In a dimly lit television studio, one of Hungary’s richest men is on the verge of tears. It is early May, weeks after the general election that ended Viktor Orbán’s 16-year grip on power, and the advertising mogul Gyula Balásy has an announcement to make.

Balásy tells the interviewer that he has just surrendered his businesses to the state, along with a chunk of his private savings. He has even brought along a notarised deed – a legal document setting out the change of ownership.

“In the current situation, I don’t think that our group of companies has a future,” he says.

Balásy was among the most prominent beneficiaries of the Orbán era. His companies operated a network of poster sites known as the blue billboards, on which a succession of figures from the financier George Soros to the European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, were designated as public enemies, in propaganda campaigns paid for by the state.

Today, the billboards stand empty. Hungary’s new leader, Péter Magyar, and his party, Tisza, have their sights firmly set on Orbán’s oligarchs. Not only has Balásy’s access to public sector contracts come to an end, but the tax bill on his remaining millions is likely to rise.

The finance minister, András Kármán, has promised that by 5 June he will provide more detail on a planned overhaul of the tax regime that could result in Hungary becoming the first current member of the EU to introduce a new wealth tax since the 1980s.

Announcing the policy in a post on X last summer, Magyar said the move was “not a punishment but a sign of social justice and solidarity in a functioning and humane country”.

The details so far are scant. In its manifesto Tisza promised a 1% annual tax for those with assets of more than 1bn forints (£2.4m), applied to the portion of their estate above that threshold. Property, shares in companies and assets held abroad would all be counted, Magyar said on X, as would possessions such as yachts, private jets, paintings and sports cars. To discourage avoidance, wealth owned by spouses and children would also be liable.

“Hungary badly needs a wealth tax, for two reasons,” says Zoltán Pogátsa, a political economist and lecturer at the University of West Hungary. First, he believes existing taxes on wealth are too low, and second, he thinks it will ensure accountability.

“Tisza’s wealth tax is a way of returning public money into the public coffers,” he says.

After analysing the fortunes of the 50 richest Hungarians, as ranked by Forbes magazine, Pogátsa concluded 38 of them either acquired their wealth under Orbán through public tenders, or were already rich, but benefited extensively from public procurements during his tenure.

Many occupy pivotal roles across media, energy, construction, banking and real estate, beneficiaries of what became known as the System of National Cooperation (NER), where political loyalty was rewarded with economic opportunity.

Among the best known of the NER oligarchs is Lőrinc Mészáros, who tops the Hungarian Forbes list with an estimated net worth of $5bn. A gas fitter from the same small town as the former prime minister, his empire spans energy, construction, finance, tourism and media. Years ago, he credited his fortune to three things – “God, luck, and Viktor Orbán” – although he has also attributed his success to brains and hard work.

At number 27 in the rankings, with $245m, is Orbán’s son-in-law, István Tiborcz. His interests include property, hotels and banking.

The wealth tax debate is a global one, with the government in Brazil and trade unions in California pushing for legislation. In the UK the Green party and many Labour MPs back the idea. In France the socialist president François Mitterrand introduced the Impôt sur les Grandes Fortunes in 1982, only for it to be repealed under Emmanuel Macron. Last year the French parliament came very close to reinstating the levy, and it is likely to be a big talking point in next year’s presidential election. For now, however, Hungary looks set to move first.

Magyar has a free hand, having secured a two-thirds majority in parliament. Described as an umbrella party, Tisza was originally centre-right but expanded to unite anti-Orbán voters from across the political spectrum.

If there is one thing on which its backers agree, it is the need to dismantle the NER system.

Magyar has promised to reform the public tender process, and established a National Asset Recovery and Protection Office to pursue corruption. However, in many cases, wealth was acquired within the rules that applied at the time.

“This is where I think the wealth tax could come in, where it’s immoral but legal,” Pogátsa says.

One or two business leaders have already spoken in favour. The trucking and transport entrepreneur György Wáberer, who backed Tisza during the campaign, told the news site Telex in April: “The rich pay taxes in other countries, too, and the average person pays proportionally much more in taxes – this is unfair and this system must be changed.

“I am happy if I have to pay a lot of tax because that means we are probably earning a lot, too.”

Not everyone agrees. Viktor Zsiday, an investment fund manager and economic commentator, says the solution to unfair enrichment should not be taxation but criminal proceedings. “It would be good if the wealth tax would not be mixed in the public discourse with the punishment of those with unfair income,” he wrote last year.

Zsiday is not against redistribution per se, describing Hungary as “almost a tax haven for the rich”, but he would prefer to see higher tax rates on dividends and corporate profits.

“A wealth tax puts Hungarian enterprises at a disadvantage as their tax burden is higher than companies owned by non-Hungarian nationals,” he told the Guardian. “That is surely not what the government wants but it is a campaign promise so it shall be enacted, unfortunately.”

With a flat rate of income tax, low and high earners in Hungary pay only 15%. The rate for dividends and capital gains is also 15%. Inheritance tax is 18%, but immediate family members pay nothing on property. By comparison, the UK rate is 40%. Corporation tax is also low, by European standards, at only 9%.

Since 2014, when Hungary introduced British-style trust laws, the ultra-rich have enjoyed generous tax exemptions for their private savings.

To pay for public services, the Treasury has turned to other types of taxes. Workers pay welfare contributions of 18.5%. Weighing in at a hefty 27%, the VAT rate is the highest in the EU.

The result is a system where workers shoulder a disproportionate share. Sales taxes tend to be among the most regressive forms of raising money because low earners spend a bigger proportion of earnings on basics such as food and fuel.

The result is a massive concentration of assets at the top, says István Karagich, the chief executive of the business intelligence firm Blochamps Capital. Their research has been quoted by those on all sides of the debate because the government collects only limited information on wealth.

There are 4.2 million households in Hungary. The top 1% own about 35% of assets, Karagich says. The top 10% own more than two-thirds. “This needs to change,” he says. “Let’s call it society revenge.”

However, he believes the threshold of 1bn forints is too low. “If you have two properties and a small company you would be caught by the tax. Two million pounds is not the Jeff Bezos wealth. This tax will hurt Hungarian entrepreneurs with small and middle-sized companies.”

He suggests a threshold of 5bn forints – about £10m – as originally proposed by Magyar when he announced the policy last summer. At this level, the state would raise about 100bn forints (£240m) a year from up to 10,000 households. At only 0.25% of annual government revenues, the sum raised seems hardly worth the effort.

However, Tisza has proposed other measures to raise more from the rich, including ending tax exemptions for trusts. The extra cash will go to helping low earners. A basic rate of income tax of 9% has been promised, along with cuts to VAT.

For Miroslav Palanský, an economics professor at Charles University in Prague and the head of research at the Tax Justice Network, wealth taxes are not just about raising money – they can boost the economy. “Inequality is not good for growth after a certain level. When wealth is more distributed, more people have the opportunity to contribute to GDP.”

The changes should improve transparency because the revenue can only tax what it can measure. They may also lead to some new faces in the Forbes rankings.