;
• luxury property;
• large financial portfolios;
• large inherited assets;
• idle land;
• speculative real estate;
• monopoly concessions;
• extractive rights;
• large passive rental portfolios.

So yes, I can envisage a world with minimal taxation of labour and enterprise, financed mainly by asset-based and rent-based taxation.

But I would not tax ordinary savings aggressively. I would tax large passive wealth and immovable assets.

5. A possible tax architecture

Pillar 1: Zero tax on basic labour

• 0% tax on low wages;
• very low tax on average wages;
• simplified social contribution;
• no double taxation of small self-employed income.

Pillar 2: Low tax on productive enterprise

• low corporate tax on reinvested profits;
• higher tax only when profits are extracted as dividends above a threshold;
• special protection for small and medium enterprises;
• immediate deduction for investment, machinery, technology and training.

Pillar 3: Strong tax on land and immovable assets

• annual land value tax;
• progressive property tax;
• tax on empty properties;
• tax on speculative land banking;
• zoning windfall tax.

Pillar 4: Tax on large passive wealth

• high exemption threshold;
• tax only net wealth above a serious level;
• lower rate for productive business assets;
• higher rate for passive financial and real estate assets.

Pillar 5: Environmental and resource taxes

• pollution tax;
• carbon tax with redistribution to households;
• mining/resource extraction royalties;
• water-use and coastal-use charges;
• waste and landfill taxes.

Pillar 6: Luxury and status taxes

• luxury vehicles;
• yachts;
• private jets;
• ultra-luxury real estate;
• speculative high-end consumption.

This creates a system where ordinary people and productive entrepreneurs breathe more freely, while concentrated passive wealth contributes more.

6. How to avoid unfairness for property-rich but cash-poor people

A property-based tax can become unfair if an elderly person owns a valuable home but has low income. So the system must include protection.

Safeguards

Safeguards for property-rich but cash-poor owners

Situation	Protection
Pensioner in primary residence	Deferral until sale/inheritance
Low-income owner	Circuit breaker cap
Family farm	Reduced tax if actively used
Historic house	Tax relief if maintained
Inherited family home	Gradual transition period
Property under legal dispute	Temporary suspension

The goal is not to force vulnerable people out of their homes. The goal is to tax passive, speculative and high-value asset control.

7. How this would liberate free initiative

This tax model would change incentives.

Under the current model

A person may think:

• “If I work more, I get taxed more.”
• “If I hire someone, I pay more taxes.”
• “If I formalise my business, I become a target.”
• “If I save, I am punished.”
• “If I own idle land, I can wait and get richer.”

Under the reformist model

The incentives become:

• work more, keep more;
• hire more, pay less payroll burden;
• build and invest, do not get punished;
• leave land idle, pay more;
• keep property empty, pay more;
• speculate on zoning, share the public gain;
• inherit huge passive assets, contribute more.

This is the moral reversal: The active economy is liberated. The passive rent economy is disciplined.

8. A radical but realistic fiscal formula

A country could aim for something like this:

Indicative shares of total tax revenue by source

Revenue source	Share of total tax revenue
Land and property taxation	25–35%
VAT / consumption tax	15–20%
Labour income tax	5–10%
Corporate tax	10–15%
Environmental/resource taxes	10–15%
Wealth/inheritance/luxury taxes	10–15%
Fees, royalties, concessions	5–10%

The most radical version could reduce labour income tax close to zero for most people and replace it with property, land, environmental and rent-based taxes.

9. The political slogan

A reformist politician could express it like this:

No tax on survival. Low tax on work. Fair tax on wealth. Strong tax on idle property. Full tax on privilege created by society.

Or even more sharply:

Do not tax the hands that work. Tax the ground that waits.

I would call it:

The Free Work, Fair Wealth Tax Reform

Its ten principles would be:

1. 01No income tax on low and middle labour income.
2. 02Lower payroll taxes to make employment easier.
3. 03Zero VAT on basic necessities.
4. 04Progressive tax on land and immovable property.
5. 05High tax on empty homes and idle urban land.
6. 06Tax public-created gains from zoning and infrastructure.
7. 07Protect pensioners and low-income homeowners.
8. 08Tax large inheritances, not ordinary family continuity.
9. 09Reward reinvestment, punish extraction.
10. 10Make tax administration simple, automatic and respectful.

11. Could this world exist?

Yes, but not overnight.

It would require:

• reliable property registers;
• honest valuation of land and buildings;
• digital cadastre;
• strong anti-corruption safeguards;
• protection for vulnerable owners;
• lower spending waste;
• transparent local government;
• gradual transition over 5–10 years;
• political courage against asset-rich elites.

The biggest resistance would not come from workers or small entrepreneurs. It would come from people who own valuable land, urban property, monopoly rights and inherited assets, but are used to paying relatively little.

A world where labour is almost untaxed, initiative is free, basic life is protected, and the fiscal burden moves toward immovable wealth, passive assets, land rents and social privilege.