The Gospel of Wealth.
Wondering if the Koch brothers also signed. Asking for a friend.
2
At a time when the concentration of wealth among the top 1% is the highest since right before the depression, it is time to consider a wealth tax or perhaps raising the inheritance tax on large estates.
“... researchers estimate that the richest 0.1 percent will pay 3.2 percent of their wealth in taxes this year compared with 7.2 percent paid by the bottom 99 percent.” Of their (accumulated) wealth, or of their income? If it’s of their *wealth*, wouldn’t lower income people be bankrupted in a few years? And zillionaires would have to earn a surprisingly high rate on their accumulated wealth in order to see their nest eggs grow.
@Paul Abrahams: I disagree on only one point: The existence of billionaires *is* a problem. They exist because of 35+years of ridiculous US tax policy (and union-busting, and wage-suppression) that has transferred massive amounts of wealth to them while keeping the rest of us in lousy shape.
There *is* a more or less finite amount of goods to which we ascribe value (minerals, oil, land), so when the top 0.0001 of the population owns as much wealth as the bottom 50%, that's because they've been going back for 20th helpings while the rest of us make do with half a bowl.
A healthy economy wouldn't have created billionaires, because if the entire population becomes more prosperous at the same rate, then they can't acquire trillions while we *lose* money.
Finally, it's galling to hear the rich grouse about the "redistribution" of wealth when in fact we're seeking the UN-redistribution of wealth -- they're the ones who engineered the redistribution over the past 35+ years. I urge everyone to question *anyone* who uses that term -- do not let them get away with not taking responsibility for the 35-yr-long money-grab of the rich.
4
By all means, let’s tax the rich, leaving them only with enough for a luxurious life, but not unrestrained opulence. That means a $50 million exemption is far and away too large. But that alone won’t begin to level the playing field for all the hard-working poor who can’t afford rent, let alone home ownership.
Let’s install the universal health care enjoyed by virtually the entire first world except the U.S. along with dental care so that a single health problem won’t be the complete ruination of a family.
While we’re making new laws let’s make one that allows only owner-occupants to buy single family homes—no flippers, no foreign or domestic investors. Ordinary people used to be the market for home purchases. Let’s make that happen again, by law if necessary.
Let’s also prohibit one of the greatest poverty-inducing financial schemes ever invented—the revolving credit card—through which the recipient is enabled to pay only a tiny amount per month while their debt grows so shockingly high they can never pay it off and the usurious interest they ultimately pay goes straight to the already rich. To repair the damage that’s already done, let’s enact a one-time law that caps charge card balances to the total of actual purchases.
In short, let’s have a revolution—now!
4
there is a large economic gap between the ultra rich and ultra poor and when you add the gerrymandering and voters suppression. you got the minority party in power and the majority feeling. marginalized these are dangerous ingredients . that can lead to catastrophic turbulence in our society
2
You know they have the option to simply give money to the Treasury. If they are truly serious about this then why wait for a tax to be imposed?
10
For all you billionaires out there.
Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called "Gifts to the United States." ... Financial gifts can be made by check or money order payable to the United States Treasury and mailed to the address below.May 2, 2018
Treasury.gov › fiscal › public › gift...
6
Well, lah-dee-dah! So a few of the super rich are offering to give up a few million to the general welfare, but only if the tax is “moderate” and they get a $50 million exemption. I’m touched.
Having raised a family on a very modest middle-manager’s salary and subsequently survived well on a small pension combined with Social Security, I fail to understand why we can’t have a system in which the super rich get to keep, say, $25 million.That should be much more than enough to live in relative luxury while everything over that goes to support the infrastructure and the environment as well as the far more urgent needs of the poor, the working class, the elderly in very modest comfort instead of the squalor or debt-ridden circumstances they now suffer through.
Even with my small income and savings I’ve helped my children, who are forced to live from paycheck to paycheck because of shocking increases in the cost of living in this country. I have also managed to pay the tuition or deposit funds into college savings plans for my grandchildren.
I am so not impressed with the pathetic efforts of millionaires and billionaires to protect themselves from possibly being overrun by the revolution that is inevitable if the current wealth imbalance keeps up much longer. The piper must be paid. And not with a casual tip, but with a substantial penalty. Nobody got their millions or billions because they deserved them or earned them. It’s time to distribute the world’s wealth more fairly.
4
As a faculty brat at Carleton College, I listened to Ike make a campaign speech in the stadium. When Ike was president, a single wage-earner could support a family of four to six, paying the mortgage on a 3-bedroom, 2-bath house with air conditioning. The top tax rate was nearly 93% and we built an interstate highway system. Moreover, a high-school graduate could pay tuition at the state university with the income from a summer job. We need to return to the era of the 93% income tax on the wealthiest families..
4
If these billionaires sincerely feel the way they do (and I don't doubt that they do), I suggest they pool together to make a heft $100-million+ donation to the campaign of whoever is the Democratic nominee in 2020. That would go a long way to flooding the media and the internet with the advertising that can help put the Democrat in the White House.
Having a Democratic president, of course, will help achieve the results they say they are seeking taxation-wise. So while this letter is a good start, lets seem them put their money where their mouth is. Then I'll really be impressed.
3
@Francisco
A hundred million would be a huge cut compared to what billionaires donated to Hillary in 2016.
2
t's great that these wealthy people want to be taxed more and also encourage higher taxes on he wealth of similarly situated people. But the estimated nearly $3 trillion that would be generated over the next ten years will make only a small dent in the national debt, which is $22T now and will be $33T in ten years.
The bigger (biggest?) problem is that none of that tax will go to increase the wages of the majority of our population whose wages have been flat for decades. Yes, he income gap is due in part to the huge increases in income and wealth at the upper reaches of society. But this has been exacerbated by no income or wealth grown among the majority of Americans. Until employers start paying ordinary people more there will be no income growth or upward mobility. Government programs should not be used to compensate for the fact that employers are starving their employees. And company profits should be used to pay their employees more and their shareholders less.
Nick Hanauer, a signer of the letter, knows this. He says the economy is like an ecosystem. Companies make things and citizens buy hem. If the company is successful, it should pay its employees more, so they will have the more income to buy more things. That way, everyone gets wealthier, not just the executives and shareholders of he company. In the meantime, people earning more money would pay more taxes and need less public assistance, thus helping to reduce the national debt at the same time.
4
Does it matter what a few progressive billionaire, trying to polish their reputation want?
The owners of the GOP is never going to let i happen. Why do we waste air-time on issues like this? The Mercers and Koch brothers will never let this happen in a million years.
2
Uh why don't they just donate it all if they feel so compassionate? Many towns and states will gladly take their money and spend it on pension, schools, road maintenance, etc.
6
@Not 99pct
There needs to be structural, systemic change to the system. Billionaires donating money is always helpful, but that's like putting a band-aid on a bullet wound.
We need to deal with the core issue here, which is a terribly unjust and regressive taxation system in this country.
3
If they want to pay more taxes, I'm pretty sure the IRS will happily take their money. Why don't they just pay the IRS instead of just talking?
6
Because that doesn't do anything to get other billionaires to pay. I'm guessing you know that.
6
no. they will send anything in excess of what you owe back.
No, they’ll take it.
2
Let the taxation begin!
However, before we get caught up congratulating a few mega millionaires and billionaires for their bright ideas, let's give attention to what the writing of this letter might want to achieve: by promoting a "positive spin" by those who enjoy their privileged lives, these writers appear to be looking out for public interests and, therefore, they're ultimately on the side of good, see? Personally, I don't buy it.
Further, this letter seems to display a strong need on the part of some from the elite class to provide their own solutions to correct rampant inequality--better that the writers continue to control the fate of their wealth than be subject to possible more stringent, politically-motivated fiscal policies--such as those that could be put forth by a Democratic president in 2021.
Finally, this letter strongly suggests a small class of Americans wanting to ingratiate themselves to the tax-paying millions who they finally acknowledge have been badly disadvantaged; who the writers now recognize as a viable force (both socially and politically) to be reckoned with. Sort of a: "Let's all be friends now, OK?" sentiment--bah humbug!
Social inequality (and the pain that goes with it) is now out in the open--it's not a radical idea anymore thanks to the work of Mr. Sanders, Ms. Warren, Mr. O'Rourke and so many others who have shown that equality is central to America's imperative for fairness and justice.
5
Seventy-five thousand uber-wealthy families but only 20 signed the letter.
Would the US government put that money to better use than do foundations that of Bill and Melina Gates?
I'm suspicious when the elites invoke "patriotism" to justify their social engineering. It's the same for-the-greater-good rationale they use to get young people to die violently in foreign lands.
4
@M Wood
Step back for a second. You said "the government." What is the government? The government is literally Our Republic according to he Constitution. It is our Public Servants (Trump would have us his servants) that are supposed to cary or our approximation of democracy. Our Republic is supposed to govern which means taxing and spending to promote Justice and the general Welfare.
The power you take from government is the power that you take from We actual human citizens of the USA. Unless of course, they transform corporations into people and take away human rights.
Why would a society of human's vote to have an economy arranged around capital?
Socialism isn't the opposite of capitalism.
Humanism is the the opposite of capitalism.
The owners of machinery have hijacked the media and government to organize the economy around capital instead of human's, because they own the capital.
The billionaires bought the media to tell their story. One of the stories they tell is that every billionaires is good at everything. There is no reason to believe that Bill Gates is good at education. Just because he has money to spend doesn't mean he knows how to spend it.
The owners of capital made capitalism synonymous with "free markets" so that a few thousand people could accumulate, literally, half of everything.
They didn't build half.
The mistake we on the left keep making is that we keep assuming the right has made the Enlightenment discovery that all people are created equal
1
Coincidentally, all the billionaires mentioned in this article are Liberal Democrats.
3
It's preposterous to somehow believe that millionaires and billionaires are receptive to being taxed. When they got the big tax break from Trump they did not object because to them there is only "more". One need only to ask why is the tax code so voluminous and to whose benefit is it so? If across the board loopholes, tax incentives, entitlements, offshore tax havens, etc., etc., etc., that comprise corporate and individual tax welfare were to be significantly reduced, meaning those entities were to pay their fare share, we would not have as much budget shortfalls, economic disparity and other economic ills.
3
Why don’t all these “guilty billionaires “ just write a check to the US treasury?
5
the money will be sent back.
That piece of paper isn’t worth a thing to the rest of us one year AFTER the Republican tax cut was passed for these disengenuis hoarders. It’s sort of like the NYTimes making a big deal about reporting on Trump’s dodgy finances two years AFTER the election. Where were you all when we actually needed you, BEFORE the election, BEFORE the tax bill was passed?
Unless I see you funding and actively campaigning for champions and policies of democratic socialism WHILE they are campaigning and being made into law, until I see you truthfully digging deep into Republican graft and reporting it loudly and clearly DURING elections, this kind of token symbolism is nothing more than massive PR spin jobs.
Meanwhile, I have my own pitchfork ready and waiting...
2
This is such absurd hypocrisy.
George Soros, Warren Buffett, and all these billionaires hire armies of tax lawyers and accountants to avoid paying any unnecessary nickel in tax that they do not have to.
If a wealth tax is ever passed, they will direct their lobbyists to design extra loopholes for them and then direct their armies of tax lawyers and accountants to use them to their fullest extent.
The new taxes will then fall on the upper middle class as inflation, success, and saving push them into the clutches of the tax man. No doubt the 401ks and 403b retirement plans of thrifty savers will fall into their sights as "wealth" to be looted.
The was the same game the federal government played with the alternative minimum tax (AMT). This was the last "soak the rich" scheme the government came up with in the 1990s - most of it now paid by upper middle class working professionals, not idle billionaire investors.
There is nothing stopping any of these billionaires from donating any amount of money they wish to the US Treasury. How many of them do so today?
Zero.
5
Please stop quoting the cherry-picked "analysis" that says that wealth of the bottom 50% fell by $900B. This analysis conveniently omitted durable goods, an important component of the net worth of the bottom 50%. If you include those, the net wealth of the bottom 50% has actually grown by $570B, or about 78%. This is not very much compared to the 500% growth of the top 1%, but you should at least report numbers objectively.
All those billionaires and other Americans who Comrade Bernie and Fauxcahantus think are “happy to pay more in taxes” are more than welcome to do so themselves: in fact, they should all put their money where their mouths are. They simply need to fill in the line to voluntarily make a contribution to the treasury or fill out a W-2V and have more withheld from their paychecks.
Here’s a fact that none of the progressive candidates will tell you, though: if you took every single penny of income from every single person who earns over $500K a year, you still would not be able to pay for a single year of “Medicare For All,” and the effects on the economy would be so ruinous as to cripple output in this country for generations.
2
@Tom
Every country in Europe gets BETTER health care for half of what we spend, per citizen, by covering all residents, and using Best Practices as determined by researchers, doctors, nurses, and patients to make decisions, instead of corporate profits. Using Best Practices to make decisions means less lawsuits, less unnecessary care, less over prescribed pain killers, etc.
