A group of billionaires sign a letter asking presidential candidates to support a wealth tax

[southernhybrid]

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/1342-wealthtaxletter-june2019/1852b1968e8e0d52b1a0/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

TO: 2020 Presidential Candidates
Weare writing to call on all candidates for President, whether they are Republicans or Democrats, to supportamoderatewealthtaxonthefortunesoftherichest1/10oftherichest1%ofAmericans—on us. The next dollar of new tax revenue should come from the most financially fortunate, not from middle-income and lower-income Americans.
America has a moral, ethical and economic responsibility to tax our wealth more. A wealth tax could help address the climate crisis, improve the economy, improve health outcomes,fairly create opportunity, and strengthen our democratic freedoms. Instituting a wealth tax is in the interest of our republic.
Polls show that a moderate tax on the wealthiest Americans enjoys the support of a majority of Americans—Republicans, Independents, and Democrats.’ We hope that candidates for President will alsorecognizetheforceoftheideaandjoinwithmostAmericansinsupportingit.Someideasaretoo important for America to be part of only a few candidates’ platforms.
The concept of a wealth tax isn’t new: Millions of middle-income Americans already pay a wealth tax each year in the form of property taxes on their primary form of wealth—their home. The kind of moderatetaxontherichest1/10of1%thatwesupportjustasksustopayasmallwealthtaxonthe primary source of our wealth as well.

That’s one reason we don’t view a wealth tax as a sacrifice on our part: We believe instituting a wealth tax would lead to political, social, and economic stability, strengthening and safeguarding America’s democratic freedoms.
A Wealth Tax Is Patriotic. In our republic, it is the patriotic duty of all Americans to contribute what they can to the success of the country, and the wealthiest are no exception. Others have put far more on thelineforAmerica.Thoseofusintherichest1/10oftherichest1%shouldbeproudtopayabit more of our fortune forward to America’s future. We’ll be fine—taking onthis tax is the least we can do to strengthen the country we love.
What about the arguments against a wealth tax? They are mostly technical and often overstated.
Someraise important questions about implementation and enforcement. But as the Warren proposal shows, we can limit potential evasion and reduce tax cheating by building on lessons learned in the United States and other countries. Others question whether assets owned by many ultra-millionaires and billionaires, including private equity andart collections, can be accurately assessed for tax purposes. But such assets are frequently valued—uponresale, donation, bankruptcy, divorce, or death.
Somehavearguedthatafederalwealthtaxisunconstitutional.Buthereagain,someofthecountry’s most prominent constitutional scholars—including two former heads of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice—have argued convincingly that a wealth tax is constitutional.”
Far-reaching policy proposals nearly always require considerable effort to iron out complexities —and that effort has always been made whenthe cause is important enough. The process ofinstituting a wealth tax would in itself likely improve the measurementtools to facilitate implementation.

The letter includes many reasons as to why these billionaires support a wealth tax. I'm not sure exactly how successful a wealth tax would be, as I've read that when it's been tried in other countries, it's often difficult to enforce. But, I am pleased that more of the most wealthy Americans are starting to realize that they need to contribute more to their country due to the extreme wealth disparity that has been created over recent decades.

 

[Treedbear]

I don't see any advantage over the progressive income tax if the marginal tax rate is just increased substantially for the highest brackets. And it's potentially much more difficult to implement and easier to manipulate. I wish all taxes except income tax were eliminated. As they point out, current local property taxes are a wealth tax. For the average person a local income tax would better reflect one's ability to pay and would more evenly apply to everyone in the community.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

 

[Treedbear]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

You miss the point of it being a tax. Voluntary won't work. We are forced to pay and it's for our own good. I take the attitude that I'm proud to pay taxes and I'm quite happy that my neighbor is forced to do so. (But I still don't think wealth taxes are a good idea.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I am categorically opposed to wealth taxes. For a diversified individual a wealth tax is simply a tax and it wouldn't be that big a deal. However, wealth taxes also hit people who have one valuable asset--generally a company they have formed and are growing. Such companies rarely pay dividends. Thus you can end up with a situation where someone has tax bill exceeding their income.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

You miss the point of it being a tax. Voluntary won't work. We are forced to pay and it's for our own good. I take the attitude that I'm proud to pay taxes and I'm quite happy that my neighbor is forced to do so. (But I still don't think wealth taxes are a good idea.)

I understand that. I think the motivation behind asking to be taxed more is that they perceive major economic problems unless more revenue is generated and unless income disparity is addressed. There may also be a modicum of compassion and guilt in there as well, though certainly not by all.

