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.
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.
-
What to know before turning to AI for financial advice
the explainer It can help you crunch the numbers — but it might also pocket your data
-
Book reviews: 'The Headache: The Science of a Most Confounding Affliction—and a Search for Relief' and 'Tonight in Jungleland: The Making of Born to Run'
Feature The search for a headache cure and revisiting Springsteen's 'Born to Run' album on its 50th anniversary
-
Keith McNally' 6 favorite books that have ambitious characters
Feature The London-born restaurateur recommends works by Leo Tolstoy, John le Carré, and more
-
Gavin Newsom's Trump-style trolling roils critics while thrilling fans
TALKING POINTS The California governor has turned his X account into a cutting parody of Trump's digital cadence, angering Fox News conservatives
-
Costco is at the center of an abortion debate
Talking Points The decision to no longer stock the abortion pill came following a pressure campaign by conservatives
-
The census: Why Trump wants a new one
Feature Donald Trump is pushing for a 'Trumpified census' that excludes undocumented immigrants
-
It is 'beyond time for us to seek bipartisan solutions' for Afghanistan
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
The push for a progressive mayor has arrived in Seattle
The Explainer Two liberals will face off in this November's election
-
What does occupying Gaza accomplish for Israel?
Talking Points Risking a 'strategic dead-end' in the fight against Hamas
-
Epstein: A boon for Democrats?
Feature Democrats' push to release the Epstein files splits the GOP, sending the House into an early summer recess
-
NY's Hochul vows response to Texas gerrymander
Speed Read Gov. Kathy Hochul has promised to play ball with redistricting that favors the Democrats