Dozens of countries are getting better care for less than 60% of what we pay. The U.S. government already pays 60% of all healthcare costs.
This means that we could have better care, for all citizens, and stop paying most premiums.
All businesses would be able to stop doing healthcare paper work. Healthcare would no longer be a cost to business, increasing their competitiveness.
Since there would only be one network, every doctor would be in your network. You could see any doctor.
In the long run Medicare for All is cheaper not more expensive. Stop protecting profits for insurance companies.
Under the current system, life expectancy is going down, and child mortality is going up.
We need to scrap the current system.
I believe in markets, but health insurance is not a market good. It breaks all of the rules of markets starting with the need for many sellers to create competition. Insurance is the sharing of risk across large pools of people. That contradicts the need for many sellers.
Sometimes government spending is just more efficient.
1
Federally guaranteed student loans...an attempt to help the poor afford college, now no one can afford college...democrat policy disaster. Federal mandates to increase subprime loan holdings of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac collapsed the housing market thanks to Barney Frank and congressional democrats (read the Atlantic article from 2011 "hey barney frank, the government did cause the housing crisis") another progressive policy catastrophe, Johnson's great society incentivised single motherhood by paying welfare to poor single mothers...now 74% of all black children are born to single mothers, up from 24% in 1964. Another complete, utter disaster for the black community. Democrat ideas on economics are just dangerous. AOC talks about FDRs new deal as if it was a good thing. Another disaster. The last 100 years is littered with liberal policy failures
2
What happens when we raise taxes on the rich?
1. The deficit falls as tax revenue jumps.
2. If the experience under Clinton and Obama is a guide, economic growth picks up after the tax hikes.
3. Inequality improves.
4. Political power of the richest is reduced.
Win, Win, Win, Win! Now that's Making America Great Again!
3
"If we don't do something to fix the glaring inequities in this economy, the pitchforks are going to come for us."
This is the important point that I still don't understand why it hasn't saturated into our plutocratic elite's psyche yet. Their wealth is almost certainly a product of the modern, ultra-connected economy, which fundamentally favors the investor class. The downside of this is that their security is entirely dependent on the goodwill of the masses they exploit not to use information availability against them.
We live in a world of terrifyingly easy asymmetrical domestic threats, where the person feeding your children, giving medication to your parents, or changing the brakes on your car can easily look up the board members of companies that denied them health coverage. In the name of greed, the ultra-wealthy are skinning to the bone, and should realize that being slightly less greedy will enable them to stay so in security longer.
2
@Theodore
Unfortunately, the .1% has a Plan B. They also own Fox and Breitbart.
Populism is the fake revolution they sell to those who are afraid of democracy but sick of being trickled on. Getting white supremacists (of being degrees) to scrapegoat other workers being treated just as badly as them is as easy as letting slip some code words. Just throw in "Both sides" while discussing Neonazis or "Norway" with immigration, to make them feel loved, then suggest violence against the press to send them on their way. Trump attacks the very structure of our Constitutional Republic daily. He demands personal loyalty from public servants like a king.
Mueller accused him of crimes and suggested impeachment. But the media barely says boo. Before enough time to read the thing had passed, the media was already faithfully repeating the phrase "do-over." What about analyzing it the first time?
Apparently, the establishment center doesn't hate Trump as much a they thought they did. It seems that shredding the Constitution could be very profitable.
Likely, this letter was just a gag. They probably bet a million dollars on the media response. (Sorry, I don't trust billionaires, but I will cite their letter as evidence that they want to be taxed.)
In the early 1980s we helped make China into a capitalist country without democracy,
In the early 1990s we helped to make Russia into a capitalist country without democracy,
Now the global billionaires are trying to do it to us.
FIGHT BACK
Never going to happen. Makes good print, but I notice nobody who has taken the Buffett Challenge on the list. They decided to donate a majority of their wealth to charity after death, not to the IRS. Seems they have no desire to pay a significant death tax over charities. Zuckerburg has designed a charity that, I am sure his family will run in perpetuity. These people will find ways to keep their money out of a treasury that doesn’t serve as a memorial. Stop charitable deductions to a lifetime million bucks, or some other number. These guys have no intention of leaving billions to the IRS. Taxing income when it is earned, even on paper solves most of the problem. Remove the loopholes and limit deductions. See if these guys really want to pay more to the government, or if they already have a plan to structured their wealth to avoid the government getting THEIR money.
3
Wonderful plan-my worry is that this money will fall into
the hands of the present administration and any good it
will do will go to more and more draconian laws and
more chaotic international relations.
@Nancy
It won't pass unless we throw the Republicans out and replace them with progressives that want to actually invest in We the People instead of global billionaires.
An even greater wrong than inequality is the system that MAKES inequality. The rich will continue having their way with America as long as Citizens United exists. The game will never be fair while some players can buy the ref.
3
@DC
Citizens United is just the tip of a 130 year old iceberg. The Supreme Court has been deliberately (slowly and intentionally) turning corporations into "people" with the rights of humans, which dilutes the political power of citizens and transfers it to the owners of the corporations.
We the People don't want that.
We need an Amendment to the Constitution to make clear to the Supreme Court that
Humans, Not Fictitious Persons are Citizens with Rights under the Constitution, and Money is Not Speech.
Capitalism is not in the Constitution. It is a manipulation of free markets and democracy by the owners of capital. Socialism is not the opposite of capitalism.
Capitalism is the opposite of Humanism.
The point of the economy should be the humans, not the capital.
We are doing it upside down and backwards.because right-wing propagandists keep turning language and logic upside down.
With a few exceptions, demand is the hole that supply fills. Without the hole there is no point in filling it. Supply Side Economics has never worked because it is backwards. It is merely a fifty year old excuse for tax cuts for the owners of capital.
They don't care that it will do long term harm to the economy, because they only care about their relative wealth and power. They only care how far they are from the top. They don't even look down.
We really need to yank the corporate tentacles out of out our Constitution.
They don't belong there.
These people just broke the party line. The line has been for decades; 'it is my money, I earned it, the government does not have a right to it.'. This is only a small crack in a very large infrastructure of 'greed is good', but it is a crack.
Unless, or until, wealthy Americans understand that it is not enough to donate to charities which engage in activities the government should be engaged in, we will always be dependent on charities to do the some of the core services government should be doing. Case in point. The Wounded Warriors Project. This organization provides great services to our vets, but it should never have to, never. 'We the People', the government of the United States of America should fully fund all services required by vets. If wealthy Americans paid their fair share, proportionally to what the rest of pay, we would not need the Wounded Warriors Project. Our government would finally be held accountable to pay all of the costs associated with the wars and conflicts we send our military to in our name.
The crack in the party line has started. It needs to get bigger and it needs to become louder. It is a necessary step in funding the services we all need to prosper in this country.
1
I guess I appreciate their willingness to pay more taxes, but wouldn’t a better solution be to use the “extra” money to pay employees more and/or provide better benefits? Or, for the billionaire signatories who aren’t actively running a company, use their majority interests in companies/seats on Boards of Directors to pressure those running the companies to do better by the employees?
2
especially Buffet's secretary
Well, good for them. I suppose that when the writing is on the wall, it makes sense for the owners of the wall to take ownership of what's written on it. It's a practical way to control the narrative.
Of course this is just the tip of the iceberg. Will we see a wealth tax that applies to massive offshore holdings, dynastic foundations that set the parameters for wealth usage?
Moreover, will we update our understanding of what constitutes a monopoly in the cyber age?
Redistribution is a difficult word because of its association with Communist ideology, but we do need to find a way to advocate for redistribution of opportunity, and that would start with taxing inheritances that are unreasonable and tend to concentrate wealth within tribal groupings.
Being wealthy is a good thing. Being able to take the position that one's wealth brings an entitlement to steer governmental policy is what has brought us to our current crisis of income disparity.
The Reagan chickens have come home to roost, and the outcome is not good. We are indeed in the end days of trickle-down economics.
The writing is on the wall.
2
Take Soros's letter as comedy relief. He and other billionaires like him want to be taxed because he hates the idea of other people being wealthy. A wealth tax would help minimize competition. Otherwise, do exactly the opposite and lower taxes instead.
2
This group of billionaires have grasped what enlightened self interest means. One acts according to purposes which offer the better results in the long run. Living in a free country with people who can achieve their own goals in life is infinitely better than living in luxury and with pleasures while surrounded by want and desperate people who must be suppressed to keep them from preying on you and yours.
But the basely selfish view of mankind that underlies conservative philosophy tends to assume that we are all on the verge of preying upon each other anyway, so spreading the wealth is pointless. Everyone should just grab what they can for themselves and the devil can take the losers.
What we have in this country is a failure consider why we are better off considering that we are all in this life together and need each other not as natural adversaries.
1
It is good to think that several of these billionaires are dedicated to philanthropy and want pay more taxes. But the world is still on the wrong track, since the distribution is getting worse, because the hole economic system do not chat how resources appropriation is nowadays. Let us add that there are economic crises that are increasingly followed and profound. Climatic crises more and more followed, but the market is slow with climate solutions. Young people in the world are the group with the highest unemployment. The elderly are increasingly unprotected. It is evident that the world must change and that change will begin in a short time, very little with an almost divine event. Maitreya, Jesus, Koo-thomi, Morya, Hilarion, Rackozy, Paul the Venetian and other masters will be announced and will begin to advise humanity, for the first time in history several spiritual instructors at the same time.
I leave some links
http://nuevaeconomiaycompartir.blogspot.com.ar/2012/08/la-ayuda-de-maitreya-esta-muy-cerca.html
http://nuevaeconomiaycompartir.blogspot.com.ar/2014/09/compartir-la-politica-economica-del.html
Being a signatory make one a member of the most exclusive club. You have to have the wealth and have a heart.
1
Actually, reason helps as much as heart. Wealth with no social order in which to use it is almost impossible to use, so it requires creating one’s own social order.
Why don't they just pay more voluntarily?
7
What is the point of this article? What proportion of billionaires signed the letter? There should be reasonably good estimates of how many billionaires there are in the US. Compare the number of signatories to that value. Let us know whether it is most, about half and half, or a tiny fraction who support this proposal.
You know, gather some information and report it. Sort of like a newspaper might do.
Question: How many people are stupid enough to believe that once we start a wealth tax, it will never reach the middle class? Remind me again, who was hit when the federal income tax began?
1
tired of hearing this silly mantra. they can write a check to Uncle Sam anytime they want? yes. the treasury dept is in Washington if they are wondering where it is to send the check.
5
We poor people don’t have the power to tax the rich. Since the GOP is the puppet party of the rich, how about these rich ‘liberals’ donate the amount they should already be paying to democrat candidates who can in turn pass a tax on all the upper class. All talk until they empower the left, with money.
how about 90%
1
There is nothing stopping these people from writing a check to the US Treasury. As you can see, they have chosen not to do so. If these progressive billionaires want to make a statement, go ahead and write a check for $10mm to the US Treasury and get the ball rolling; don't wait for Congress to change the tax code.
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/gift/gift.htm
5
A little searching reveals that since 1980 marginal tax rates have been cut almost in half for upper incomes.
For example, in 1980 earning an amount equal to $658,000 in today's dollars would have resulted in a tax rate of 70% on each additional dollar.
Today, earnings over that amount are taxed at only a 37% rate.
The GOP has conned Americans into believing that upper bracket tax cuts would make us all better off. In fact, tax cuts favoring the wealthy have left us with enormous bills for health, education, infrastructure, etc.
And the GOP is still not satisfied. Now they whine a about debt and entitlement spending.
Their motto must be that "only the little people pay taxes."
2
It’s a zero sum game. These wannabe patriots are billionaires at the expense of what others don’t have. Yes, they are the risk takers and the entrepreneurs, but they also exploit those whose labor creates their wealth.
I would also suggest paying off the Republicans under the condition that the largesse will not be effective if they run for office (money in their pockets, whatever it is called, is the only language they understand) and funding candidates who support; term limits, the abolition of the archaic electoral college, climate change, a senate based on population, and whatever constitutional amendments required to make the Constitution really meaningful for the next 200 years.
1
I’m a one percenter according to the numbers, but I’m certainly not rich.
3
if billionaires can decide where their money should go, why can't the rest of us decide where our money should go?
3
The saddest thing about a *wealth tax law, is we used to have one in which they (those with wealth over 200K single, 400K married) were taxed between 70-90%.
*The top marginal tax rate in 1960 was 91%, which applied to income over $200,000 (for single filers) or $400,000 (for married filers) – thresholds which correspond to approximately $1.5 million and $3 million, respectively, in today's dollars.Sep 29, 2011*
TaxFoundation.org
These much fairer tax laws began being repealed in the early 80's by, guess who, We named a large international airport after him. Go figure. So, it is easily deduced how and why our public schools, our decaying public infrastructure, our once stellar health system have all been put on notice as being at huge risk for future failure. Thirty five years of resource starvation does that.
