"Welfare and Basic Income Supported by Majority of Citizens... Preference for 'Tax Increase on the Wealthy'"

National Assembly Budget Office: "If Progressive Forces Fail Due to 'Amateurish Governance and Ideological Excess,' the Public Will Turn to Moderates and Conservatives"

[Sejong=Asia Economy Reporter Son Sun-hee] More than half of the public supports tax increases for welfare or basic income, but a study found that people prefer 'taxing the rich'?targeting high-income earners or large corporations?over universal tax increases that apply to all members of society.

On the 21st, the National Assembly Budget Office released research results containing this finding in its report titled "A Study on Koreans' Attitudes Toward Tax Increases Related to Welfare and Basic Income." The report cited a survey conducted in October last year by the Welfare State Research Center at Yonsei University, titled "Perceptions on Social Security and Tax Increases for Basic Income." The online survey collected responses from 2,502 men and women aged 18 and older nationwide.

According to the survey, 50.2% of respondents supported "expanding social welfare." Furthermore, support for tax increases to fund welfare was even higher at 59.5%. However, only 24.1% agreed that taxes should be raised from all members of society. In contrast, 73.6% believed that higher taxes should be levied on high-income earners.

Regarding preferred methods of tax increases for welfare, raising corporate tax was the most favored at 53.7%, followed by property tax increases (43.3%), and reducing tax exemptions and restructuring expenditure (42.1%). Universal tax measures such as income tax (15.7%) or consumption tax (13.7%) were less preferred. This phenomenon is known as the 'Noomp' effect. Issuing government bonds (8.5%) to borrow funds for welfare expenses was also ranked low in priority.

Among those who agreed to welfare-related tax increases, the additional amount they were willing to pay annually averaged 198,000 KRW, which translates to about 16,500 KRW per month. The report interpreted this as "even if social security is strengthened, since individuals do not directly benefit unless they fall into social risk, the conditions for welfare expansion do not effectively influence the willingness to pay additional taxes."

Support for basic income was also higher (42.8%) than opposition (26%). Support for tax increases to fund basic income exceeded half at 54.8%.

However, similar to welfare, 68.7% favored taxing high-income earners more rather than universal tax increases. This again reflects the Noomp effect. Taxes considered suitable to newly introduce for basic income included land holding tax, earmarked taxes for basic income, and carbon tax.

The most frequently desired basic income amount was "500,000 KRW per month" at 20.8%, followed by 300,000 KRW per month (16.7%) and 1,000,000 KRW per month (14.7%). Those who responded "not needed" accounted for 15.7%.

The report stated, "Overall, many respondents showed supportive attitudes toward welfare and basic income, but when tax increases are involved, opposition surpasses support, and the Noomp phenomenon?preferring tax increases through the wealthy and corporations?is confirmed. While it would be desirable to seek public consent before raising taxes, even citizens who agree on the necessity of tax increases are willing to pay only very small amounts in actual taxes, making it practically impossible to obtain prior public consent and then raise taxes," it analyzed. It added, "The realistic approach is for the government to implement necessary tax increases according to fiscal expenditure needs and maximize taxpayer compliance."

To achieve this, the report identified the need for ▲improving government trust ▲providing objective information on tax burdens ▲increasing national income ▲enhancing state management capabilities. The report noted, "After government trust, the variable that fosters a positive attitude toward tax increases is progressive ideological orientation," but also pointed out, "Although progressive political forces have come to power, if amateurish governance or ideological excesses fail to deliver expected results, even citizens who held progressive views before elections may shift to moderate or conservative positions." It further added, "To enable tax increases, it is necessary to reduce ideological excesses of progressive political forces and strengthen state management capabilities."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.