The UK's public finances are not in great shape, with estimates of tens of billions of pounds needed to be found in tax increases or spending cuts in the October budget. (And the recent U-turn on disability benefit cuts removes one potential avenue for spending cuts.)
Reluctant to break their manifesto pledge of not increasing income tax, will the government introduce a wealth tax?
If a wealth tax is introduced by the end of 2025 (realistically in the October budget), market resolves YES. The tax doesn't need to actually be in place (I assume that will start with the next financial year) but does need to be passed by Parliament.
I expect that the definition of a "wealth tax" will be straightforward. Considerations will be: does the government call it a wealth tax? Do mainstream media sources call it a wealth tax? In my judgement, does the policy result in wealth being taxed?
In the unlikely event that judgement is required, I won't bet in this market. If you think any of my resolution criteria are unclear or should be refined, please let me know. For two weeks from market creation date, I might tweak the resolution criteria, so you might want to not place any very large bets in that period, especially if you intend to win on a technicality. The spirit of the market will not change.
Update 2025-07-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Following a user question, the creator has clarified that the introduction of an unrealised capital gains tax would be sufficient to resolve this market to YES.
Update 2025-07-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The creator has clarified that the following will not be sufficient to resolve this market to YES:
The introduction of a land tax
Changes to property taxes, such as a major increase or re-evaluation of council tax bands
Update 2025-07-10 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): In response to a question about a tax limited to certain assets (e.g., a high-value real estate wealth tax), the creator has stated they are leaning towards this being sufficient to resolve YES.
This is because such a tax, while on property, is commonly called a 'wealth tax' and targets high values, distinguishing it from a general property tax which has been ruled out.
1,000
1.00@adssx hmm, tricky. My first thought was "no", because that sounded similar to a property tax, which I already ruled out below.
But after a very quick Google, it does seem that everybody calls it a "wealth tax", and it seems to target high values, rather than being something every homeowner pays. Which makes me think it should count.
I'll sleep on it, and I welcome opinions, but I'm leaning towards "yes".
@Fion There's a difference between a property tax (gross value, often flat rate, and most often to fund local gov / services) and a wealth tax limited to real estate (net value [debt is removed] often progressive rate and used to fund national gov and redistribution). The OECD classifies the former under the 4100 code (Recurrent taxes on immovable property) while the latter is under the 4200 code (Recurrent taxes on net wealth). So you can defer to the OECD (but we'll have to wait for a while) or use your best judgment or a third party source that could help.
@PaulBenjaminPhotographer Thanks! This is exactly the sort of thing I had in mind when I asked for advice on refinements to resolution criteria! (I worried I was being too cautious, but it seems not.)
I'll admit my ignorance here - I just spent ten minutes with Claude trying to understand the differences and implications.
It agreed with you that "unrealised capital gains" tax was a more likely thing for the UK government to implement, for several reasons
It suggested that if the government implements an unrealised capital gains tax, that many commentators and political opponents will call it a wealth tax
An unrealised capital gains tax would result in wealth getting taxed (even if not as comprehensively as a "wealth tax")
Based on this, I think I'll say that unrealised capital gains tax would count for resolving the market YES. I think that's more in line with the spirit of the market.
Welcome pushback or other comments (from you or anyone else reading this).
I'm entirely happy with that decision, I just think whatever tax increases do happen won't be called 'wealth taxes', which sound like they affect regular pensioners, while 'unrealised capital gains' sounds like something that will only punish 'millionaires and billionaires'...
In a similar vein, what are your thoughts on an increase in land/property taxes introduced through a re-design/increase of council tax?
@PaulBenjaminPhotographer I don't think I'll include land taxes or property taxes. They do kind of have the effect of taxing "wealth", but I don't think anybody would call them "wealth taxes" for shorthand, the way they might with an unrealised capital gains tax.
Some scattered thoughts:
A modest council tax rise is the sort of thing that happens all the time. Not a new tax, not newsworthy
A re-evaluation of council tax bands is something that needs to happen sooner or later and would be big news, but not relevant for this market. Probably revenue neutral. Revenue goes to local councils anyway. Pattern of winners and losers will be more complicated than "tax the rich more".
A massive increase in council tax (perhaps targeting very valuable properties), and a restructuring so that the revenue goes to central government, would be big news, and starts to get close to being relevant for this market. But it's so unlikely that I don't really want to include a provision for it.
Introduction of a land value tax would be very big news. Depending on how it was done, it might seem quite a lot like a wealth tax, but it also might not. It might feel like a tax on middle class people living in houses in the city. As above, very unlikely to happen and kind of hard to quantify the criteria for whether it's sufficiently "wealth-like" enough to be relevant for this market, so I don't really want to include a provision for it.