Too many commentors here for my comfort advocate for "voluntary" tax contribution vs. mandatory rule. Well, I've got news for you. We've already HAD that option, for thirty five years. Trickle down was a ruse.
It is high time to return our country and it's wealth, made off of the backs of it's hard working people, to everyone.
4
This is definitely a step in the right direction but it does not mean it will change income inequality unless there are also plans to redistribute that money to address the needs of ordinary Americans. Our present administration and its minions have absolutely no interest in the welfare of ordinary Americans so that will have to change first.
1
I am wondering if they can start making less money by not investing in predatory industries, companies that treats employees badly, and paying crazy sum of money to CEOs. Instead invest in companies that include employees as stakeholders.
3
The first year they would have higher taxes. The next year loopholes would be written in. The third year they wouldn't be paying more, but the rest of us would be paying federal taxes on our wealth instead of our income
5
If Trump changed the tax reform he brought about, lowered taxes for those of earning 150k and increased it on the likes of Jeff Bezos, I’d vote for him! But I’m paying 2/3 of my salary in taxes! All my deductions have been taken away.:professional expenses, property taxes! Am single, no mortgage, no children! Feels like I’m supporting everyone and have lost my ability to pay back debt! The tax cut turned into a burden!
1
I applaud these folks. However, any system is only as good as those willing to abide by, collect and administer it. For every one of these high and like minded individuals, there are more who disagree with either the principle, or the how their taxes are spent. Without proper funding of the IRS, the enforcement of this tax will face endless questions of valuation, fractured ownership, and domiciliary. This is why the IRS and Congress have largely abandoned collecting corporations fair share of taxes (down from 33% to 9%), which is obviously a deep flaw in our system. The IRS doesn't have the capacity, and personnel to address such complex issues - see Trump's family tax fraud 30 years ago. The chronic underfunding of IRS regulators, largely by Republicans, is why we are not getting the taxes we are now due, much less additional ones. This is in part why many countries, like Germany, have abandoned a wealth tax system. A VAT tax does not have these problems of accountability/enforcement, and daily essentials are not assessed, exempting those on low incomes. It's not as ideologically popular, but it's vastly more efficient to collect, and spend. You buy, you pay. Now, as to the other side of the coin, US spending, if we could just locate that oh so hard to find trillion $$ the Pentagon cannot locate... we could help those most in need, and repair a few bridges today.
3
He's been saying this for years to make a point. He could just pay his secretary more. Although you think she'd be rich by now.
3
There are probably 25 families that donate heavily to republican campaigns to buy their votes. Those families have bought the right to dictate policy and that is why the only legislation that has passed is tax breaks for millionaire. They didn’t just lower corporate taxes, they lowered taxes for capital gains, carried interest, dividends, business owners and pass throughs. They lowered taxes for the wealthy and are systematically dismantling our federal agencies and eliminating all institutional knowledge. These wealthy families are waging war and have successfully committed a coup with the full complicity of the Republican Party.
3
Well, what's stopping them? Any one of the "us" could, tomorrow, do wonders for "inequality" by simply writing a check to the government.
Progressives talk a good game -- when speaking of other people's money -- but when it comes time to pony up, they suddenly lose the courage of their convictions. See MA's voluntary program, for instance.
https://medium.com/@mysteriousrook/did-your-progressive-friend-pay-ma-s-higher-tax-rate-babe5a335729
It would truly make any conservative's heart go pitter pat to have Soros (and other rich socialists) give all their money to the government they love so much. That much less for them to spend electing prosecutors who refuse to prosecute, etc.
Let them lead by example. Soros could simply sign over his vast holdings. He'd be one of the rich folks whose money would probably do better things if he didn't have it.
6
How about those who complain about paying their share of taxes give up using government programs like social security and Medicare, forego using roads, red lights, fire and police services, libraries, the post office. Instead of you expecting someone wealthy to give away all their resources, give up what you don’t want to pay for. Hope your uninspected meat and untested medicines work out for you.
1
@Michael
It's not "other people's money." It is the productivity of the American worker that was siphoned off and diverted into the bank accounts of a few thousand people.
Productivity = wealth created divided by hours worked.
Before 1980 wages used to go up at the same rate as productivity. Both shareholders and wage workers participated in increased income from productivity increases. Wage increases became increased consumer spending which cleared the shelves of inventory, requiring more investment to increase output.
Since 1980 the productivity of the American worker has increased by over 40%, but none of that new wealth has gone to the people that did the actual work that created the actual wealth. The financiers have used propaganda and government interference in markets to shortchange the American worker.
Not only is this unfair, but it is bad for the economy. The Conservative Revolution has undermined the American worker/consumer hurting the economy.
Tax cuts for capital and attacks on the right of workers to organize has created too much capital and not enough educated workers to operate it. This mismatch in the factors of production has decreased capital utilization from 88%'in the 1970s to 78% now, slowing growth.
The lack of consumer demand has lowered average GDP growth.
We had higher average GDP growth during 1970s stagflation then we have now!
Capitalism is the constant demand by the owners of capital for government interference in markets.
STOP IT!
Let's see how this gets twisted into bad news. "There's that George Soros again, trying to take money out of his pocket!!!"
Nope, not scary. I guess the far right will have to figure something less factual.
Go for it. The uber-wealthy have already nearly killed the inheritance tax, they instructed the GOP to give them money in this last monstrosity of a deficit-inducing tax plan, and many of them absolutely freaked when Obamacare took a bit of their wealth to improve access to medical care for people lacking insurance.
Expect rage and more dark money from the Mercers, Kochs, Scaifes and similar families. And possibly a "don't look at me" silence from many of the tech billionaires absent from that letter.
4
Is something stopping them from writing checks to the government right now?
No. They are all full of....
6
@George Orwell
Those that keep demanding tax cuts for the rich never complain about billionaires who demand tax cuts for all rich people. They only complain about billionaires that demand tax increases for all rich people.
Republicans have turned hypocrisy into a sport.
There is nothing stopping Soros, et. al. from making voluntary contributions to the Treasury right now.
6
But will Schumer play along ???
"In Opposing Tax Plan, Schumer Breaks With Party"
(NY Times July 30 2007)
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/washington/30schumer.html
1
The ironic thing here is that all of the billionaires who have pledged to give away to charity most of their money are denying the Democrats access to hundreds of billions of dollars to fund their social net expansion.
2
The list of signatures is most interesting for the glaring absence of the most familiar names of multi-billionaires.
Now it's tempting to curse them in some cruel way (may they choke in their cash, etc etc) but that would surely violate some NYT comments- guidelines. And maybe the initiative just got lost in their spam inbox.
1
I'm afraid that some other billionaires, unlike the ones mentioned int this article, hate this tax proposal so much that they will stop at nothing to kill it.
3
As many of us realize, in the 1950s, the best decade for stocks in the past century, CEOs averaged only 20 times the pay of their average employees. Now the CEO of Disney gets 1,400 times as much. Obviously, American corporations were performing at the top of their game in the 1950s, with no problem with slacker CEOs feeling underpaid. We definitely need a radical rethink of sharing corporate profit growth with workers, not just CEOs and other investors. In addition, we obviously need much, much higher rates of taxation on the rich than we have now. The current situation in unique in the Western world and utterly indefensible. Why are any average Americans stupid enough to ever vote to continue the political economy for the rich neoliberal Dems and Republicans have foisted on us in the past several decades?
2
Taking from the wealthy is not American. Appropriating wealth is a slippery slope. Part of freedom is the right to keep what you rightfully own. When the government tells us we are too rich, too fat, and what you can do we lose freedom. The government has no right to take wealth. We pay income tax but wealth tax is a new concept. I for one would stop working and stop being productive if the government was taking already taxed wealth. Just imagine playing monopoly and having to share the money each time someone passed go or had someone land on their property? Who would want to play the game? Not me. It would be boring, or maybe take incentive away to play. Capitalism is a game that drives goods and services. Take away incentives and people will not play. This we turn into an non functioning society. Without winners and loser many people just opt out of playing monopoly or maybe even careers.
3
@SJW
Read your Constitution!
Article I says that government should tax and regulate trade. Trade is done by the owners of capital, the rich.
Taxation to promote the general Welfare is exactly what the Constitution said is American.
Calling the Government "the enemy" like Republicans have been doing for fifty years is unAmerican. The government is Our democratic Republic according to the Constitution.
Republicans are against almost everything it says.
The Constitution says that we should spend tax dollars on Union, Justice, Tranquility, defence, the general Welfare, Liberty, and Posterity.
The Party of Trump wants to divide. They replace Justice and Tranquility with unjust laws imposed by militarized and violent police.
They replace defense with an aggressive, global offense paid for with debt.
Instead of the general welfare, they promote the particular welfare of the already rich.
They demand Liberty for those that can afford a good lawyer and public relations team, but love to railroad the poor on no evidence, then charge them for jail time.
And they measure posterity in quarterly Reports.
Creating a U.S. aristocracy off the sweat of the underpaid is unAmerican.
Again,
READ YOUR CONSTITUTION!
Democrats who think that they should compromise with those who are against the Constitution need to start believing it when Republicans say our Republic is their enemy. Their actions prove it is not empty rhetoric.
Why wait, just pay more now.
Sounds good to the masses but nothing is stopping the rich from giving all their wealth to the government. This sounds like a political stunt.
4
This is an important turn of events in our media, which has been dominated by the democratic norm-trashing, mind-bending Trump, McConnell, Republican Party, Fox and right-wing propaganda media, predatory financial sector, big polluters, military-industrial complex, Big Pharma, etc., etc.
These are a tiny group of wealthy and powerful Americans who believe that the purpose of our government is to make them richer and that they personally have absolutely no responsibility as citizens to contribute to the common good by paying their fair share of taxes.
To psychologically condition the American public to their appalling self-serving political ideology, they have dominated, controlled, and often bought the media and information outlets to successfully propagandize their greedy, unpatriotic, right-wing ideology. Read Paul Krugman's column from yesterday: "Notes on Excessive Wealth Disorder."
One way to counter such anti-democratic and damaging propaganda is to reinforce the norms of American democracy by giving a much-needed and stronger voice to those wealthy individuals and corporations that are against predatory capitalism and support the values of American society, such as the billionaires in this article.
The vicious right-wing attacks and demonizing of George Soros in particular, indicate how paranoid and threatened the big Republican donors are by a functioning democracy.
4
They seem to realize that the GOP is
not necessarily a party of prudence.
Income taxes ought at least be "fairer."
Unwise DJT preaching to his semi sensible
base apparently forgets that our reserve
currency status has to do with confidence
In our relatively sound USD.
If and when reality hits the fan, DJT and/or
his progeny will surely regret the so called tax
reform, though they'll never confess.
Our not smart POTUS is running the asylum and Putin is running DJT, seemingly.
Murdering our middle class is happening,
and at least a few billionaires are ashamed.
I can't help but fear our contradictions
as a social-political dis-unified culture
are irresponsible if not doomed.
Give Arthur the Laugher a booby prize for
taking away the intelligent fiscal prudence of
the GOP by decimating common
sense, again.
Keynes is being distorted by crazy
income tax reform too.
2
Who is missing - Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and any known GOP affiliated Billionaire. Step up people - you have been very fortunate. Income inequality has vast ramifications for society and the economy. Besides, if people have more money in their pocket they will spend more on the stuff you are peddling. It's in your own self interest to give them a boost. When the richest among us pay half the amount of their wealth in taxes that the 99.99% do, something is clearly out of balance.
2
All Americans have the option of making voluntary donations to the federal government via the Treasury's 'Bureau of Public Debt'. Why don't these billionaires do that instead of just writing about it?
4
Vote blue and let's oblige them. Any thinking person knows it's the fair and right thing to do. Let's do it! Vote!
2
What's stopping them from contributing now?
3
@S James
The basic function of any government is to levy taxes and invest in the country.
Republicans call Our Government "the enemy," and oppose taxation, but are happy to borrow from global banks to increase payments to global corporations to whom they reward fat, no-bid, cost-plus contracts. (See for example Dick Cheney and Halliburton.)
The Declaration calls for equality, not a new aristocracy.
Stop undermining the Constitution, which demand taxes to invest in the general Welfare.
Seems to me it’s all about whether someone is mainly “me” oriented or “we” oriented. Thank you to Soros for having the compassionate “we” perspective.
5
By all means, let progressives pay as much as they want, but to consider them a voice for other wealthy people is quite ridiculous.
3
Foxes designing a hen house...
2
At least some care about America, unlike Trump.
