Poorly thought out and deeply antisocial – this is how Stefanie Bremer criticizes the federal government’s crisis management in relation to rising energy prices. The 33-year-old is one of the five percent of the richest people in Germany and would like to give a lot more than the state demands of her.
FOCUS online: Many people in the country are afraid that they can no longer pay their electricity and gas bills. In the course of the energy crisis, measures such as cold swimming pools and a lack of street lighting are being discussed and some have already been implemented. Politicians give tips like “washcloths instead of showers”. What does it do to you when you hear something like this – as someone who probably doesn’t need to worry about the “luxury” of a warm shower or a well-tempered apartment?
Stefanie Bremer: I worry about social cohesion. People increasingly seem to feel left alone by politics. You just brought up the washcloth thing. That was really very unfortunate communication. Someone doesn’t trust their citizens to know how to save water.
But what is even worse: There is an obvious lack of recognition that there are ways of actually tackling the crisis. With well thought-out concepts based on solidarity.
Now save articles for later in “Pocket”.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz seems to see that. We will arm ourselves as a country, he said, “because we are a solidary country”.
Bremer: For the moment, that sounds more like a phrase to me. If people are afraid of being thrown out of their apartment because they can no longer pay the utility bills – and some people don’t panic, it’s a legitimate concern – while others hardly notice the increased costs, a serious imbalance arises.
Despite the numerous measures that politicians have pushed for?
Bremer: What has been offered in terms of relief so far, from a fuel discount to a flat-rate heating fee or a nine-euro ticket to the gas price cap, seems to me that it hasn’t been well thought through. This is watering can par excellence.
Your criticism of the watering can?
Bremer: First of all: that people are helped who don’t even need this help. In addition, the watering can certainly does not encourage a rethinking of energy consumption among the wealthy. Where certain groups of the population save adamantly and perhaps really use the washcloth, many wealthy people continue to live privately as before. Here, in particular, a change in behavior could achieve much more.
In what way?
Bremer: It is well known that increasing prosperity correlates with increasing energy consumption. Many studies show that. Those who have a lot of money tend to live in large apartments and houses that have to be heated and lit. The wealthy drive bigger cars and consume more overall. A study comes to 87 gigajoules per year for the average energy consumption in Germany. The top 1 percent of the super-rich use an average of 400 gigajoules. Forgoing a private pool, a yacht and other climate-damaging consumption holds enormous potential for savings.
Economics Minister Robert Habeck apologized to some extent for the gas price cap that was evenly distributed across the country: In the hurry, there was no other way, and a certain degree of injustice had to be accepted.
Bremer: That honestly stunned me. It was already abundantly clear in the spring that there would be a need for action. This went through all the media and was to be expected in a wide variety of places. I’ve never been in politics myself, so maybe I have misconceptions about certain processes. Spontaneously, however, I would say that we should have started setting priorities much earlier. Keyword target group justice. You should have remembered what you wrote in your own election manifesto.
In the election campaign, the Social Democrats in Germany campaigned very strongly for wealth tax, is that what you mean?
Bremer: The Greens also had the issue in their election program and called for reforms, including inheritance law. Happened so far: nothing.
Do I understand this correctly: you would like to be taxed differently? In your opinion, do the wealthy give too little?
Bremer: I see it that way, yes, and that’s why I’m involved in the “Taxmenow” association, an association of wealthy people in the DACH region who are convinced that the financial means should be distributed differently. The richest ten percent of Germans currently hold 67 percent of the wealth. Much could be achieved through redistribution.
I often have the lines from a doctors’ song in my head: It’s not your fault the way the world is, but it’s your fault if it stays like this. I was fortunate to be born into a wealthy family. Now I want to use the design options that I have. Hence my commitment.
What are the demands of “Taxmenov”?
Bremer: Very important: the resumption of wealth tax. It was suspended in 1996 because the Federal Constitutional Court declared it unconstitutional. At the same time, however, the court ordered that the topic had to be revised. Unfortunately, no federal government has done so since then.
Actually why, what do you think?
Bremer: One issue is definitely the lack of transparency in politics. Talking about lobbying: Wealthy people can afford to delegate 30 or 40 people to influence politicians in a certain area. Poor people don’t have that opportunity. What is often not implemented is what would be fair and sensible, but what plays into the hands of certain groups. There is a lack of pressure on politicians to change something about this situation.
What else does “Taxmenov” demand?
Bremer: We want the exemptions from inheritance and gift tax to be withdrawn. These should be largely abolished because they promote the concentration of wealth.
The reform for the new property tax is complex – and this year it will require owners. You have to submit some data to the tax office. You have to be very precise and observe special deadlines. In our large guide you will find all the information you need to know in a compact form.
An example?
Bremer: If I inherit three apartments, the normal inheritance tax will be due. If I inherit 300 apartments, the tax office almost automatically considers them business property, which is largely exempt from inheritance tax. There are numerous similar exceptions. This is not for the common good!
There is also an urgent need for action on income tax. Anyone who earns income from work pays significantly more taxes than someone who earns money from investments. That can not be.
Let’s summarize: You think you pay too little tax. They find that unfair and would like to give more. Dumb question: Why don’t you just donate?
Bremer: Good point. Anyone who hears the demands of our club sometimes concludes that we already have perfectly worked out solutions on the table. Of course that is not the case. The specific steps are the responsibility of politicians and legislators. As an association, we want to give an impetus and stimulate political processes.
What exactly do they look like in the end? We shouldn’t be the key contact for that. We’re not experts. I myself don’t know much about taxes and I was glad that I managed to avoid this topic to some extent during my studies in sustainability sciences.
As for your question about donations, that’s an idea that keeps coming up. I find this difficult because when I donate, the people around me depend on me trying to help them. In other words, the other 99.9 percent are unlucky. Is that democratic? And who am I to determine what people in Germany need?
A warm apartment, for example.
Bremer: Yes, but as I said, I see the task as a task for the state. He has the broadest points of contact with the population and he has resources. The distribution of these funds is controlled. No individual or association can do anything comparable. Especially now, in the energy crisis, I would find it attractive, for example, if it could be ensured that no one was thrown out of their home because they couldn’t pay the utility bills. For me, discussions with property owners and landlords urgently need to be opened.
Have you actually approached politics as an association?
Bremer: That’s a tightrope walk. What we definitely don’t want are backroom conversations. Conversations we only get to through our privileges. A transparent appearance is the be-all and end-all. Events to which everyone has access and where parties appear could be an option. But one by one. Our association has been active since June 2021 and at the moment we are focusing on public relations and recruiting more comrades-in-arms. At the moment we have 21 members, we would love to have more.
The start of a whole new movement?
Bremen: No! It’s not that our ideas and demands are all new, we work together with numerous organizations that have been campaigning for something similar for years. Tax lawyers, legal experts.
What is new is that the topics are not only brought up on the table from a technical point of view, but in a very concrete way. Said lawyers and legal experts are often not wealthy themselves. On the other hand, something would actually change for me and for society if I paid my fair share of taxes. And I would like to do that.
