6

This picture:

enter image description here

(source) currently has nearly 6,000 likes on Facebook. Its claim as text:

There are over 20 countries on Earth that have zero tax, yet somehow they still have roads, schools, sewers, and hospitals.. most of them better than ours! Imagine that...

Judging by other posts on the same page, the "ours" mentioned here is likely to refer to the United States. Is it true that there are countries which collect no taxation and provide these kinds of public services, and are they "better" than similar services in the US by any reliable evidence-based metric?

Sklivvz
  • 78,578
  • 29
  • 321
  • 428
lvc
  • 441
  • 5
  • 13
  • 1
    Here is a list of ten countries with no income tax... http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/01/04/10-countries-with-zero-income-taxes.aspx – GEdgar Apr 01 '16 at 00:32
  • 17
    @GEdgar Worth pointing out that the claim does technically say *zero tax*, unqualified with *income*, *payroll*, *property*, *sales*, *tarriffs* (i.e. import / export taxes), *VAT*, etc. if that's so, and the states still provide social services, they must have some non-tax source of revenue. – Dan Bron Apr 01 '16 at 01:10
  • 6
    @Dan Bron: Anyone want to bet that those countries are all major oil exporters? – jamesqf Apr 01 '16 at 04:26
  • 1
    @jamesqf - no, there are some rich tax havens in there too ;) – Jamiec Apr 01 '16 at 07:24
  • 3
    Comments after my link say: either oil or tourism. So, the way the government can get money from oil without taxation is: the government owns the oil companies. – GEdgar Apr 01 '16 at 12:58
  • 1
    @Jamiec: How do those rich tax havens get their money, then? If they don't have a resource like oil to sell, they must tax SOMEONE. As for instance Monaco (probably - I haven't gone into details, but see e.g. the Wikipedia article) gets much of its money from taxing (= taking profits from) tourists in its government-run casino. It also may impose no income tax, but (per that article) imposes a 19.6% VAT on goods & services. – jamesqf Apr 01 '16 at 18:11
  • 4
    to be fair, it's not very hard to have better public infrastructure than US. – vartec Apr 01 '16 at 22:44
  • 1
    @vartec: I doubt you could really make a case for that. Granted, it may not have the particular types of infrastructure that you personally want, but that's a different matter. – jamesqf Apr 02 '16 at 05:43
  • @jamesqf: I don't have to make a case. A bloke did that for me: https://youtu.be/Wpzvaqypav8 driving every day on highways in California (a state with one of the highest taxes), I still 100% agree with the video. Taxes go to something for sure, but it ain't public infrastructure. – vartec Apr 02 '16 at 05:47
  • @vartec: If you want to make a point, it would be helpful to express it without expecting people to waste their time watching video (which not everyone is even capable of doing). But as stated, California highways are only one particular type of public infrastructure (and one limited to a small fraction of the country, at that). – jamesqf Apr 02 '16 at 18:06
  • @jamesqf if you're not interested in knowing the facts, WTH are you doing trolling on Skeptics.SE? – vartec Apr 02 '16 at 18:19
  • But since you're lazy: high-speed rail — nonexistent, interstates & US routes – crap, public transport – obsolete & falling apart, water – you're lucky if it's not polluted with lead. Is there anything else that is _public_ in US? Municipal shooting ranges? :-P – vartec Apr 02 '16 at 18:28
  • 1
    @vartec: Why do you think I'm not interested in knowing facts? (Though in this case I think they might better be called opinions :-)) Would I bother asking that they be made easily accessible, if I did not care to learn them? – jamesqf Apr 03 '16 at 05:55
  • @vartec: High speed rail, when airline flights are readily available at reasonable cost? (Airports are public infrastructure, you know.) Highways at all levels, from interstates down to dirt tracks in the mountains, go most everywhere you'd want, and except in badly-overpopulated areas (like urban California) are quite efficient. Way better, in my experience, than say the M25. Water? Well, see the post here about the so-called lead pollution actually being rather less than the limits of a few years ago. – jamesqf Apr 03 '16 at 06:03
  • @vartec: For other public infrastructure in the US, how about National Forests & Parks, public libraries, state university systems, &c. – jamesqf Apr 03 '16 at 06:07
  • @jamesqf High speed rail is much more convenient than air travel, especially over shorter distances, say one to four hundred miles. For example, a trip from Tokyo to Sendai (190 miles) takes about 2.25 hours by train, 4.5 hours by car, and 55 min. by plane. Train ticket is about 1/3 of plane ticket. Factor in the time you have to spend in the airport, and you don't gain anything by flying. Also, trains leave every 15 mins, (nonstop) planes are 2 a day. You can't really compare trains and planes as if they are any sort of equivalent means of transportation. Well, you *can*, but... – BobRodes Apr 13 '16 at 09:27
  • @jamesqf Also, commutes by train are more efficient than commutes by car, because you can work while you're traveling. – BobRodes Apr 13 '16 at 09:29
  • @jamesqf As for "so-called" lead pollution, there are folks in Flint, Michigan who would take issue with that characterization. – BobRodes Apr 13 '16 at 09:31
  • @BobRodes: I don't really disagree about high-speed rail, though some of your points are mistaken. E.g. getting to the train station may well be less convenient than getting to the airport, if passenger load only justifies 2 planes/day, a train every 15 minutes wouldn't be economic justified (Euro HSR doesn't have trains every 15 minutes), etc. Nor are train commutes more efficient than cars if the stations are nowhere near your house or your destination. – jamesqf Apr 14 '16 at 17:07
  • @ BobRodes: My point was that Flint's lead levels are 'pollution' today because the standards have changed. – jamesqf Apr 14 '16 at 17:09
  • @jamesqf If you are saying that they have changed since the time that water pipes were routinely made of lead, I'll agree with you, even though the levels found would represent the same health risk then that they do now. But the EPA action level of 15 ppb hasn't changed since it was first specified in 1991; a water supply is subject to corrective action if 10% or more samples exceed the action level. The highest sampled level in Flint was 1051 ppb, and the sample at the 90th percentile was 26.792 ppb, about 79% higher than the action level. – BobRodes Apr 15 '16 at 01:02
  • If you add in state industries which often have 100% confiscation (tax) on their income such as Saudi Arabia, then they don't look anywhere near as good. – user2617804 Nov 01 '17 at 00:28