1
Do you believe people should be rewarded for the quality of their character? Or for the size of their parent's bank account? The ultra wealthy often go to estate lawyers to create trusts seeking to find ways to incentivize their children, feeling that their kids simply don't have any fire in their bellies. No wonder. The wealthy can give all they want to their kids, but do it during their lifetime, and that gift will be taxed as income. When they die, level the playing field and levy a hefty inheritance tax. You can't take it with you, and if you leave it to the uninspired children we end up with morons in high places (I'm sure you can think of a few).
4
We need to rewrite the Horacio Alger story/myth to account for the large role playing by Lady Luck, in professional success, as in health, skin color, hair color, longevity, zip code—and life generally. To be sure, innumerable other things play important, if ultimately immeasurable, roles, as well; it’s not my intention here to take anything away from things like discipline, responsibility, long-term thinking, kindness, work ethic, preparedness, etc. But, as a nation—that is, as a people—we have tended to downplay the importance of luck. It’s time we acknowledged that, as well as luck’s importance. “There, but for the grace of God, go I” might well become the mantra of every American with food and shelter.
Nearly 2 decades of unrelenting wars have gone unfunded. It’s time that those who have benefited the most be taxed on the wealth accumulated over these years.
2
The first comments on this article seemed to run about 50/50 for/against the proposal in the article, yet the more resent comments are overwhelmingly in favor of a wealth tax.
Why is that?
I can only surmise that the right wing paid troll army was rousted out of bed asap to skew he discussion before it even got started. We know that this is common practice now. Why would it be excluded from the Times’ comment pages?
Now that the average Jane and Joe are awake and contributing, suddenly the discussion more closely resembles actual American opinion on the wealth tax- the overwhelming majority are in favor of it.
Even a majority of Republicans support higher taxes on the wealthy.
Its scary how money can so easily skew political discussion.
10
Why can't people just say "thank you" ?
2
They’re getting a little nervous that the proles are getting ready to come after them with torches and pitchforks, but not too. So yhey’re saying “ Geez, we’d pay more taxes if anybody asked us to.” Aren’t these the same people who made tax cuts the absolute priority after the election? They’ll fire any legislator too stupid to recognize these crocodile tears.
5
Pass the laws! Hah! McConnell will stonewall immediately.
2
Note to rich people who don't want to sign on: consider this a little investment in ensuring you can hang on to your wealth (no matter how you came by it) over time.
If self-interest (and not citizenship) is your thing, be reminded that being able to keep your wealth is very much in your interest and those of your progeny.
To hang on to your wealth, law and order is necessary. Courts are necessary. Quiescent social conditions are necessary.
Government is the moat around your castle of fortune. It keeps the pitchforks, the spears and cannon balls of social discontent from destroying your fortress.
6
In other words, give in to threats of violence because the mob ultimately rules. Glad to see how far our society has progressed.
4
@randomxyz
Is a bank "giving in to threats of violence" when it installs security cameras?
1
@randomxyz
Threats and incentives are a matter of perspective.
1
To some commenters, those who think “government” should not receive such taxes: the government is “us.”
That our representatives are falling down on the job is a problem that must be remedied. Get rid of them. Find someone who will do the job.
Not so easy? Why not? Team up with those with whom you who agree. Vote and encourage others to vote. I personally think it’s an act by every citizen that should be required.
5
We pay close to 39% as top 1%'ers and Mitt Romney pays 12% as a top 1%'er.
Somewhere, I did something wrong. I need better lawyers.
4
I am in favor of an increased income tax on the 1% of the 1% -- about 16,000 people in the US each year. The wealth tax, on the other hand, would create more ineffectual governmental administrators and the tax on how to even count wealth really gets the government into the personal snooping business that crosses privacy rights. Let's just use the income tax system we have, do a little tax bracket work, and see what kind of result we get.
2
Instead of the government squandering billionaires' money on politics and misguided programs, billionaires should create their own climate change foundations, private schools for the public, and job programs that they would send their own employees to.
If billionaires want to pay taxes, those funds should go towards infrastructure, internet, and healthcare.
1
The problem is not just the income to the govt, but the use of the funds in a way that accomplishes something meaningful. At this time, what do you think the Trump admin would do with the additional funds? Even worse, this additional money would be compensation for the sharp drop in corporate taxes which was a huge mistake imo. The GOP has quit yacking about the natl debt since they have been the biggest contributor to it, far in excess of the Dems.
Not that they shouldn't put on a push toward this type of taxation, but in the meantime, why not put the equiv amount of money into a fund and/or foundation that intelligently and competently investment in our country and people. Bill and Melinda Gates are doing this on a world wide level which includes the US. A "business' could be set up and they have shares in the company. The goal however would not be to make a dollar profit, but a social investment profit in lowering crime, improving education, housing, medical care, etc. Just maybe rather than the fed govt having the burden of doing this, maybe a private initiative could accomplish much more in addition to what the govt is doing.
1
Right on!, and thank you for signing this statement; this is a very important step in the national debate.
People get antsy when they see something like Elizabeth Warren's wealth tax and cry "wealth redistribution! oh, no!"
But in fact, the financial structures we have in place ALREADY constitute wealth redistribution--only it's being redistributed from the not-so-wealthy to the super-wealthy.
3
I wonder if Anonymous is Bloomberg.
I hope these wealthy citizens will follow up by speaking out on interview shows, etc.
2
Every commenter (disingenuously) suggesting these billionaires make a donation to the public fisc or charitable causes rather than lobbying for a tax on their wealth is missing the very obvious point. We have budgetary shortfalls that can only be remedied by a consistent, predictable, reliable flow of liquidity from somewhere - in this proposal, the hyperwealthy - to the treasury (and state tax departments as well). Not an ad hoc, random, occasional display of generosity.
They know this. They also should not be the only billionaires contributing to that pot, and are right to demand that load be shouldered by their less generous (or at least less vocally generous) counterparts.
The fact is, excessive concentration of wealth is its own negative externality - a threat to democracy because of the power it concentrates in the hands of someone other than representative government. Taxes on sources of negative externalities to either deter them or pay for remedying them are just basic good governance.
It's crazy how many people who will never have to pay this tax and would directly and indirectly benefit from it manage to object on ill-defined principle. The brainwashing is strong in this country.
11
Those individuals are free to write a check to Treasury ANY TIME THEY WANT. There's even a line on the tax forms for individuals to contribute in excess of what they owe. Don't write an open letter...write a check.
4
People who blithely advise the super-wealthy that they can more in taxes now don't get it. These people already give a lot of money to charity. They wouldn't mind giving more, but they think that ALL billionaires should be giving more, and the only way to do that is to raise their tax rate.
6
These billionaires do not need to wait for Congress to change the tax laws.
Just send in a check, made out to the U.S. Treasury.
No amount is too small, or too big for that matter.
5
@G
Money is how the rich keep score. This only works if everybody’s score is reduced by the same amount. Anyway, all they want is something that makes them look good, so the proles will put away the pitchforks.
Congress wouldn’t dare increase taxes on their patrons, unless they provided them with additional loopholes to offset it. The idea is reducing the appearance of income inequality, not actually altering the reality of it.
1
Capital is one factor in the creation of new wealth but under our laws it is considered all that matters. So the gains beyond costs all go to those who contributed capital. The people with the capital end up deciding how all the wealth is used. The only way to enable the rest of society to have use of wealth is from taxes and wages and salaries. Reduce or eliminate those and the super wealthy end up with more and more and all others just barely get by.
That’s where this country happens to be, now. It means perpetual slow growth and deterioration of public infrastructures and service until they are just useless. The super-rich will end up living in gilded cages, separate from all others and effectively jailed in their bunkers.
3
@Casual Observer
Yes capitalism is actually the constant demands by the owners of capital that government interfere in markets on their behalf.
Yes, one does here some billionaires say "tax us". But all the proposals I have seen involve extra taxes on people who are far, far below the billionaire level.
Take Elizabeth Warren's wealth tax, starting on those with $50 million or more. Well, $50 million will make one quite comfortable, but what a wealth tax on those with $50 will do is make is much, much harder for them to ever become a billionaire.
So, perhaps the motivation of those members of the billionaire's club to to simply make their club more exclusive and keep the distance between themselves and the rest of America great.
It would be far more reasonable to eliminate the deduction for charitable contributions which is used by the billionaires to avoid paying any significant taxes.
Warren Buffet is always claiming he thinks he should pay for in taxes, but watch him complain if one took any his charitable deduction.
The billionaires are free to give the government as much as they like, but they would rather fund foundations to perpetuate their name.
3
A simple fact from the article that is missed. Trickle down and tax cuts has cut the earnings of all Americans. Not only that it has rocket shipped the wealthy into orbit.
They were supposed to spend that wealth and raise all boats. They have had 40 years to practice this. It’s the duty of journalists to burn this fact into their being. Stop protecting the wealthy. They pay far less than we do and gain far more from government than we do.
1
It's probably me, but why is this group of billionaires, albeit small, openly suggesting and supporting a "moderate wealth tax on the fortunes of the richest one-tenth of the richest 1 percent of Americans" but yet doing nothing in the interim that would benefit others who truly could use some help? It's almost as if they either need or are asking for permission to do something positive and beneficial. If these "noble" billionaires really meant and believed what they are proposing, would they not have already made generous contributions to various charities that could really use the money to help those less fortunate?
When I first read this article, I thought, "Wow - how generous of these folks to want a "moderate wealth tax" on their fortunes. But then I thought, if that horrific tax bill had not been signed in December 2017 and put into effect January 2018, the Federal Government would be getting an appropriate amount of taxes from ALL billionaires and millionaires.
Whatever percentage this "one-tenth of the richest 1 percent of Americans" is purporting, it's a nice gesture but in the long run, they are still getting a bigger financial break than most of us "regular" working stiffs.
This entire scenario sounds like it's more mouth than chops.
3
Because that’s the purpose and job of government run by the people for the people to figure out.
They don’t know what we need. You’re asking a king or god to go figure out what the ants need. The smartest thing is to have the system that represents the people figure it out and put it where needed.
1
If you look at the names, they all have huge charitable foundations they fund that disperse vast amounts of money. ( Several are names in the article.)
The Pritzkers, for example, are among the largest donors to hospitals, universities, law schools and services for the poor in your hometown, Chicago.
2
The top 1% now control about $40 trillion in wealth, most of which is financial assets. A 5% annual return is about $2 trillion/year, so taxing say half that (2% of total wealth per year) would eliminate our budget deficit and end all calls to cut Social Security and Medicare to cover our budget problems.
5
Note to rich people who don't want to sign on: consider this a little investment in ensuring you can hang on to your wealth (no matter how you came by it) over time.
If self-interest (and not citizenship) is your thing, be reminded that being able to keep your wealth is very much in your interest and those of your progeny.
To hang on to your wealth, law and order is necessary. Courts are necessary. Quiescent social conditions are necessary.
Government and a stable society make the moat around your castle of fortune. It keeps the pitchforks out.
4
The Billionaires can say raise their taxes but they know it's not the taxes but the Loopholes that allow them to get away without paying their fair share.
6
We pay for our day to day public institutions with credit because taxes are to low to pay cash.
4
In stead of begging to be taxed ,where such Tax dollars are going to be obviously wasted happily on unnecessary wars by the politicians, these rich few should do what Bill Gates and Buffett have done . Spend those extra dollars on philanthropic projects which change the lives of people who cannot afford basic necessities of life here in USA as well as out side USA .
Taxes will be spent without their input mostly in bad decisions by politicians !
2
If though they are willing to be taxed more, not all are going to accept this like Trump and his family. If a bill was formed by Congress and get sent to the Senate, it will end there.
1
Trump and his family may have money, but they ain’t got the kind of money these folks have!!
2
Okay, Billionaires, you can start by funding the needs of the kiddos at the border. Soap, meals, beds, classes.
Next, step up and fund infrastructure. To continue: clean up the environment. Rolling on: fund the public schools, and increase the nutrition of the school breakfasts and lunches.
What cost justice? Is it adult education in urban centers? Help us find out, there's a price on learning.
Boot corruption out of politics at every level. Promote honesty, truthfulness and trustworthiness. Clean up the sneakiness and deceit, which has a dollar value to it.
Come to the rescue and pay off all outstanding student loans.
3
Why don't these wealthy individuals just send extra money to the government with their tax return each year. In the alternative, they could simply forego deductions on their income tax returns until they feel they have paid their "fair share" of taxes. Better yet, they could just send that portion of their assets to the IRS which will bring them to the level of wealth they find appropriate. There is no need to change tax laws for these very generous people to help America. If they really want to do this, they can achieve their objective very easily and within the current statutory framework.
4
The purpose of taxation is to privide a regular, consistent source of income to the treasury. Voluntary donations are the opposite of "regular and consistent". Imagine, for example, how quickly the Brothers Koch would withhold their donation were the government to commit to a serious pro-environment program (substitute your favorite tycoon/cause in this sentence). This recreates the problem we already have: too much power in the hands of a moneyed few.
