There aren't enough rich people for Democrats' 'tax the rich' plan
Facing unfavorable economic trends, congressional inertia, and collapsing approval for the Biden administration, Democrats are getting desperate. Tensions within the party have stalled the reconciliation bill on which they've placed longstanding aspirations for new social programs and environmental regulation. Now, reality seems to be setting in: The party needs to pass something if it hopes to avoid a wipeout in the midterm elections next year.
Senate Democrats took a step toward that outcome early this week when they agreed to fund some of the proposed spending with a new tax on billionaires. As with the rest of the bill, the details remain vague, but the idea is to tax "unrealized gains" — in essence, the appreciated value of property that hasn't been sold — of people who own more than $1 billion in assets or report income above $100 million for three consecutive years.
The short-term politics seem favorable. The very rich aren't especially popular with the public (although a majority regard them with indifference), and the plan is apparently acceptable to Sen. Krysten Sinema (D-Ariz.), who ruled out increases in standard marginal income tax rates. While raising any taxes probably isn't an optimal strategy before an election, squeezing about 700 billionaires is a fairly safe bet.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
For just that reason, though, the billionaire tax is more legislative gimmick than serious proposal. For one thing, it's not clear that it's legal because of a constitutional requirement of proportionality among the states for taxes, like this one, collected directly from citizens. The 16th Amendment makes an exception for income taxes. But are unrealized gains income? No money can be collected until the courts answer.
Second, the structure of the proposal makes it unlikely to go into effect as planned. In the current version, billionaires would have up to five years to pay the first installment. Since Republicans are likely to take control of Congress or even the White House during that time, there's a high probability this assessment would be reduced or eliminated before it ever came due. Billionaires can easily wait out the clock.
Last and most important, though: Taxing the rich is fiscally irrelevant. As my George Washington University colleague Kimberly Morgan has pointed out, "No large welfare state is funded solely through taxes on the rich and corporations. The middle class is where the money is."
According to reports, Democrats hope the tax could eventually be extended downward from billionaires to mere millionaires. But even that won't cover the bills for the spending they want. There simply aren't enough rich people, and you can't have European-style benefits without European-style taxes on people who aren't rich by any reasonable definition. That's a dilemma Democrats don't want to face.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Samuel Goldman is a national correspondent at TheWeek.com. He is also an associate professor of political science at George Washington University, where he is executive director of the John L. Loeb, Jr. Institute for Religious Freedom and director of the Politics & Values Program. He received his Ph.D. from Harvard and was a postdoctoral fellow in Religion, Ethics, & Politics at Princeton University. His books include God's Country: Christian Zionism in America (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018) and After Nationalism (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2021). In addition to academic research, Goldman's writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and many other publications.
-
Why are home insurance prices going up?
Today's Big Question Climate-driven weather events are raising insurers' costs
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
'All too often, we get caught up in tunnel vision'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
2024: the year of legacy media failures
In the Spotlight From election criticism to continued layoffs, the media has had it rough in 2024
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Is the United States becoming an oligarchy?
Talking Points How much power do billionaires like Elon Musk really have?
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
What is Mitch McConnell's legacy?
Talking Point Moving on after a record-setting run as Senate GOP leader
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
'This quasi-coup attempt has baffled most experts'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
Who will win the coming US-China trade war?
Talking Points Trump's election makes a tariff battle likely
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published
-
Democrats eye a new strategy after Trump victory
The Explainer Party insiders and outside analysts are looking for a way to recapture lost working-class support
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
The Democrats: time for wholesale reform?
Talking Point In the 'wreckage' of the election, the party must decide how to rebuild
By The Week UK Published
-
'The double standards don't trouble the critics'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
The political latitude of Musk's cost-cutting task force
Talking Points A $2 trillion goal. And big obstacles in the way.
By Joel Mathis, The Week US Published