2 Answers2

12

There are only 15 countries in the world with no income taxes, listed here. These are countries such as United Arab Emirates, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, The Bahamas and Brunei. Another source provided by user DavePhD adds British Virgin Islands, Monaco, Norfolk Island, Turks and Caicos Islands, and Vanuatu to this list.

However only one of those countries United Arab Emirates is found in this list of Mercer's Quality of Living Rankings for 2016 noted here in the Middle East and African region. Mercer's Quality of Living Rankings measures living conditions according to 39 factors, grouped in 10 categories which includes public services and transportation.

Paul Johnson
  • 15,814
  • 7
  • 66
  • 81
pericles316
  • 22,676
  • 2
  • 84
  • 161
  • 20 "countries" with no income tax are listed here http://nomadcapitalist.com/2015/09/07/tax-free-countries-second-residency/ – DavePhD Apr 01 '16 at 13:36
  • 1
    The Wikipedia page on taxation in UAE disagrees. Each of the autonomous emirates has its own income tax legislation, which at least apply to some kind of businesses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_the_United_Arab_Emirates – Tor-Einar Jarnbjo Apr 01 '16 at 13:41
  • British Virgin Islands, Monaco, Norfolk Island, Turks and Caicos Islands, and Vanuatu are the new additions. That again totals to 15, thanks DavePhd! – pericles316 Apr 01 '16 at 13:43
  • @Tor-EinarJarnbjo-The link states " UAE does not have any enforced federal income tax legislation for general business. An income tax decree has been enacted by each Emirate, but in practice, the enforcement of these decrees is restricted to foreign banks and to oil companies." So this should mean that as a country UAE does not have any income tax right and also for the individual Emirates, the income tax is restricted to foreign banks and oil companies! – pericles316 Apr 01 '16 at 13:53
  • 11
    Of course "no income tax" is not the same as "zero tax". Tax havens generally offer low corporate taxes alongside low levels of financial oversight. This attracts large amounts of throughput, compensating for the low rate and providing a reasonable revenue stream for the government. Of course this model doesn't scale to large countries. – Paul Johnson Apr 01 '16 at 14:03
  • 1
    @Paul Johnson: Yes. For instance the US state of Nevada has no state income tax, but imposes a hefty sales tax, taxes on casinos, and so on. Someone gets taxed, regardless. – jamesqf Apr 01 '16 at 18:14
  • North Korea claims that it does not have taxation. Whether that's true or not is another matter. https://www.nknews.org/2015/04/read-my-lips-dont-believe-north-koreas-no-taxes-talk/ – Andrew Grimm Apr 02 '16 at 00:38
  • 3
    @Andrew Grimm: But how do you tax slaves? – jamesqf Apr 02 '16 at 05:41
  • I'm surprised Vatican isn't on the list. – John Dvorak Apr 02 '16 at 11:17
  • 3
    @pericles316 Claiming that there is no income tax in the UAE just because there is no federal income tax although the tax is claimed by each emirate makes just as much sense as to claim that there is no income tax in the EU, because the income tax is claimed by each country and not by the EU as a union – Tor-Einar Jarnbjo Apr 03 '16 at 16:54
  • UAE has income tax of up to 55%. https://en.santandertrade.com/establish-overseas/united-arab-emirates/tax-system – A E Apr 03 '16 at 20:48
  • North Korea has sales tax @ 15%. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/north-korea/sales-tax-rate – A E Apr 03 '16 at 20:54
  • How do the ratings of "public services and transportation" compare, though? – jpmc26 May 18 '17 at 22:25
  • @jpmc26-Ratings of quality services like administration (public services) and transportation (travel) contribute to the quality of living. – pericles316 Jun 18 '17 at 10:13
2

This page lists the countries with the lowest business tax rates, but none of them have zero. This also excludes personal taxes (income, capital gains etc).

Paul Johnson
  • 15,814
  • 7
  • 66
  • 81
  • 2
    Interesting. It is based on [the Global Competiteness Report](http://reports.weforum.org/global-competitiveness-report-2015-2016/competitiveness-rankings/)'s Total Tax Rate (Select 6.05 in the drop-down), which "only" includes 140 countries, so strictly there might still be 20 others with no tax. – Oddthinking Apr 01 '16 at 10:50
  • 1
    Strictly, yes, but you probably don't want to do business in them. You might be hard put to find decent roads, schools, sewers and hospitals too. – Paul Johnson Apr 01 '16 at 13:57