1
Their wealth grew by 21 trillion and student debt loan is a mere 1.6 trillion. They could easily write a check and repay this debt--just based upon this wealth growth, not their actual fortunes--and not feel it a pinch. Such leaves the rest of Americans not having to worry that student-loan forgiveness would be a tax on them. Before the response that no one deserves a free ride bombards me, consider that many older Americans have already repaid what they actually borrowed but are trapped with amortization interests that were added to the principal. These interest-payments have helped these top one-percenters earn their trillions, so if they are willing to return that money that's only fair.
1
I’m thinking things are so economically out of whack, some of the less altruistic billionaires may foresee the battering rams at their gates and have concluded they may not have enough boiling oil to dump over the sides of their ramparts on those below. It only takes a few unscathed to get through.
It’s impossible not to be cynical these days. Maybe it always was.
2
How about that, the rich asking to be able to pay their fair share in taxes? What are we waiting for? This is not only the prudent thing to do, it is also the right thing to do...so one can look into the mirror again...without holding one's nose!
2
A wealth tax would suit sensible billionaires but not the majority addicted to money; those will fight it and engage a confederacy of attorneys and accountants to hide money and lobbyists to reverse the policy and add more loopholes to tax law.
2
There has to be a fair and proportional tax plan across the board. As it stands right now, we have welfare program for the wealthy through tax abatements and nonsensical loopholes, including offshoring personal wealth without penalties . The Panama Papers reveal as much.
The deceitful accusations of “socialism” against people like Rep. Alexandra Ocasio who are advocating fair taxation and representation is nothing more than anti American and criminal accusations. Democracy has to work for all, not just a small group of so-called meritocratic minorities who have been looting the economy into cinders. If money was eliminated from politics and lobbying groups advocating for foreign governments were forced to register as such, the economy would be in better shape and there would not be any hint of pushing the country to war against Iran.
8
There is no way anymore to tax; income, profits. Creative accounting, Foundations have made it easy to there's nothing to tax in the US. Yes, wealth tax and sales tax on luxury items is the only way left.
2
WOW! This is clearly a strong letter of support for Elizabeth Warren. But then, she is the only 2020 candidate who has come out with a specific plan for taxing the ultra rich. There will be copy cats, of course, but Warren will remain the candidate who understands just where our government and laws have failed us and she know how to go about fixing it. So others will copy her, but they don't have the background to understand why they are following her.
The June 24th issue of the New Yorker has a detailed account of Warren and her economic policies. While it does highlight how Warren "eviscerated" the then head of the Treasury, it also cited critics of her tax plan (it wouldn't generate enough money, billionaires won't want to pay up). The billionaires signing this letter would prove the critiques wrong. The New Yorker also neglected to cite Krugman and Stiglitz, two Nobel laureates in Economics who applaud Warren's plans.
Incidentally, has anyone noticed that Warren is generating comments, arguments on her policies and not whether she's shrill or likeable. I say she's elevated the political discussion already from the usual mud slinging we see among politicians.
6
She is not the only one. Sanders's plans show multiple ways to tax the super wealthy so that we can fund Medicare for All, as well as to provide for more opportunities for working people
2
Dear generous super rich people,
This is a very nice letter you wrote. Unfortunately, I fear that as long as the bad apples among you continue to sow what amounts to corruption anywhere else in the world, and continue to tilt the playing field in their/your favor, all the letters in the world will not help.
Here is something that you can do--use all of that money you want taxed to re-level the playing field. Forget the letters and spend a few billion on think tanks that expose the corruption and candidates that will actually carry out rational policies. Fight fire with fire.
Thank you.
11
A related issue is the tax rate on income. There the issue is widely misunderstood, though tax lawyers understand it very well. A high tax rate is unnecessary and even counterproductive as long as all income is taxed. Getting rid of tax shelters would be far more productive that applying confiscatory rates.
5
Oh, how sweet! Will these people support a single-payer Medicare4All? How about tuition free public college? These initiatives will need taxing them, of course. So, are you game?
3
Even after taxes, the wealthy will still be wealthy. They'll continue to invest and make profits.
So, what's the problem with taxing those with the abilities to pay more taxes?
Seems like a no-brainer to me.
5
Bring back the 10% Federal Luxury Tax not a VAT -- which affects people poor and rich.
Get rid of the charity donation deduction.
Put in more brackets and raise percentages.
Raise interest rates -- so we don't have to bet on the stock market. Get rid of monopolies-- break up Amazon and make it pay taxes already.
Start controlling land use.
Build for density in cities.
Birth control all over the world.
Universal single payer medical care.
Lower the costs of public transit(commuter train and bus) so it truly cost less than driving. Speed up Google Car development.
End the Arms Race.
1
Why can’t these people just give their money away? Why will they only contribute to society if they are threatened with prison time? Nothing is stopping them from paying their fair share right now to schools, hospitals or social services agencies. They can even right out a check to the government or stop taking tax deductions. The rich should consider taxes as a minimum and do better because it’s the right thing to do, not because of the threat of IRS prosecution.
6
@Rick
Because they are political ideologues. Show me one billionaire willing to hand over his wealth to the US government on his own. They need to be "taxed" because they support big government and taxes.
1
Dear Billionaires,
We have a disabled Vietnam veteran who is our neighbor.
He is in a wheelchair.
His house is in complete disrepair.
We, and 2 other neighbors, have helped him over the years.
We paid $1,000 to have the overgrowth removed from his property (the vines were covering his house).
Just recently we spent $250 to have more overgrowth removed.
All told we have spent over $2,000 in the last few years paying to get things repaired, inside and outside.
There is no end in sight. He needs a new roof, among other things.
We help him because no one else is. He has no family.
We are retirees. We are not wealthy. We do it because he is our neighbor and of respect for a veteran whose life was ruined by Vietnam.
There are many people like our neighbor.
I am sure that not all of the wealthy his age were in Vietnam.
You will never know what it is like to live with permanent disabilities, inflicted by an unjust war and now forgotten by society.
$1,000 is about 2.5% of our yearly income.
If we can give that surely you can do more with your billions.
13
@J. Swift Your county probably has programs that can help your neighbor with his home and his healthcare. If you go to your county's website, there's probably a Health and Human Services page that will give you further information and a number to call for an appointment.
And a number, meant to be called for an appointment, is all your neighbor will get.
Humiliation and deterrence from using social services are the main items on offer ‘locally’.
Or- they will send a helpful list of local charities you can call, but only at the beginning of each month- and they run out of very minimal funds, possibly $100 toward bills, not paying the whole bill, very quickly indeed.
By the second week of the month even this paltry help has been exhausted.
It is Dickensian out there for the poor.
Believe.
3
For all those who argue Democrats are needed to fix the tax inequities look at New Jersey. The democratic governor failed to convince the democratic legislature to enact a higher income tax for earnings over $1 million.
2
@Charlie
Because he didn't want high earning residents to flee the state. The reason these billionaires insist on taxing is because they don't want anyone to actually have a choice.
1
Taxing wealth is much more difficult administratively than a loophole-free AMT. Property appraisals in the real estate sector are a classic point. Too easy to hide, undervalue or offshore wealth holdings.
2
@GCM
Okay. Let's restore connecting to the IRS. Shortening on the IRS pays for itself in multiplies.
My view, and it may appear a bit jaded, is that these folks are trying to head off a much larger taxation situation looming in the not too distant future. If they can persuade Congress to put a 'moderate' tax on their wealth now they have the high ground when the politics shift and demands for a much more robust tax on their wealth will be popular. These folks didn't get this wealthy without some insight - they can read the hand writing on the wall, so to speak.
6
Let's do a thought experiment here. Let's say, somehow, we were able to develop and pass a tax that said anyone whose net worth was over a billion dollars in a given year had to give up half of it in taxes. (For the sake of argument, ignore the question of whether this is even a good idea, or the fact that this would be nigh-impossible to do since not all net worth is liquid, or that there would likely be plenty of ways around it, or that it's a far more severe tax than anyone is calling for. Assume we've taken care of all of those things, and rest contented knowing that there's no way this will actually happen, and it probably shouldn't.)
So if you're worth a billion, all of a sudden, you're down to $500 million. If you're worth two billion, you're down to one billion, and then next year you're down to $500 million. (Oh yeah, it happens every year you're still over a billion.)
That is still more than 99.999999999999% of people who have ever lived (give or take) have had to their names, and presumably more than enough for you, if not also your heirs, to never have to work another day in your lives. And that's in a scenario that is infinitely more strict than anything we're actually going to see.
Folks, I promise - whatever wealth tax we maybe, MAYBE end up with, our wealthy overlords are gonna be just fine.
5
They could make a point by creating a hypothetical tax structure with several more progressive steps, then publicly note how much that would cost them and openly donate, above and beyond what they normally would donate, that amount to causes that conservatives don't approve of. Conservatives would prefer to have that money in the government coffers to potentially get their hands on it, or at least tie it up.
1
I say kudos to the billionaires who signed this letter. But why do they need to be taxed by the government, in reality a taking their money. Why can't they just write the check and mail it in. They could produce a manifesto saying that they will do this (and continue to do this) and urge others to do it as well.
This would be a true spirit of giving and an acknowledgement that they really have the inclination to do what's right, not just saying they would do something they know the government is highly unlikely to mandate.
Action vs. words--that is democracy
5
@Max No, that's not a democratic society, that's a paternalistic oligarcy.
5
While taxing the wealthy will help in reducing everyone else's taxes while improving society, and distributing more bonuses to a company's worker will help those worker' living standard, a third idea--the same idea when one thinks of when working at improving the economics of health care, is to reduce costs-- in this case our cost of living. Concentrated wealth means that those few who own the wealth control how much profit is demanded, and therefore control the cost of things.
For example: To the family that owns the Hyatt chain: your hotels is some resort areas charge $125 to $140 a night on weekdays, but $300 to $500 a night on weekends. (Asheville, NC and Whitefish MT come to mind). You are pricing the middle to lower-middle class out of a vacation. Do you really need more?
1
SO THE BILLIONAIRES IN THE top 0.1%, are calling for a moderate tax on their wealth. If I didn't know better, I'd think that they were responding to the siren call of Elizabeth Warren with her tax initiative being based precisely on what the top 0.1% are proposing. George Soros has a fine record of philanthropic activities. I am not famliar with the philanthropy of the others, but the fact that they wish to be taxed moderately is a sense of noblesse oblige that has been painfully missing among the 1%. As Supreme Court Olive Wendell Holmes wrote, Taxes are the way we pay for civilization. By that standard, the rest of the top 1% are uncivilized in their values. Perhaps those with any social conscience will see fit to join the top 0.1%. After all, philanthropy is another name for public service. Some synonyms include: benevolence, generosity, humanitarianism, public-spiritedness, altruism, social conscience, social concern, charity, charitableness, brotherly love, fellow feeling, magnanimity, munificence, liberality, largesse, open-handedness, bountifulness, beneficence, benignity, unselfishness, selflessness, humanity, kindness, kind-heartedness, big-heartedness, compassion, humaneness. I think there's plenty of reason for the remaining 99% of the top 1% to show that they have values consistent with the qualities and civic-mindedness of the meanings listed above. After all, we come into this world with nothing and leave this world with nothing. So it's logical to share.
2
That said, a tax on wealth itself seems to make sense, especially if that wealth is increased by corporate tax freeloading. For example, Jeff Bezos doesn't have his $100B because he saved his after tax paychecks, it is mostly the value of his Amazon stock. But how much is that value inflated because Amazon doesn't pay taxes?
Simplistically stated, Bezos gets to build his personal fortune tax free.
10
There is the individual income tax (on annual incomes) and the estate tax upon decease (on wealth). I would recommend a graduated income tax of up to 70% on annual incomes, with the highest bracket kicking in at $10 million. I would recommend a graduated estate tax of up to 70%, with the highest level kicking in at $100 million. What do readers think? Too high, too low?
@C.L.S.
Too high.
1
@C.L.S.- Depends on the tax at lower levels, but I'd with 70% at 100 million.
Nonsense.
They don't really mean it.
Besides Donald Trump,Sr's inheritance of 295 streams of income from his New York City real estate baron father shielded him from the consequences of being the worst losing businessman in America over a ten year period.
With a Republican Party majority in the U.S. Senate and on the Supreme Court of the United States coupled with Republican Party control of the White House there will be no tax increase on the American billionaire royal caste class.
Supporting a tax cut on the billionaire caste class is akin to urinating on yourself in a dark navy blue suit. No one notices nor cares. But you get to feel warm all over. And the scent of urine is slow to develop.
If it was pitchforks torches and guillotine time that would catch their attention.
' Say you want a revolution,,...' ? Or not?
4
@Blackmamba
I don't want a revolution. I want to minimise corruption so that we follow the Constitution instead of doing the opposite most of the time.
Read the Preamble of the Constitution. It is a left leaning document. The Right wants to have a civil war because they are against the Constitution.
