Mr. Simon Murtagh:

It is in order to go for the elite wealth that we see increasing so much. Having examined the trend over a decade in Ireland, there is a valid argument for saying those in the top decile have increased their wealth. However, there is no doubt but that within that – this is what Oxfam has determined across the world – the most dynamic increase in wealth is among the 1%. We believe it is fairest if the richest in society make a contribution but the economic research shows that people at the very high end have a much better return on their capital and access to much better financial advice so they can earn returns of well beyond 5% or 6%, which you might expect on property, and right up to 10% and percentages in double figures. When a wealth tax is imposed on these kinds of sums, it is really only placing a check on the increase in the individuals' fortunes. That is why we would go for the very highest earners. It is also because we believe there is a genuine revenue base.

To go back to the report of the Commission on Taxation and Welfare, when Mr. Clarken says we are non-prescriptive, it should be noted that it is in our report that we do not quite care how the richest sections of society in Ireland and the rest of the world are taxed as long as they are taxed effectively. We agree with the commission's emphasis on the State raising much more revenue, which it needs to do because we have an ageing population and face the challenges that we and the commission have documented. However, we believe the revenue can be raised much more progressively through making our existing capital taxes much more efficient. They can also be made more progressive by having higher tax bands for the richest. This could be the case with capital gains tax, for example. We would like to push up the thresholds and make the commission's recommendations more progressive to aim at the 1% we have mentioned.

Reference was made to the classes of assets. It is true that the highest echelons of society hold much more wealth in the form of financial assets. This can be seen from the CSO returns, which show a lot more variation in the types of assets the top 10% hold.

The point the Deputy made about intellectual property is interesting in the context of what are called unrealised capital gains. A major aspect of the thinking of the American movement for tax reform and taxes on elite wealth in America, led by President Biden, is that where wealth is held in stock and has not yet been realised, it should also be taxed. The movement is very interesting, particularly in the US. Professor Killian might have something to say about that. It shows that a lot of the elite wealth is often not actually held; it is held in some of the assets the Deputy has mentioned and in stock market value. There is a broad international movement to tax it.