I have just heard a rumour that Spain is doing to be taxing capital assets, and doing it retrospectively by 20 years.
Spain already has almost no GA and this isn't going to help.
Greece did this too but they do it by allocating a nominal "income value" to the asset, and if you already declare tax on that income (or on more) then you pay nothing for having the asset.
With aircraft, say a TB20 worth €100k, you may need to earn something in the region of €100k (it isn't 1:1).
One workaround is to syndicate the aircraft; 4 people each paying tax on €25k will do it.
Another is to go N-reg, which in Greece means paying ~ 5x more in landing fees in some places, much longer PPR in some (e.g. LGSA), and possibly having to ship an A&P/IA, all expenses paid, to have a holiday on a Greek island which will obviously be unpleasant because he has to eat crap food like calamari, olives, and yoghurt with honey.
How is Italy doing on asset taxes?
Another is to go N-reg, which in Greece means paying ~ 5x more in landing fees in some places, much longer PPR in some (e.g. LGSA)
Is it just N reg or would they charge the same for say C reg or VH reg? I suppose this is actually illegal in the EU and could be challenged...but I guess they know that the barriers to challenge are prohibitively high!
I think it is any non EU reg that attracts the higher charges.
However, SX-reg specifically get (or used to get) concessions like being able to fly to some airports without PPR.
I have to pay taxes for my car but my airplane is tax free... for now. Taxing GA aircraft isn't all that attractive because it will yield almost no revenue.
In general I have no problem with asset taxes. If you own a toy for 100k€, you can certainly afford some tax otherwise you shouldn't be owning a 100k€ toy. Right now I am glad that there isn't such a tax in Germany but that might change one day. Italy have introduced it. There are a lot more boats and expensive cars out there.
GA provides very little value to the society these days and is next to irrelevant as a means of transport so we should be glad that there is still widespread government funding of the infrastructure.
Greece did this too but they do it by allocating a nominal "income value" to the asset, and if you already declare tax on that income (or on more) then you pay nothing for having the asset.
Well, this is not a tax on assets, it's just a checkpoint for your tax declaration. Greece has had these notorious issues of collecting tax, the dentists with villas and pools and a declared income of 20k€/year etc. so lacking other means of assessing people's incomes, it's more than fair to draw conclusions from assets.
Here in the US, my County charges me 1.2% per year on my planes, but it very 'easy to work with' on the value of the aircraft. I also pay fuel tax, although not the outrageous level that's levied in all of Europe.
In general, think money spent in the economy does more for society than money given to government. I certain don't equate 'society' with taxation or government. However, certain functions are intrinsically governmental and I'm OK with paying my share of those.
"If you own a toy for 100k€, you can certainly afford some tax otherwise you shouldn't be owning a 100k€ toy" How do you arrive at such a statement? I have paid extraordinary amounts of tax on what I have saved to by my 100k "toy" so why should i be taxed on that item? If I had spent it on booze etc it could not have been taxed again, and I could then live on the state no doubt. If that were ever to happen then I and my aquired "wealth" would be off in a great hurry to somewhere far away from those in the EU who just seem consumed with envy (and woe betide anyone who dares to question the EU gravy train). Also by what standard should I "not be owning" such an item?
My particular "toy" contributes a lot a money annually in taxes on fees, on avgas, on wages to staff and of course in local taxes for the airfield. Any more and I'm off.
Spain already has almost no GA and this isn't going to help.
Not really correct. There is (or at least was until the crisis fully hit) quite a vibrant Microlight scene. You'd be surprised how much flying was going on at some fields! It just wasn't the 'certified' stuff. Nowadays activity levels are way down, but that is a direct function of disposable income or rather the lack thereof. That said, the Spanish 'hacienda' (HMRC equivalent) is desperately trying to scrape together some money to keep the place afloat and will claw at anything.
GA provides very little value to the society these days and is next to irrelevant as a means of transport so we should be glad that there is still widespread government funding of the infrastructure.
Well, that really depends where you live. In Europe you are not wrong, but if you look at the US, Oz, Africa and some parts of South America, GA is very much part of the transport infrastructure.
How do you arrive at such a statement?
It refers to your ability to pay, not whether I think you should be taxed. Asset taxing is common many (most?) countries. Many tax second homes, cars with a displacement larger than 2l, more horsepower than 150 etc.
If I had spent it on booze etc it could not have been taxed again, and I could then live on the state no doubt.
Indeed, yet very few people apply this logic. Among the countries with the highest asset taxes is Switzerland.
it's more than fair to draw conclusions from assets.
That's definitely an "interesting" take on fairness 
Right now I am glad that there isn't such a tax in Germany
Indeed you must be!
Asset taxes are fundamentally unfair, because just because you have Item Value X does not mean that you have Income Y from which to pay the tax.
Such a tax is therefore a presumption of tax evasion on something unrelated, and it is a tax which is imposed without the State having evidence to support the accusation.
There would be a huge uproar here in the UK if they tried that here.
There is a value-based tax on property, which (looking at my house for example) runs of the order of 0.25% a year, but that has been around for decades and is ostensibly to fund local services, who are supposed to account for how they spend it.
They are talking about a tax on houses above some value, say £2M, at something like 10x the current rate, but it doesn't look like that will go far.
I suppose if a country is bankrupt then it has to do "something", but that only indicates that the said country doesn't have a functioning tax collection system, due to a lack of organisation and corruption of tax officials. It doesn't mean it's fair. Anyway, those affected tend to move their boats outside the country, sell and lease them back, etc... Corruption can be very useful because it works both ways.
Any more and I'm off.
You aren't the only one.
It refers to your ability to pay,
No, it refers to your ability to pay at the time you acquired it. Generally, you paid a tax at the time - VAT.
Among the countries with the highest asset taxes is Switzerland
Indeed, but that country also has "ways and means" in "other areas" 
Any more and I'm off.You aren't the only one.
+1 for that!