Don't help the Party of Trump start a civil war.
The oligarchs are trying to get ahead of the rising tide of unacceptability towards their hoarding of the capital in our so-called capitalist nation. They are willing to pay a little to keep the pitchforks at bay. But what they are really afraid of is the auditing of their wealth. That is the key to addressing inequality and the wealthy have known it, and feared it, for centuries. A national process for auditing wealth is what is being called for and I support any and all presidential candidates the get behind it.
5
The top 2 percent in America are not inviting a huge tax increase - and perhaps they shouldn't. Instead, they should contribute tens of billions to people living under the poverty line directly and with no political strategy except equal only to their heartfelt anger at this vicious and uniquely worldwide humiliation our nation and we Americans.
1
The members of the 1% are smart enough to realize that the only way their companies will continue to grow is if the 99% continues to buy their products. ( Of course they could all just invest in bonds and live off the interest but even bonds need an expanding economy to survive).
Instead of spending billions on lobbyists to draft laws that protect their business interests they should hire lobbyists to rewrite the tax laws.
3
Yes, Please. Let us end Capitalist Socialism for the Super Rich.
5
While I commend the few billionaires for doing the right thing it is not a long-term solution. Maybe they should spend their money on ensuring it can be a long-term solution rather than throwing money at a government with a severe waste problem.
If all corporations paid taxes and all billionaire tax evaders were investigated and made to pay the trillions they owe, I hear there would barely be a deficit. Plus, there would be money enough for infrastructure and other much needed projects that would give all a means to rise above poverty as well as fund the future well-being of the US: prepare the next generation with investment in new innovations and education projects that help keep democratic ideals alive.
Instead the apple is being gnawed from inside.
https://www.propublica.org/series/gutting-the-irs
https://www.propublica.org/article/irs-now-audits-poor-americans-at-about-the-same-rate-as-the-top-1-percent
4
@angel98
Funny how progressives always blame Reagan for the distrust many Americans have for the government. It's as though all those Americans who have run up against the incredible US bureaucracy are making it up.
I have a small business client who entered the wrong month when filing his quarterly sales tax returns. He was told he couldn't go back and change the incorrect month. Eighteen months later the government is charging him over $1K in penalties and interest.
Dealing with the government can be an absolute nightmare for many Americans. Our government has become "too big to manage".
2
@AACNY
"Dealing with the government can be an absolute nightmare for many Americans. Our government has become "too big to manage"."
I agree hence the streamlining: Addressing problems makes it effective, ties up loopholes, and thus it shrinks.
2
taxes are for the little people.
4
The signatories should put their money with their John Hancocks. There's nothing to stop them from giving more, now.
3
At least there is a glimmer of hope................
Now listen to conservatives tie themselves into knots trying to explain why this is a BAD idea! All it really does is reveal the depraved depths to which their tribal ideology has taken them.
3
It's not just the Richest individuals who benefit from (R)onald (R)eagan's trickle-up tax Voodoo. Corporations have been tipping the scale for decades and need to be forced to pay their fair share to support the society that has made them obscenely rich.
In 1960, corporate America's share of the federal govt's total income tax revenues was over 23%. By 2017, The Corporatocracy had finagled to slash that by more than half, to 11.4% - and that doesn't even consider VeryGoodBrain's latest trickle-up tax windfall for The Fat Cats!
2017 Federal tax revenues were $3.3 Trillion. If the corporate share had remained at 23%, they would have contributed an additional $383 Billion in taxes!!
FWIW, the so-called "unaffordable" Medicare-for-all proposals from so-called "socialist" Democrats are projected to cost around $332 Billion/year. If corporate America continued to pay their fair tax share, we could fund health care for all citizens PLUS have enough left over to fund TANF (the so-called "welfare" the soulless (R)s whine about endlessly) @ $14 Billion/year (.0035 of our federal budget, BTW) PLUS have $37 Billion left over for pocket change for their wholly-owned Congress Critters.
Return to Sane Tax Policies! Make American (Citizens) Great Again! Reject the Corporatocracy!
3
ridiculous: what do you think Ireland and the Cayman Islands are for?
Why wait for Congress? Fork it over now!
2
What?No Stephen Schwartzman?Perhaps he can't see any way to get his name on a building or "thing"to assuage his and his wife's monster egos with this little,itty,bitty tax.
Dick Fuld is still loitering about after bringing down Lehman Bros.when he should be in jail.Perhaps he'll jump at the chance to help those that never bounced back after the recession he had such a heavy hand in.
4
If student loan forgiveness is too difficult to pass, then at the very least, reduce the interest rate to ZERO.
Using the BILLIONAIRE proposed taxes, use those funds to MATCH student loan repayments over the next ten years.
2
Marketing ploy. Virtue signaling. Nothing stops them from just giving their wealth away without fanfare.
4
@Dady
Money is not speech. Writing letters is speech. That are contributing to the conversation, just like you..
It sounds like a brilliant idea to charge the 0.1% of the wealthy with 30% tax cuts while 99% of the public benefits from larger tax cut, that may enable substantial purchasing power, which stand to benefit those zillionaires and make up for their tax cut.
2
Here is another insidious element of America’s wealth management system.
If a wealthy person, with 3 children, accrues a portfolio of stocks and bonds valued at $45 million at the time of his death, he can leave $15 million to each child and no taxes will be paid.
If an average person, with or without children, builds a 401k fund valued at $45 thousand, when he reaches 70 1/2 years of age, the IRS will estimate his life expectancy, and demand that he start withdrawing funds at a rate that will ensure that the account will be zeroed out by the time he dies. If he happens to live longer than expected, tough luck.
Seems fair, right?
11
Why not have a more progressive tax structure and Medicare for all and your second example not need luck.
This is a joke It is nothing more than a publicity stunt.
Each billionaire who signed this letter could pay student debt relief, fund climate change research and pay everyone one of their employees a wage well above the national average.
Each individual could also donate a portion of their wealth to the federal government.
Their written words are cheap.
8
No individual should have $1b. Too much responsibility.
Spread it around and the everyone benefits.
Yeah, I said that.
6
I don;t doubt that Georg Soros is willing to pay his fair share, but I am very doubtful about the rest of them. People don't get THIS rich being law abiding citizens, and altruists. Walk the walk, and defeat corrupt Republicans, from the bottom to the top.
5
Republicans are all at the bottom, there is no top; the higher you go in their hierarchy, the thicker the bottom feeders are on the ground. one good way to get rid of America's worst enemy, the Republican Party, would be to slap a tax on membership and support. because they flee from taxes like Dracula from the dawn, true Republicans will quit en mass to practice their favorite sport: avoiding taxes so they can help those who need no help and step all over everyone else, the majority, the peons.
1
@ChesBay
Soros has his own issues. Remember he actually said he wanted to make Bush a one-term president and spent $25 million trying. He has spent his adult life fighting the GOP. His demand for higher taxes is more about them than his altruism.
Soros has also claimed that the US is the biggest obstacle to a stable world and that China's is a better functioning government than the US'.
He is a typical progressive ideologue, through and though.
So Elizabeth Warren believes 2.75 trillion over 10 years will help? Get real! This is not a drop in the bucket of taxes needed to fund all Democratic proposals.
3
Republicans somehow will be able to convince their willfully uninformed gullible base that the new tax legislation is in their best interest....now lets concentrate on the hoards of immigrants and abortion!
5
Let's actually start somewhere. Look at who is getting something done; Mitch McConnell.
For the first time in my life, I'm calling my Reps, Senators. Other people's Senators. I'm a Boomer; I KNOW all kids can get a breakfast and a Head Start, and can feel good about themselves as they get a good education and bring up the whole family. How DARE the goal of Republicans be to make the majority of Americans pregnant and barefoot. A Putin Playbook move. Read the history. Read The Putin Mystique buy Anna Arutyunya available on Amazon. Wanna see where we are headed if we don't get control of this over fed lobbyists vote controlling hydra?
We ALREADY have American Oligarchs sucking more than their share of the American Dream into their garages so big they need elevators.
I resent the idea that America will come after the wealthy with Pitchforks. Seriously? What an idiotic statement. Some of the Proud Boys are educated and smart. Some of the new poor Middle Class have MULTI-MA'a and PHD's. Read Sarah Kendizor's essays written when she was with Al Jazeera; "Flyover Country."
OPPORTUNITY: All the new poor highly educated want for THEIR kids is a chance to apprentice in Washington DC to Senators and REsps and that is GONE! Only the fab wealthy can send their kids to DC AND pay the rent, AND pay for food AND pay for plane fare and clothes and toothpaste.
1
Is there no shame. George Soros is not shy of pandering to Democrats if it means more votes in the next Presidential election. If he really wanted to pay more in taxes, he would do it immediately. Instead, his plan is to stoke the fires and divide the Country into those that have and those that do not. But, the majority of people in the US are smart and they see through this sophomoric attempt. The people know that this is a show and talk is talk. When it comes to action, no Democrat President is going to substantially raise taxes on the rich that fund him or her.
4
@RCS
Money is not speech. Writing letters is speech. That are contributing to the conversation, just like you..
It would have been helpful if the author had at least mentioned the fact that there is controversy regarding the legality of the Federal Government’s ability to impose a wealth tax. The Constitution, by virtue of Amendment XVI, adopted in 1913, authorizes the Congress to impose solely “taxes on incomes.”
3
@john
does the Supreme Court bother to read the Constitution anymore?
@John
If necessary, We the People can pass an amendment.
Article I clearly authorizes Congress to "tax trade." Wealth is often traded. Maybe we should tax more of that.
Why would a king ever borrow when he could tax? Why pay interest to banks when you can tax them.
According to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, We the People are the Sovereign Citizens who are the Authority behind our Representatives, the Public Servants sworn to uphold the Constitution who run our government.
As Sovereigns (equal Kings and Queens sharing power democratically) We the People have the Power to Tax. We put that power in Article I of the Constitution. When the Republicans accuse Democrats of taxiing and spending, they are accusing them of following the Constitution.
The only reason we pay interest to global banks (at the same time we lend them $trillions at near zero% interest, and are now even paying them to raise rates!) instead of taxiing that money from them, is that the same shareholders that own the banks own all mass news, which they use to tell us that things we need are too expensive.
Every time a majority of the American People want the government to invest in their healthcare, educations, or infrastructure (all key ingredients to productivity increases) the Right and the "centrists" that compromise with them warn of the debt it would create. They deride these things as socialism or populism, but when the Right gains power they increase the debt by raising military spending and cutting taxes.
Debt is a scam designed to take the wealth created by workers and transfer it to shareholders.
DON'T BORROW.
TAX THE RICH!
3
@McGloin
Instead of paying their share of taxes they lend
money to the government to cover the deficits.
1
@DooDah
Yes, and then they collect billions in interest from us.
The Federal Reserve just spent a decade giving global banks a NET of $3 trillion. That comes to $3,000 per citizen or $36,000 for a family of four. New money created by Our Treasury doesn't belong to global banks. It belongs to We the People.
They were given so much free cash that now, if the Fed wants to raise interest rates, they have to PAY the banks to do it!
Don't listen to those who claim taxation is unfair to the rich. They are lying to you or themselves.
Considering these guys are willing to pay more tax, why can’t they form a group charity amongst themselves and pay for targeted services such as healthcare, subsidized education etc?
If their tax rate increases, it is quite likely that majority of their $ will go towards unnecessary wars and weapons! At least if they form their own charity, they can decide where their money should go!
1
@Bogus yogi
Money is not speech. Writing letters is speech. That are contributing to the conversation, just like you..
“Stop me before I kill again”. Yeah, right. Change the rules on vulture capitalism. Get rid of Citizens United as a starting point. Regulate the monopolies and predatory lenders and other assorted investment-banksters. And by all means, re-institute a truly progressive tax system that treats labor and capital the same way and re-invigorates the estate tax. Now that would make America Great Again.
6
Any Republicans on this list?
2
Oh we will !
1
Before implementing such an idea there needs to be a massive audit of government spending and waste. Then, laws passed so a president cannot appropriate funds for pet projects to guild his/her crown citing national emergencies. If no measures are put into place before such a windfall arrives the billions extra could easily become hugely detrimental to the well-being of citizens, the future of the country and democratic ideals.
btw: There are a number of politicians, who have far better, well-thought out, long lasting ideas, with strict oversight, that are not about just throwing money at the government and hoping it will do the right thing.
for example; https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/1/24/18196275/elizabeth-warren-wealth-tax
https://www.propublica.org/article/irs-now-audits-poor-americans-at-about-the-same-rate-as-the-top-1-percent
https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-irs-was-gutted
Makes sense to me.
1
Do these billionaires know that they can pay more in taxes that they owe? It is actually quite simple: they just have to send a check to the IRS for what they think they should pay. If they did, their professed intent to pay more would be much more believable
3
@MS
I am convinced republicans lack a "fairness" gene. They seem to truly believe every man is an island.