I think the uniting force is economics and also fairness wrt paying higher taxes. Everyone should pay, it should not be voluntary.

I am categorically opposed to wealth taxes. For a diversified individual a wealth tax is simply a tax and it wouldn't be that big a deal. However, wealth taxes also hit people who have one valuable asset--generally a company they have formed and are growing. Such companies rarely pay dividends. Thus you can end up with a situation where someone has tax bill exceeding their income.

If you read the article they used the example of having to pay a property tax based on the value of the home you own, which is a wealth tax. I assume you are against all such taxes including taxes based on property assessments.

And how is income not wealth?

 

[laughing dog]

And how is income not wealth?

Income is earned while wealth is owned.

 

[lpetrich]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

Because it's the Tragedy of the Commons. Freeloading off of others' efforts will be rewarded.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

Because they are saying "I want you to tax them even if it hurts me."

That's one of the major justifications for tax increase proposals. Another is "he has more than I do so tax him". Raising money for the government is a distant third.

 

[Worldtraveller]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

Because they are saying "I want you to tax them even if it hurts me."

That's one of the major justifications for tax increase proposals. Another is "he has more than I do so tax him". Raising money for the government is a distant third.

Do you have to buy stock in straw to build strawmen that big?

 

[southernhybrid]

I kind of doubt that many of you read the letter that was written by the billionaires who want to pay a wealth tax.

Others have put far more on thelineforAmerica.Thoseofusintherichest1/10oftherichest1%shouldbeproudtopayabit more of our fortune forward to America’s future. We’ll be fine—taking onthis tax is the least we can do to strengthen the country we love.
What about the arguments against a wealth tax? They are mostly technical and often overstated.
Someraise important questions about implementation and enforcement. But as the Warren proposal shows, we can limit potential evasion and reduce tax cheating by building on lessons learned in the United States and other countries. Others question whether assets owned by many ultra-millionaires and billionaires, including private equity andart collections, can be accurately assessed for tax purposes. But such assets are frequently valued—uponresale, donation, bankruptcy, divorce, or death.
Somehavearguedthatafederalwealthtaxisunconstitutional.Buthereagain,someofthecountry’s most prominent constitutional scholars—including two former heads of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice—have argued convincingly that a wealth tax is constitutional.”
Far-reaching policy proposals nearly always require considerable effort to iron out complexities —and that effort has always been made whenthe cause is important enough. The process ofinstituting a wealth tax would in itself likely improve the measurementtools to facilitate implementation.
Thoseofuswhohavesignedthisletterbelieveitisourdutytostepupandsupportawealthtaxthat taxes us. It is a key to both addressing our climate crisis, and a more competitive, stronger economy thatwouldbetterservemillionsofAmericans.ItwouldmakeAmericahealthier.Itisafairwayof creating opportunity. Andit strengthens American freedom and democracy.It is not in our interest to advocate for this tax, if our interests are quite narrowly understood. But the wealth tax is in ourinterest as Americans.

Too lazy to read that above quote? I'll make it easier on you.

Division and dissatisfaction are exacerbated by inequality, leading to higher levels of distrust in democratic institutions—and worse."
That’s one reason we don’t view a wealth tax as a sacrifice on our part: We believe instituting a wealth tax would lead to political, social, and economic stability, strengthening and safeguarding America’s democratic freedoms.
A Wealth Tax Is Patriotic. In our republic, it is the patriotic duty of all Americans to contribute what they can to the success of the country, and the wealthiest are no exception.

I used to think a wealth tax was an unreasonable idea, but these extremely wealthy people are making a pretty good argument as to why it's a good idea. If they are arguing in favor of Warren's wealth tax plan, it's only going to affect a very small percentage of ultra wealthy people, those who can most afford to pay more taxes.


Regardless if some of their motivations are for selfish reasons, I don't care. They have enough sense to realize that the current insane disparity of wealth isn't healthy for the future of our democracy.

 

[Gun Nut]

And how is income not wealth?

Income is earned while wealth is owned.

yes... and while "income" is one line in the ledger, "wealth" is a value judgment on the bottom line.

You can have $100,000 per year in income, but if you have $99,000 in taxes and expenses, then it will take you a million years to be "wealthy".

 

[Treedbear]

...
Too lazy to read that above quote? I'll make it easier on you.
...
Regardless if some of their motivations are for selfish reasons, I don't care. They have enough sense to realize that the current insane disparity of wealth isn't healthy for the future of our democracy.

