A 2% tax on America’s 75,000 wealthiest families would raise $2.75 trillion

A 2% tax on America’s 75,000 wealthiest families would raise $2.75 trillion over the next decade.

This is at the heart of Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren’s economic plan to reduce the enormous wealth gap between the top .1% and to raise federal revenues. The families that would eligible for this wealth tax would be those with over $50 million in assets. Families with over a billion dollars in assets would pay 3%.

E-War is not mincing around the discussion – she wants redistribution of wealth and believes that we’ve given the free market enough of a chance to “correct” the imbalances, and now it’s time for government intervention. This is obviously a polarizing subject among everyone else who makes up the 99.9% that would NOT be subject to the wealth tax, because ideologically they either believe or don’t believe that the government can better allocate these resources.

Upper middle class earners would be asking themselves “Where does it end? When do they come for my wealth? Why are they punishing success?” The rest of the middle class will be reminded of the “slippery slope” towards socialism and eventually full blown communism. Americans don’t like the idea of there being a ceiling over their heads, regardless of how far away from that ceiling they might currently reside.

According to the Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Consumer Finances, the top 5% of American households have 2/3rds of the country’s wealth. The bottom 60% have only 2% of all net worth. Very few people would seriously argue that this isn’t a problem, even if they disagree on how severe the trajectory of this trend is, or if they’re not on the same page about how to fix it.

One of the trickiest aspects of implementing a wealth tax is that the value of assets, unless they’re publicly traded stocks and bonds, are not exactly agreed upon by everyone. You don’t find out what a home or a building is worth until you’ve actually sold it. Until then, it can be appraised, but the appraisal itself isn’t a hard number. Multiple appraisals for property could arrive at multiple valuations. And because values change over time, appraisals would have to be carried out annually. Now, substitute real estate assets for small business ownership. There’s no ticker symbol. Impossible to measure in a uniform way across industries and geographies.

Think of all the potential for corruption and fraud with all of these households being put into a position to manipulate all of these subjective, ephemeral numbers. The President of the United States reportedly spent his career lying about the values of his properties to tax assessors, to banks and other lenders, to magazine publishers and to professional sports leagues  – hiking their worth when it would benefit his interests in some cases, and then lowballing in other cases, depending on what might suit the negotiation he was in at that moment in time. He’s admitted in court that the values of his assets change with his feelings about them. And he’d been able to do it for decades without much of a problem.

How could any agency or institution possibly carry out the enforcement of something at this massive scale?

For more on this subject, I highly recommend you read this Gary Burtless op-ed at Brookings on the subject of accurately measuring the assets of the super-rich. Some of the challenges involved make the Warren plan far less of a slam dunk even if you agree with her premise that the wealth gap is one of the biggest problems we face as a society.

Putting a tax on wealth means we first must measure it (Brookings)

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here: https://www.ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. Eat Verts commented on Sep 23

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More here on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]

  2. blazing trader reviews commented on Sep 23

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]

  3. dumps + pin commented on Dec 23

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]

  4. shrimps for sale online commented on Dec 30

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More Information here on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]

  5. bnc national bank commented on Jan 13

    … [Trackback]

    […] Here you will find 84611 additional Info to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]

  6. cheap wigs commented on Jan 16

    … [Trackback]

    […] Info on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]

  7. wig commented on Jan 20

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More here on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]

  8. bekijk dit hier commented on Feb 03

    … [Trackback]

    […] There you will find 75775 more Info on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2019/06/12/a-2-tax-on-americas-75000-wealthiest-families-would-raise-2-75-trillion/ […]