I have a supplementary proposal on the proposed increase in capital gains and dividends to 25%.
People should (also) be motivated to save in shares and similar investments, as the state will not be able to provide decent pensions for the majority of the population. With the new government proposal, people will certainly be even more demotivated to save in shares (after the heavy capital losses in recent years). But we know that in developed countries, saving in shares is one of the most important ways for the population to save.
I fundamentally disagree with the proposal to raise the tax to 25% (see below for the arguments), but if the crisis situation is going to make the proposal viable, let us add a few corrections to it:
 
Concerns:
1) the richer classes of the population are mostly entrepreneurs and can buy shares through their companies. The tax on corporate profits should even be reduced to 15%. This will give the richer class a substantial advantage in capital gains and dividends over the middle and lower classes. In fact, according to media reports, in the past a considerable amount of capital has fled abroad (to tax havens), so that the resourceful rich are once again heavily privileged over the rest of the population.
Proposal: we should compensate for this anomaly. Since it is more profitable in the short term to buy shares in a company, it should be more profitable in the long term to buy shares in individuals. E.g. after five years of ownership (to incentivise long-term ownership), capital gains for individuals would still be taxed at only 10% (i.e. less than for a company), and after ten years of ownership at 0%. Zero taxation of capital gains over the medium term is known in quite a few EU Member States. The current tax scale of reducing capital gains towards zero over 20 years is irrelevant because in that time most firms in an investor's portfolio can go bankrupt, a takeover can happen in the meantime and the acquirer squeezes out small shareholders, etc.
Also, as regards the taxation of dividends, business owners will be heavily favoured over individuals, as they will pay almost half the tax. I propose that, following the example of bank interest, individuals should not be taxed on individual dividend payments up to an amount of e.g. EUR 200 (thus privileging the lower classes). However, if the dividend of an individual issuer exceeds EUR 200, the difference should be taxed cedularly at the proposed tax rate.
2) A significant number of small shareholders are humbly waiting in the stocks for the long term due to the lowering of the capital base (every 5 years the capital gains tax is reduced by 5 percentage points). Introducing the proposed higher rate (25%) would completely demotivate long term investors as every few years the rules of the game change for them and even before they fall into a lower tax bracket, the tax law is changed. Moreover, in the long run, inflation can wipe out all capital gains and investors are still taxed as if they had made real capital gains.
Proposal: capital gains on sale should be taxed as they are legally taxed at the time the investor bought the shares. Alternatively, again, the tax rate could be reduced more sharply with years of ownership (i.e. after five years of ownership there is still 10% tax, after ten years 0%).
3) Capital gains and losses for individuals are netted only within the same calendar year. Again, individuals are very disadvantaged in this respect compared to entrepreneurs, who can offset losses against future profits. Thus, for individuals, the effective tax on profits is not 25%, but the effective tax rate can be as high as 100% in the worst case (if a small shareholder realises a large loss in the previous year, but in the following year realises a minimal profit, which is taxed by the state on top of that).
Proposal: capital losses for individuals should be carried forward to be offset against future capital gains. It is not correct for the State to levy a tax on profits, even if the investor has a cumulative loss.
4) A part of the population invests in shares over the long term through an individual wealth management service. This is one of the few forms of financial services where VAT is charged, at a rate of 20% (on the management fee and on the sharing of profits between the bank/BPH and the client). Moreover, there is even double taxation, since the payment of VAT is not taken into account as a reduction of the tax base when capital gains are taxed).
Proposal: the service of individual asset management should be assimilated to that of mutual funds, where VAT is not charged. There is no substantive difference between the two services, but from a tax point of view there is an unjustified difference between them.