Political Commentator & Podcaster Marina Purkiss has come under fire for her latest post to X suggesting that the rich should "live within their means" if they can't afford a 2% wealth tax.
Ms Purkiss posted to X:
If you can’t afford a 2% wealth tax on assets over £10 million…
Might I suggest you live within your means?
Peter McCormack was quick to question Ms Purkiss on her post:
Obviously I'm going to respond to this, because I have questions and I'm interested in your answers.
If someone's wealth is tied up in a business or property, and not in liquid cash, how exactly are they meant to pay a 2% wealth tax? Sell off pieces of annually?
Do you expect them to sell assets every year, triggering capital gains tax on top of the wealth tax?
What if selling the asset destroys the underlying value, like a founder diluting their company, or a landlord forced to sell in a down market?
What if the wealth is generating no income at all that year? Should they borrow against it? At rising interest rates? So they're now in debt to pay the state for owning something?
Ms Purkiss doesn't seem to have replied at time of publication.
https://twitter.com/MarinaPurkiss/status/1942694321272283154
https://twitter.com/PeterMcCormack/status/1942837081421820071