1
@MS
Money is not speech. Writing letters is speech. They are contributing to the conversation, just like you.
This will be a boon investments in Panama, the Cayman Islands, and Swiss banks.
Superrich: How much gain per person?
(50% of) average citizens: How much loss per person?
Find the ratio of these two numbers!
Create a group of relevant Global experts who should eventually present various approaches to reduce this gap.
It is likely to lead to better Opportunity, Security, Prosperity.
Amen?
1
What's not surprising is having extreme wealth interject themselves into the debate. They obviously suspect there's a good chance Trump will lose the 2020 election and whoever succeeds him will most likely advocate a wealth tax. They want to control the terms and conditions of that conversation. They want a seat at the table.
If you're going to get hit with a wealth tax regardless, you might as well negotiate for the most amenable tax you can find. The alternative is going to look more like Occupy Wall Street. The super rich don't want that.
5
Assuming my view is not popular, but would like to see a 10% or fair percentage flat rate tax applied to EVERY single individual living in the country and that includes people living off the welfare system. It would be “fair” and make everyone a “team player”.
4
A wealth tax will not happen. Even if progressives win the Presidency and congressional majorities, enough congressional Democrats will still be so beholden to their wealthy contributors that the wealthy will not be heavily taxed.
By the way, if really want to tax the wealthy, eliminate all tax preferences on investment income Tax this income at the same, high, rates that wages are taxed. Unfortunately, this too will not happen for the reason mentioned in above.
1
All income should not only be taxed as income, but it should be subject to payroll FICA taxes. Once in retirement social security income should not be taxed. Go after the other wealth and income of wealthy retirees in as needed ways, but SS should be managed as an equality program.
1
A wealth tax will be passed because people are stupid enough to believe it will always only apply to billionaires. It’s the definition of “wealth” that the middle class should be worried about.
This letter looks to be done solely for publicity purposes. What were their deductions & charitable contributions? They take advantage of the tax laws.
4
An annual wealth tax--initially hitting billionaire's but probably creeping into the merely rich tax bracket eventually--seems like a bad idea to me. It would also be a compliance and avoidance nightmare. That's why European nations are turning away from them.
But because a federal tax on wealth is unconstitutional, what if we proposed a one-time wealth tax Constitutional amendment and targeted unrealized gains (or other wealth never previously subject to the federal income tax like property with a stepped-up basis since inheritance). You'd hit the Waltons, Zuckerberg, Gates, Bezos--all of them who are pretty much sitting on billions in paper gains.
You could go for a more material amount since it's a one time hit--like a one-time 10% hit on a billion and 15% on 10 billion and 20% on 20 billion (probably need to keep it lower than the long term capital gains tax rate). It would take the work of thousands of accountants and lawyers but only once--say in 2025.
Since it would be a one time event, maybe the ultra rich would even go for it, knowing that the whole Constitutional amendment process would have to start over if there was an attempt to confiscate more wealth. That's the danger and fear of an open-ended wealth tax of course.
1
If you read about some of the individuals in this list, their companies have delinquent or tax avoidance issues going back multiple years. If they want to give more to the Treasury, simply write a check.
5
Can't wait to see Trump scramble to prove he is NOT in the billionaire taxable class.
8
Better than not speaking up at all, but to get from A to B, the game has to be played by the current rules. That means campaign financing the people who are willing to raise taxes on the rich.
The US’s unique (apart from Eritrea I believe) citizenship-based tax system is well-suited to raise taxes on the rich, especially with the FATCA foreign bank disclosures in place.
Closing capital income loopholes would raise hundreds of billions.
2
Wonder how these folks feel about raising the estate tax again. When my grandmother died nearly three decades ago the estate tax applied to the value of her estate beyond $600,000. Now the tax only applies to estates worth 10 times that amount — and there are plenty of loopholes on trusts that allow billionaires to keep their money all in the family for generations.
Back in Andrew Carnegie’s day there was a saying about wealth in America: “From shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations.” Which meant that one generation made its fortune, the next generation squandered it, and the third was forced to start from scratch. Now we have tax laws and institutions (plus a fetishizing of wealth) that considers this saying outrageously un-American.
5
Do they realize that they don't have to beg the federal government to pay more taxes? No one's stopping them from voluntarily giving their money to the IRS, for goodness sakes.
4
@Sheila
Money is not speech. Writing letters is speech. They are contributing to the conversation, just like you.
Hmm. The initial imposition of the "permanent" US income tax in 1913 only applied to incomes above about $78,000 (in 2019 dollars) with a rate of 1%. A stiffer rate (7%!) applied to incomes above about $12 million.
Any bets on how a "modest and reasonable" wealth tax will evolve?
1
Billionaires are free to pay more taxes at any time. All they have to do is instruct their money managers to stop using loopholes and tax shelters.
The US tax code didn’t become Byzantine because of W-2 employees with a mortgage and kids. It became what it is from lobbyists for millionaires and billionaires writing rules so their bosses wouldn’t have to pay as much as the W-2 employees.
So, bravo for wanting to give back more to the system that has given you so much, but like Dorothy and the ruby slippers, you had the power all along.
7
Without changes that affect everyone it’s not an equal playing field.
4
But perhaps this small sliver of the ultra rich who are willing to be taxed more want to ensure the other 74,000 ultra rich people also pay their fair share. It shouldn’t be optional. It shouldn’t be done on a volunteer basis. The solution is for the tax system to change.
And there shouldn’t be any middle or low income Americans voting Republican. If Republicans didn’t exploit wedge issues and hatred and people actually became informed of the policies, Republicans would have no chance at the polls.
8
"Members of the billionaire club have previously argued that they should be taxed more."
Then why did they support the regressive Trump tax cuts? It wasn't just for the reduction in corporate tax rates.
Let's start with repealing the tax cuts, which were just a giveaway to the same people this wealth tax would affect.
2
Some billionaires favoured the tax cuts, some did not. Not all billionaires agree.
6
@Norm Vinson And how many of these billionaires who didn't favor the tax cuts turned them down?
Yes, go ahead and tax the ultra wealthy. But don't raise my taxes. I already pay too much.
4
how many will understand you're being sarcastic?
@Bob I am not being sarcastic. I mean it. I pay thousands and thousands of local, state and federal tax $ . And what do I get for it? Potholed streets, endless wars and mentally ill homeless people roaming the community. I also strongly object to taxing dividends and social security. Constant handwringing articles about how people cannot save enough for retirement, and then those savings are taxed! What?
Obviously I mean that dividends below a certain amount should be tax free (let's say $100K).
The letter is a good point of departure but people, all of us not just these wealthy few, need to address this disparity directly to our representatives in congress and the senate. They made up the current tax laws that are crippling us. Those laws need to be redrawn once again in a more balanced way, in my opinion. If the people who signed this letter really mean what they say, then they should use the full weight of their influence on the above mentioned sections of government. The republican party only listens to the wealthy. That should be a good place to start.
3
Wonder if it would be best for those billionaires to amp up their charitable donations to those who need it most rather than give more money to this government who spends it on Trump golf vacations and oil company subsidies.
8
Other than seeking good publicity, what is the point behind this endeavor? All these folks have to do is write a check made payable to the IRS.
13
@Frank J Haydn
Money is not speech. Writing letters is speech. They are contributing to the conversation, just like you.
Several thoughts come to mind when I see this kind of "tax us we're really rich" publicity stunt....
First, no one is stopping you from writing a check to the US Treasury. Second, how about taking no deductions at all when you file your taxes and/or treating all your income regardless of source as income. Most of the uber wealthy pay tax rates at the capital gains level. That alone would mean a significant closing of the gap between the published tax rates and the real effective tax rate. Third, I find it interesting that while these people were generating their wealth, they were silent but now that they've amassed a ton of money, they're all for a wealth tax. Hypocrisy at its finest.
8
@Ben R
and now...?
methinks the gent doth protest too much .
these "gazillionaires " are proposing systemic , codified changes . you , as well , can write checks to US Treasury .
that's a feel good move
1
@Ben R
Wealth is not income it is accumulated money. They are asking for a tax on their accumulated money..
All income should be taxed as ordinary income
Eliminate depreciation on real estate
Limit losses to real losses
Triple the IRS and audit the wealthy
23
Finally some rich people who are not tax dead beats like Trump and his supporters. Trump still needs to go to jail for decades of tax abuse and he has trained his family to be tax deadbeats. Lock them all up. We pay taxes serve in the military why are they so special they do none of the above.
17
Next to demagogues, the super wealthy are the biggest threat to a functioning democracy. The Adelsons and Kochs know this, and I’m sure they have already paid the right politicians to prevent any wealth tax from ever being implemented.
9
Breath taking largesse...of course, only in moderation...
A letter being published online on Monday calls for “a moderate wealth tax on the fortunes of the richest one-tenth of the richest 1 percent of Americans — on us.”
2
Dear Mr. Soros, good thinking. Expand on it.
4
Comments Mr. Bezos, Mr. Gates?
7
These articles drive me crazy.
If you (the billionaires) feel you should be taxed more, then cut a check (or wire transfer) to the US Treasury and stop complaining.
It will take eons for Congress to address this notion.
16
This is not just about tax dollars. These Uber wealthy Americans are, in effect, asking for a stronger federal government that sets a social and political agenda for corporations and wealthy donors, not vice versa. They very wisely understand that the tentacles of many corporations and rich patrons have penetrated too deeply into government, eroding the things that have made America the land of opportunity and freedom for all. It is important we read between the lines.
And yes, it also means that the super rich should be taxed more.
6
Imagine what your personal finances would look like if you hadn't paid such a large % of your income in taxes over your lifetime.
It is the tax system more than any other single factor that has allowed the rich to accumulate the obscene fortunes we see
today. Opportunity and hard work are a distant second. Get the
money out of politics and change the tax system or nothing will
ever change.
5
I am grateful for this group of successful individuals who have a conscience and would like to see our country go forward. I thank them from the bottom of my heart.
6
Thank you, billionaires. But the rest of us would be much better off if we could just get corporations off our backs. Problem is, these corporations are, for the most part, no longer run by these billionaires. A rising generation is at the helm and are eager to wring every penny out of the rest of us. As eager as you and your parents and grandparents once were.
3
Buffets letter complaining that he was taxed at a lower rate than his secretary pure nonsense. Buffet owns roughly 33% of Berkshire Hathaway and has owned much more through the years. Berkshire Hathaway pays corporate taxes in the Billions of Dollars each year that impacts its earnings and stock price.
The Trump tax cut saved Berkshire Hathaway 29 Billion in 2017. Of the 65 Billion Berkshire earned, 29 Billion was from the tax cut that dropped rates from 35% to 21%. A rather nice increase in profits for doing absolutely nothing to improve company earnings.
The corporate tax cuts were an amazing give away to the top .01%. The rest of us who pay taxes will get less government services and more debt service.
3
@HL —
I’m sure you’re aware that personal income is not synonymous with corporate income — and that earned income is taxed at a higher rate than unearned income (of which stock dividends are a prime example).
Pretty sure Warren Buffet is financially savvy enough to know what he’s talking about when he says his tax rate is substantially lower than that of his office help.
3
A progressive national wealth tax should be instituted and replace income tax, capital gains tax, corporate tax, and estate tax. People would be exempt up to a certain amount, say 100k. Beyond that all assets would be valued at market and taxed accordingly. It is the most fair method of taxation and would unlock enormous economic energy in the country.
2
Easier said than done. How many billionaires are currently taking advantage of the huge tax cuts. How many are hiding money or using whatever loopholes they have to pay less taxes. How about if they pay higher wages and higher benefits to their employees?
Just reading about Amazon getting a tax rebate! They have a negative tax rate. Our President is taking advantage of not paying any taxes.
I agree with those who recommend that billionaires can donate money to those who need it.
We need a tax code that is fair to everyone. We need to close loopholes and make sure our government is spending wisely.
2
Oh,but the president is working for free. That should justify all his money grubbing scams.
Yes these people need to be taxed. No it should
Not be a moderate one.
2
As much as I want to believe this is something of a step in the right direction,
why do I feel this is really talk that rings hollow?
1
@Ponsobny Britt
I don't know. If they get their wish their taxes will increase. Why does that ring hollow with you?
1
@Max Deitenbeck: Just like you ask, "if they get there wish..."
I say, "if it sounds too good to be true..."
It's times like this, I have a serious problem with that word, "if..."
In case people have short memories or were born after Reagan was in office, there is the fact that taxes used to be more progressive.The only marginally affluent paid a higher tax on income than they do now.Reagan passed two tax relief acts and every Republican since then has had a penchant for tax relief.Trump could hardly wait to add to the wealth of his rich pals even though he pretended it was for the middle class. Tax rates need to be more progressive and have fewer loopholes.That way we would not have to get a handout from the 75,000 richest families.
6
A more practical way of approaching this would be rigorous tax audits of all billionaires.
