Stop taxing wealth: maintain compound interest for the small saver

Stop skimming unrealized profits. Ensure a fair system where tax is only levied on the profits actually held by the citizen. Protect the saver who tries to build an independent future through research and economy.

Petition Against the Reintroduction of a Wealth Tax in Denmark

We, citizens, investors, and business owners in Denmark,

find that:

• The proposal to reintroduce an annual wealth tax on net fortunes — abolished in 1997 for well-documented reasons including capital flight and administrative inefficiency — represents a dangerous reversal of nearly three decades of sound fiscal policy.
• The proposed tax (estimated at 1% annually on net wealth above DKK 35 million, encompassing liquid assets, securities, unlisted shares, property, and pension savings minus debt) constitutes a tax on the stock of wealth rather than on income, forcing taxpayers to pay recurring levies on assets that may generate little or no cash flow.
• Taxing illiquid assets — such as unlisted company shares, family-owned businesses, real estate, and pension reserves — at their paper value creates an unsustainable liquidity crisis, compelling owners to sell productive assets, dilute ownership stakes, or liquidate pension holdings simply to meet the annual tax obligation.
• Denmark already imposes one of the world's highest marginal tax rates at 60.5% (2026), a 42% tax on share income above DKK 79,400, a 15.3% annual tax on pension scheme yields, and a 15% estate tax — meaning Danish wealth is already taxed at creation, during accumulation, and upon transfer. A net wealth tax adds a fourth layer of taxation on the same assets.
• Denmark's own historical experience with wealth taxation (2.2% rate pre-1989, reduced to 1% in 1989, abolished entirely in 1997) demonstrated that such taxes drive capital offshore, erode the domestic tax base, and ultimately fail to achieve their redistributive objectives — conclusions confirmed by OECD research and the academic record (Jakobsen, Jakobsen, Kleven & Zucman, 2020).
• Eight of twelve OECD countries that once levied net wealth taxes have since repealed them — including Denmark itself, Germany, Finland, Sweden, and Austria — because the costs of administration, capital flight, and economic distortion consistently outweighed the revenue collected.
• Norway's ongoing experience with its wealth tax has triggered a well-documented exodus of wealthy residents and entrepreneurs to Switzerland and other jurisdictions, eroding rather than expanding its tax base — a cautionary precedent Denmark should heed, not emulate.
• The proposal violates the principle of undisturbed enjoyment of property (Article 1 of Protocol No. 1, ECHR) by imposing recurring financial obligations on assets that have not been converted to income, effectively confiscating a portion of citizens' wealth each year regardless of their ability to pay.
• For entrepreneurs with wealth concentrated in a single private company, an annual wealth tax based on assessed company value forces a devastating choice: sell equity in the business they built, take on debt against the company, or relocate abroad — none of which serves Denmark's economic interests.

and requests that the Folketing:

• Reject the reintroduction of any form of annual net wealth tax in Denmark.
• Respect the 1997 consensus that led to the abolition of the wealth tax and the well-documented economic rationale behind that decision.
• Refrain from taxing unrealised, illiquid, or paper gains on assets that have not been sold or converted to income.
• Protect Danish entrepreneurs, family businesses, and long-term investors against forced liquidation of productive assets to satisfy annual tax liabilities.
• Uphold citizens' property rights under the ECHR and the Danish Constitution (Grundloven §73) by ensuring taxation is proportionate and based on actual ability to pay.
• Recognise that Denmark's competitiveness as a destination for talent, capital, and entrepreneurship depends on tax certainty — and that reintroducing a failed tax will accelerate wealth migration to Switzerland, the UAE, Portugal, and other jurisdictions actively courting high-net-worth individuals.
• Instead pursue targeted reforms to address wealth inequality — such as closing loopholes in estate taxation, improving transparency of offshore holdings, or adjusting capital gains rates — without resorting to a blunt annual wealth levy that history has repeatedly proven counterproductive.