A mildly-punitive tax on high levels of personal consumption (including imputed consumption. such as business owners using business assets for private use, etc.) would seem to be a lot less distortionary and more socially-beneficial than a punitive tax on wealth, and just as politically sensible. What it doesn't have, unfortunately, is the raw appeal of soundbites like "soak the rich!" and "you didn't build that!".
Re:Modeling a Wealth Tax
by codekansas on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @03:06PM
(#24202878)
There's a cool related video of Greg Mankiw [0]. He talked about two "redistribution" schemes:
1. $1000 per month to those with zero income, phased out at 20c / dollar extra income, financed by 20% tax on all income above $60k 2. Transfer of $1000 per month to everyone, financed by 20% flat tax on income
Apparently a group of Harvard students he asked were strongly in favor of the former, without realizing that the two plans are equivalent. It's all about framing.
Re:Modeling a Wealth Tax
by dpoochieni on Tuesday August 18, 2020 @03:36PM
(#24203298)
That's just who has better PR (been longer at it)
A "punitive tax on interest income" is popular with the left because it is, on paper, very progressive and avoids taxing the poor. But in truth, I don't think people actually want fewer billionaires, they just don't want aristocratic billionaires.
It also doesn't help that it's so unclear what the money would be spent on.
[0] https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/explore/public_figu... [1] https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/explore/public_figu...