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.
-
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation: the group behind Gaza's controversial new aid programme
The Explainer Deadly shootings and chaotic scenes have been reported at aid sites after US group replaced UN humanitarian organisations
-
Is UK's new defence plan transformational or too little, too late?
Today's Big Question Labour's 10-year strategy 'an exercise in tightly bounded ambition' already 'overshadowed by a row over money'
-
How much should doctors trust parental intuition?
In The Spotlight Study finds parents' concern can be better at spotting critical illness than vital signs
-
Time's up: The Democratic gerontocracy
Feature The Democratic party is losing key seats as they refuse to retire aging leaders
-
The Biden cover-up: a 'near-treasonous' conspiracy
Talking Point Using 'Trumpian' tactics, the former president's inner circle maintained a conspiracy of silence around his cognitive and physical decline
-
Democrats are on the hunt for their own Joe Rogan
IN THE SPOTLIGHT Party leaders and mega-donors want to counter MAGA's online momentum by recreating a digital right-wing ecosystem for the left
-
Democrats grapple with Biden cover-up fallout ahead of 2028
IN THE SPOTLIGHT Even before his cancer diagnosis, Dems have been grappling with whether the White House's alleged effort to hide Biden's failing health is worth relitigating
-
Trump DOJ charging House Democrat in ICE fracas
speed read Rep. LaMonica McIver is being charged with assault over a clash outside an immigration detention facility in Newark
-
Is Trump trying to take over Congress?
Talking Points Separation of powers at stake in Library of Congress fight
-
Democrats: How to rebuild a damaged brand
Feature Trump's approval rating is sinking, but so is the Democratic brand
-
'Two dolls': Can Trump sell Americans on austerity?
Feature Trump's tariffs may be threatening holiday shelves but they've handed Democrats a 'huge gift'