One of my major gripes in the Uk was the size of the civil service and their benefits fortunately the Tories put paid to that, I was well happy.

Mr Hollande now not just is the President but has majorities in the Assemblée and the Senate, and so has almost unlimited powers. He will use the momentum to push through his political agenda as swiftly as possible.

You got that right who was saying he wouldn't get a majority? I wouldn't like to be a French citizen at the moment it seems like it going to a whole lot of pain.

He did NOT have a majority in the Assemblée when he was elected.

All the French leftwingers must be delighted and happy. All those who voted socialist and do not believe in leftist politics should consult the doctor. And all the rightwingers have to ask themselves what all they did do badly !

All those rightwingers who wanted to oust Sarkozy now have Hollande. Completely THEIR fault ! And I do not have even an ounce of pity for their fate. Because, had the right-wingers voted for A) Sarkozy and B) the rightwing, they would have WON

I see it a little differently from most people here. These nations want to claim the money owed to them by those who left their country with what i call a "social debt" to their home country. They were often educated, provided with services, heath care, functioning roads, parks etc as a child and a host of other necessities by the state and now the state want to make good on the individuals "social debt". The question is should the tax rate be as high as the home rate?

An interesting point. But the general idea is that you do not pay taxes to where you grew up or lived in the past but to the place where you live NOW.

There may be some rather small countries who give citizenship fairly swiftly to sufficiently rich French people BUT under the condition that they stay a certain time per year in those countries. It recently became known that some lawyers in the area of the Lake of Geneva now specialize on such matters. I cannot tell you of what country their customers will become citizen (rough guesses are permitted ) obvious however is that if they stay "there" 50% of the year, they for the rest of the time will NOT stay in Paris but some other French speaking places

Mr Hollande however needs what they will have to pay in the next few months. His calculation may even work when those folks invest into France from outside. And then pay taxes on their investments and the profits out of those investments ! So that he in the end may be in a win-win-win place !

Even if I accepted your idea of a "social debt" (and I don't), the reality is that the US (and other such countries) wants to collect taxes from people who have never even lived there!

Tom

I think it's appalling to be fair, it's like a previous poster said expats are a soft target as they're not in the country so they cant take to the streets to protest.

sure i admit those who never have lived in the country, these expats have a legitimate issue with my arguement. but there are those that i would say could own a "social debt" to their home country. I certainly do! Healthcare, education, university education, and a whole host of services i used and have not paid for yet.

But such "social debt" is usually not paid for directly, through taxes and what not, it's more an assumption of paying it forward, i.e. you get a better job than you would have without the government assistance when you were young (under 18 and Uni) and aren't on the dole or taking up welfare. You consume (shop) and create jobs, fuel the economy.

It's silly though, to say that as humans, we want to improve the world through education, broaden horizons and what not, but it really that governments are still nationalistic and expects everyone to honour their debts by staying in-country for the rest of their lives.

Anyway, I really feel sorry for my French-American dual citizenship friends, if this goes through. If they have to move somewhere else for economic reasons, they'll have to file their worldwide income in 3 places! I hope it doesn't come to that!

Have you never paid taxes in your native Australia? Im quite astounded as I have never met anyone whos from Australia, has lived and worked there (i presume), and never paid taxes.

In regards to the above services you mentioned in Australia for example, I HAVE paid for them (not sure how you have avoided it - but interested to know!!)

Healthcare - paid for via 1.5% medicare levy on income, some years I also paid the additional medicare surcharge, also paid income tax and I also had private insurance. How much have I used of these services? NOTHING (Since dental isnt covered, was never admitted to hospital, dont take meds). Now that I live in Switzerland I wonder if I can get a refund

Education (prim/high school) - my parents paid for via taxes (what do you think they pay tax for? - up until yr 2000, Oz tax was 47% from $50K+ income) and I continued to pay once I entered the workforce myself.

University education - Paid five figures for mine, so did all of my colleagues. Many took on government loans - by the way those are the 'subsidised' government supported places . Also paid through via income taxes.

University Education (Post grad) - Paid full fee - so does everyone else I know except PhD degrees.

Looks to me unless someones unemployed, they actually have paid already or will do after some years in the workforce.

When I was a child, parents paid for healthcare and education. I paid for University education. Both parents paid taxes and then i paid taxes for the years I lived in Australia.

Should someone calculate my social debt then? Since I left when I was 28 will I owe taxes till I die?

I have now also lived in England and the US. Do I owe them a social debt? I paid taxes in both those countries and used negligible public services. Can I get a refund?

Imagine trying to live in Switzerland with the tax rates of France or Australia. You get the high cost of living of Switzerland with much less disposable income.

I dont feel any social debt to Australia. Maybe some of my relatives who have lived there but haven't worked many days in their lives have a much higher social debt. Australia should sort out the handout mentality before it goes after expats. France similarly has gone to far left and should look at home while the US government(s) provides nothing socially but still takes in high income taxes (federal plus state plus social security).

The problem is when these governments go over the top with taxes people with means who are contributing lots to public coffers leave (they are probably covering their social debt). Thats Frances problem. They are proposing massive tax hikes and the expat proposal is necessary because otherwise people leave to avoid it. They still might if they have other passports.

The "social debt" exists, but cannot be the basis for taxes. Just imagine, Tunisia started to demand taxes from some very rich Tunisian (Tunisia grown up) business tycoons in France ! THEY of course would do what many rich French abroad now WILL do, and that is to become citizens of other countries (Greetings from Monaco and Jersey and Liechtenstein )

In my opinion, tax should be paid where money is earned and where infrastructure is often used. As such, countries where holiday homes and other residences are owned should also be due tax, usually in the form of property tax in most countries already, as well. Paying tax in a country where one does not live or have any benefits is not fair. As mentioned in an earlier post, the cost of living is different in different places.

The biggest problem for any country will always be the seriously wealthy for whom I imagine these tax laws were designed - they will always find a way not to pay or to pay as little as they can and it is usually the "normal" individual that gets "hit", whatever is introduced.

Another thought: What proportion of tax in the US is paid by expats? What would the US economy look like without this free money (in the sense that no services are provided) coming from abroad?