Inheritance tax an outdated, shortsighted move

Whoever thought of the proposed inheritance tax (IHT) as one of the measures in narrowing income or wealth disparity needs to learn more of past facts before chanting that mantra of taxing the rich to help the poor.

After the fall of communism and socialism, one can hardly pinpoint one country that has introduced this archaic tax. In the past, 10 countries (including Sweden, Norway, Singapore and Hong Kong) had abolished IHT because of heavy cost in collections, plenty of loopholes, and disincentives to domestic savings and foreign inward funds. Thailand had IHT in 1933 and abolished it in 1944. Currently, there are 13 countries still having IHT. They are EU and some European countries plus the United States, Japan and Philippines. Some are now considering abolishing IHT. 

My objection is not only because this Robin Hood measure is not enough to cure disparity, but it is also harmful to our relatively stabilised economy. The rich are few and it is certainly easy for them to take their wealth away from Thailand but also foreign individuals will stay away from Thai assets that can be reduced with a 10-per-cent IHT upon death. In the context of the global economy, the proposal is shortsighted and serves only as a public relations exercise but lacks substance to benefit the country. 

With due respect, the focus should be on the proposed property tax replacing that corruptible Household and Land Tax that has hardly been amended since 1932. This proposal is progressive, a source of potential substantial tax revenue, productive, socially fair, and having the least ill-effects.

Songdej Praditsmanot