I didn't see anything about why a wealth tax is better than simply raising the marginal tax rate in order to take in more money from those who can afford to pay. That would also lessen the current wealth disparity. Why don't they argue for a wealth tax that completely replaces the income tax and have it apply to everyone? I'd need a lot more analysis of the effects of a wealth tax before I'd consider endorsing a candidate (Warren) whose main slogan is having a plan for everything and basing them on a wealth tax.

The advantage of a progressive income tax is that it tends to offset the biggest problem of a capitalistic society, which is that it's so extraordinarily effective at leveraging financial success that it severely disadvantages those at the bottom. They simply don't have any hope of someday having sufficient capital to participate. An income tax (along with the various social welfare programs that it funds and which the right calls socialism) addresses that problem at its source. I believe in capitalism, but we don't have a capitalistic system unless everyone gets to participate.

 

[Treedbear]

... Why don't they argue for a wealth tax that completely replaces the income tax and have it apply to everyone? I'd need a lot more analysis of the effects of a wealth tax before I'd consider endorsing a candidate (Warren) whose main slogan is having a plan for everything and basing them on a wealth tax.
...

OK, here's the big problem with a wealth tax. It's that you become dependent on there being a class of the extremely wealthy. Institutionalize the oligarchy. I bet Putin and Trump would love that.

 

[Canard DuJour]

... Why don't they argue for a wealth tax that completely replaces the income tax and have it apply to everyone? I'd need a lot more analysis of the effects of a wealth tax before I'd consider endorsing a candidate (Warren) whose main slogan is having a plan for everything and basing them on a wealth tax.
...

OK, here's the big problem with a wealth tax. It's that you become dependent on there being a class of the extremely wealthy. Institutionalize the oligarchy.

Correct. What the extremely wealthy are really frightened of is the rest of us realising that money doesn't grow on rich people. It's issued by govts and could be issued for any public purpose we have the physical means to produce without the permission of the extremely wealthy.

As Keynes said, what we can produce, we can afford.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

... Why don't they argue for a wealth tax that completely replaces the income tax and have it apply to everyone? I'd need a lot more analysis of the effects of a wealth tax before I'd consider endorsing a candidate (Warren) whose main slogan is having a plan for everything and basing them on a wealth tax.
...

OK, here's the big problem with a wealth tax. It's that you become dependent on there being a class of the extremely wealthy.

I pay a "wealth" tax based on the value of my home and property. What do you think about that?

 

[dismal]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

You miss the point of it being a tax. Voluntary won't work. We are forced to pay and it's for our own good. I take the attitude that I'm proud to pay taxes and I'm quite happy that my neighbor is forced to do so. (But I still don't think wealth taxes are a good idea.)

How does it not work? If these billionaires voluntarily pay taxes doesn't the government get the money? If not, who does?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

You miss the point of it being a tax. Voluntary won't work. We are forced to pay and it's for our own good. I take the attitude that I'm proud to pay taxes and I'm quite happy that my neighbor is forced to do so. (But I still don't think wealth taxes are a good idea.)

How does it not work? If these billionaires voluntarily pay taxes doesn't the government get the money? If not, who does?

They don't actually care that the government is getting the money, they care about making other people pay.

 

[Treedbear]

... Why don't they argue for a wealth tax that completely replaces the income tax and have it apply to everyone? I'd need a lot more analysis of the effects of a wealth tax before I'd consider endorsing a candidate (Warren) whose main slogan is having a plan for everything and basing them on a wealth tax.
...

OK, here's the big problem with a wealth tax. It's that you become dependent on there being a class of the extremely wealthy.

I pay a "wealth" tax based on the value of my home and property. What do you think about that?

Here -

I don't see any advantage over the progressive income tax if the marginal tax rate is just increased substantially for the highest brackets. And it's potentially much more difficult to implement and easier to manipulate. I wish all taxes except income tax were eliminated. As they point out, current local property taxes are a wealth tax. For the average person a local income tax would better reflect one's ability to pay and would more evenly apply to everyone in the community.

 

[Treedbear]

What's preventing anyone from writing a check to government at any level? Better yet, bypass government and give it to where need is perceived.

You miss the point of it being a tax. Voluntary won't work. We are forced to pay and it's for our own good. I take the attitude that I'm proud to pay taxes and I'm quite happy that my neighbor is forced to do so. (But I still don't think wealth taxes are a good idea.)

How does it not work? If these billionaires voluntarily pay taxes doesn't the government get the money? If not, who does?

I don't see anyone volunteering to pay when the others in their bracket (wealth or income) don't. If most of them don't a few donations won't solve the problem. And that's what they are trying to do. We need tax revenue and how you go about collecting it either creates or solves problems. I just think it's the wrong way to solve the wealth disparity problem.