Dr. Sheila Killian:

Deputy Moynihan's questions were excellent. They are exactly the kinds of design questions required. I am referring to questions on what the scope and thresholds should be. To me, it is a matter of having the discussion on the tax in as inclusive a way as possible. To return to what Mr. Clarken said at the beginning, if people have the conversation and decide to set the level at €5 million or €10 million, the value of having had that conversation in terms of social cohesion and transparency will still be evident. Social cohesion is not just a nice thing to have. With the changing nature of society and the damaging effects of false narratives, we have seen the beginnings of why it is pretty urgent in Ireland. We are not yet swamped with false narratives or at the level of polarisation of some of our neighbours, such as those to the east and west. There is an opportunity to avoid it by introducing the kind of conversation to which I refer.

To echo what Mr. Murtagh said about applying the tax to all the asset classes, applying it in this way is pretty necessary. I worked as a tax consultant for three of the big four firms before joining academia. If there are five asset classes and three of them are taxed, all the wealth will be transformed into the untaxed two. The tax has to be universal but set at a level that works for our society. Really, there is a great opportunity to have the conversation to inform what is being done, through the likes of a citizens' assembly. Whatever would be decided would be decided, but it would create trust, including in the political and financial systems, and ultimately reduce inequality, which would create a pipeline of talent through society. I see no downside to having the conversation.