Russian MP calls for tax on ‘stupidity’
Russian State Duma MP Yevgeny Popov has spoken out against the proposed revival of a Stalin-era policy that would tax people who don’t have children. The tax was created in 1941 to stimulate population increase in the Soviet Union, which was suffering huge losses due to the Second World War.
The idea was proposed on Friday by Lieutenant General Andrey Gurulev, a member of the State Duma Defense Committee, who argued that there is nothing “left of a man in this life” after he dies except his name and his children. “Everything else is of no interest to anyone,” he claimed. He suggested that the money raised from the childlessness tax could be used to modernize orphanages in Russia.
Gurulev’s proposal sparked a backlash among some lawmakers. Popov, a member of parliament from the ruling United Russia party, quipped “I don’t know about childlessness, but a tax on stupidity definitely needs to be introduced."
The suggestion was also slammed by Nina Ostanina, head of the Committee of the State Duma on Family Protection. She called on Gurulev not to “traumatize” and “scare” young Russians with his proposals, which she said he is conveniently voicing from “the warmth of a deputy’s chair.”
She also suggested that Gurulev and other members of the Defense Committee needn’t comment on topics on which they are “incompetent.”
Ostanina also noted that the Soviet-era policy to which Gurulev had alluded to also included mandatory social guarantees, free nurseries, free kindergarten, free school, free vacations for children, free university and a free apartment.
She accused Gurulev of failing to understand that many people postpone having a child due to a lack of financial resources and stressed that until the state is capable of providing housing, good wages and social guarantees to young families, there can be no talk of reviving the childlessness tax.
Last month, the Russian government backed new legislation “in principle” that would outlaw “child-free ideology” propaganda from being disseminated via the media, movies, advertising and the internet. The bill defined the ideology as “refusing to have children” and suggested fines for those who promote such ideas.
Legislators, however, have urged the authors of the bill to further refine it and clarify what constitutes a “refusal to have children” so that it does not affect individuals who can’t have them due to religious beliefs or medical reasons, or who are the victims of rape.