3
It’s not that there isn’t enough money, it’s how it is being spent. NY State, for example, has enough money to provide driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants but not enough to pave the Thruway? Taxpayers are being robbed and now some want to help the robbers.
3
First of all, by providing them with driver’s licenses that adds to the much needed revenue. Second, less likely they’ll go to jail for driving without a license, meaning the state spends less money in processing them. I am sick and tired of people blaming immigrants while the super rich dodge BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in taxes that could easily pay for better highways.
5
You said it Chris!
1
Not immigrants, ILLEGAL immigrants. The only money spent on illegals should be the cost of sending them back where they came from. Use our resources on citizens and those who are here legally.
2
Dems must campaign on Trump's bald face lie regarding how his "Tax Cuts for the Rich" would not benefit him....
"In a speech in Indiana, Trump just flat out lied when he claimed that his wealthy friends "can call me all they want. It’s not going to help. I’m doing the right thing, and it’s not good for me. Believe me.
The truth is that the richest families got the biggest tax cuts in both dollar and percentage-of-income terms, with upper-middle-income families facing SIGNIFICANT tax increases in time.
9
It's one thing to compose and sign something that broadcasts one's intentions to pay a higher tax. It's another thing to actually to ahead, willingly, and contribute in various altruistic ways. Actions always speak louder than words. So what's preventing these folks from doing some good today or tomorrow or next week?
3
Yes, what’s keeping them from giving now? As noted by the great rabbinical sage, Jerry Lewis, “Give like it hurts”.
3
What's stopping them from paying more Right Now?
Do they not know how to write a check?
7
To whom...the IRS?
Under current rules/law, the check would be sent right back to them.
What makes you think they are not already writing checks?
You miss the point. It's the rest of the zillionaires who would be taxed as well. A tax on zillionaires does not exclude making personal gifts. My only concern is that most will figure out a way around the taxes..as they have done since the beginning of time.
1
Unfortunately these billionaires with conciences will run up against the sociopaths in the gop donor class, who can spend unlimited amounts of money on advertising to combat these kinds of initiatives with the backing of the kangaroo conservative wing of the US Supreme Court.
10
We certainly need this revenue if America is to shine truly from sea to shining sea. If these people require some sort of public recognition to give, let’s set up structures that allow them to do so. The old Brahmin merchants of Boston and the aristocracies of Athens and Rome competed in adorning their cities and countries. Bobby Kennedy’s paraphrase of Pericles’ famous words (“If Athens shall appear great to you, consider then that her glories were purchased by valiant men and by men who learned their duties.”) is appropriate here. Glad to see some of the billionaires understanding their duties! May these dutiful givers be an example to others in our land and around the world...
2
A federal wealth tax would be unconstitutional under the Direct Tax Clauses of the Constitution. For this purpose, a federal tax imposed on assets merely because one owns them, without regard to the transfer or other use of the assets, is a direct tax that is prohibited unless it is apportioned among the states by population or imposed on income, neither of which is the case here. States are not so prohibited, so state property taxes are constitutional.
2
The Billionaires should simply write checks to the United States Treasury and their local State governments. Why the charades? If you want to pay more money, simply pay it.
2
A noble act indeed for the wealthy to support paying more taxes, but quiet honestly, I rather they increase their charitable contributions ten fold or maybe 100 times and insure it is going to the needy. Just increasing taxes to the gov't means more $500 toilet seats are purchased by irresponsible government employees. Helping those who could use the donation is far more rewarding.
3
Here's a suggestion to these billionaires - in this era of unlimited campaign financing they should take the money they would otherwise pay in increased taxes and spend it instead on campaign finance donations to individuals and groups which fight for better government and the higher taxes necessary to support it.
4
While it is admirable that these individuals are willing to step up and contribute to social welfare -- the money would certainly be better appreciated by the 99% than it is by those whose money just sits investments accumulating interest by the hundreds of thousands or millions on a daily basis, they are in a minority. Also, the fact that such inequities exist suggests there is something very wrong with the system. Food service workers, cashiers, delivery, janitors and so many others -- where would be without them? Yet there wages are often incapable of supporting an individual, no less a family. Rather than calling it a wealth tax, I'd suggest that when people reach a certain net worth, they either face the option of either making qualified contributions to socially responsible organizations, make direct contributions to government specified departments such as those that are earmarked for infrastructure development, improving housing, or providing housing subsidies, utility bill abatement for low income households, and so on. No one likes to just turn money over to the government knowing it can use or misuse it however it pleases. However if there were funds that were directed by way of voluntary contribution or taxation to improve the general welfare, this would enable people to feel more comfortable that their wealth was being directly utilized for salutary social purposes, not just gobbled up by a wasteful bureaucracy.
7
As always, it also comes down to campaign finance reform. Take the money out of politics and a lot of things will become more fair.
6
I have always wondered why there wasn’t a tax on assets over a certain threshold. Taxing small incomes but ignoring enormous wealth that is essentially kept in tax advantage shelters seems odd to me. I’m pleased to see that some agree with me.
2
There is nothing wrong with philanthropy, except when those practicing it see it as a substitute for a fair rate of taxation on great wealth, which it should NEVER be. What is even worse is when the philanthropy is used to try to “wash away the sins” committed when making billions in industries which exploit the sick and vulnerable- i.e. like the Sackler family.
5
George Soros and the small number of other billionaires who are advocating higher taxes for the super wealthy like themselves are a very small slice of the billionaire class. The rest are not so eager to follow suit. They never had enough wealth and never will.
The politicians are owned by those bigger slice of the never enough billionaires. Unless we are able to take money out of politics (undo Citizens United) and institute heavy inheritance tax on the super wealthy, the concentration of wealth through generations to the very top will continue.
12
Nothing stops from from not using an army of tax attorneys to avoid or minimize taxes, taking deductions or using tax shelters and other schemes ... all legal but not mandatory to take advantage of
1
These are highly intelligent people. Besides doing the right thing morally, they are long term greedy. They have read about 1789 and 1917.
And they have understood that history repeats itself in funny ways!
Kudos to Warren (and of course Piketty, Saez and Zucman). Presidency to her and Nobel Prizes in economics to the other three.
2
This is love of country and love for fellow citizens.
4
Hopefully these billionaires will use their billions to support Democrats in Congress and the White House. Otherwise this is so much hot air.
9
There are many in the great state of Texas who would disagree with George Soros when it comes to paying taxes:
Corpus Christi!
You Waco?
Houston?
We Fort Worth every cent we earned!
You’re not taking our Dallas!
Sorry, we’re gonna take El Paso
1
It is patriotic to pay taxes to support your country, your military, your military veterans, etc. I have no respect for those people who don’t pay their taxes or who don’t pay a fair share of taxes. To those who say if you want to pay more just cut a big check to the treasury that is not the patriotic thing to do or the solution. As a middle income person I pay a whopping percentage of my income in taxes. I don’t resent it but I do resent paying for people who pay very little or nothing at all like rich people like Trump. I also resent their bragging about not paying taxes and I resent his stupid followers who think that Trump is smart for not paying taxes. The rest of us, the poor and the middle class, make up for what the rich or the dishonest don’t pay.
16
Of course.
Being wealthy doesn't mean that you don't care about the country that made your wealth possible.
Or that you think the only system that matters in human relations is an economic system rather than a system of morality, realized through government action, that enabled your achievements.
4
I hate paying taxes and I hate government waste. I hold my nose on April 15, and pay. But I’ve had my own evolutionary thought on the subject.
As I age I have come to appreciate the American economic system. Few other places I am aware of provide the amazing broad-based opportunity for wealth we have here. It’s a privilege to live life in a system that allows me to live a decent lifestyle and have the opportunity and hope to improve myself, honestly.
The point is, I will gladly pay for this privilege. And I appreciate these rich guys. Thank you. Some of you get it. Yeah you’re on a whole different level most of us will never know, but you seem to appreciate the SYSTEM that allowed you to get there!
As long as there are humans, there will be waste. It is a byproduct of an imperfect system. And we for sure to constantly fight against it. And we can argue about where... too much defense, too many freeloaders, etc. But our government is great! The services work, the schools, infrastructure and transportation system is functional, and government protections against unfair practices are decent. Corruption is minimal. If you’re willing to take risk, you have an honest shot as the next guy.
We have a million problems, but this is worth paying for and I wouldn’t have it any other way.
9
A message from the multimillionaire club - We own the politicians and they make the tax laws and we've told them not to tax us or our corporations, just average Americans. Guess who is going to get their wish? You billionaires or the multimillionaires?
3
The time is long past for a wealth tax to fund universal health care, student loan debt forgiveness, reduced college tuition, child care, and climate change programs. These programs could not only make the lives of millions of Americans substantially better, but free up creative energy to tackle our serious problems, especially around climate change.
5
The self-made billionaire worked very smart and hard. He or she should not just allow himself to be taxed more or especially demand more taxes on himself. The tax system is a legal mechanism to control producers of all sizes, so by submitting to it voluntarily you abet it. You should pay down a bit of the national debt, directly by the treasury, if you want to be patriotic, don't you think?
@Frederick Farias No.
1
Ok. It should be by your voluntary choice.
Ok. It should voluntary.
Unless these billionaires start working to defeat Republicans in Congress, this can not happen. There are no studies or theories of economics that support the GOP's false belief that taxes on the rich hurt the economy nor take away all incentives for the rich. There is, and only is, studies of such taxes that show the approach recommended by these billionaires ALWAYS increases the economy and always reduces the rich vs poor disparity.
This disparity occurs when taxes on the rich are reduced The highest economic growth the country had was in the post war 50s & 60s when the marginal tax rate was 91%. Upon reduction by President Reagan to nearly a third of that in the 80s our economic growth shrank and the serious rich vs poor disparity we have now set in. It is a disastrous disparity for the young parents today trying to have the success their parents had. It isn't happening and can't happen under the GOP's "the rich are our personnel fountain so we protect only them". Or worse "businesses are people too my friend" - fine then let's tax them like people on their income not on their profits like businesses.
300
@Anthony Williams while I agree with all of what you say, it is important to note that virtually no one paid 91% in the 50s. According to a paper by, among other, Thomas Piketty, the average tax paid by the 1% was 42%. The article is referenced below. http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/PSZ2017.pdf
11
@Murray Boxerdog
The 42% that they paid then is higher than the nominal rate that they are avoiding taxes on now, so the argument that raising the nominal rate does not increase revenue is as ridiculous as the argument that lowering the nominal rate decreases revenue.
13
@Murray Boxerdog. And that's really the point. When the top tax rates were very high, the wealthy invested that money back into their company (capital expenses like plant expansion/improvements) or workers (salaries/benefits), creating deductions that lowered their rate. Today the 0.1% don't need to invest that in anything but themselves to keep their taxes low, and, actually are taxed less - lower capital gains (20% max) & lower pass thru entity taxes (20%) - than they would if they invested back into their company & workers.
44
These people could make an instant impact on our tax to spending debacle by contributing to the treasury to help pay down the national debt. Not only will it reduce the debt but, also, the interest paid on the debt. And they could do it tomorrow and not have to involve the congress or open a pandora's box.
5
Say you live in Omaha and you have 10 million bucks invested and generating returns and a 100 K salary. your returns would pay the moderate wealth tax and your wealth likely would not change. With a 100 K salary you live in comfort.
Say on the other hand you live in Manhattan and you have 10 million bucks invested in your 3 story building and you own a bodega on the ground floor and almost scrape by on a 100 K income. In order to pay for the wealth tax you may have to sell that building.
Say you live in Dallas and your 10 million bucks of wealth includes not only income producing instruments but also things that you have purchased on credit. Cars and boats and a new kitchen because that is how you want to spend you 100 K salary. To pay the wealth tax you now need to prioritize and stop spending on consumables therefore hurting the economy.
Say you live in Portand and your wealth consists in part of non liquid assets. Jewelry and diamonds and paintings. Is that 5 million dollar Picasso today going to be worth that much on April 15? Is the IRS going to find that stash of gold doubloons or 6 carat diamonds hidden inside you walls?
My point is confiscatory taxes like wealth tax are hard to calibrate, or administer fairly. They have substantial side effects on individuals and on the economy in general. Most of the policies are cudgels with curb appeal.
And then there is the kicker. Will the proceeds be spent on textbooks or on 1000 screwdrivers?
4
@Ronald. This proposal is not talking about $10 million. It begins with those in the $50 million and over category. I have no doubt that they have enough liquid, disposable income to cover a modest wealth tax.
9
@Dale Yes i realize that. I was making the point on the difficulty of calibrating the application of the fee and evaluating the amount subject to the tax. Moreover, if you look at the French model of what they call "Tax on the large fortunes" the " admission" threshold to the club and the percentage taxed have crept downward since its creation.
These policies are always reasonable to start. The premise is to find the villain so to speak and ever so slightly poke him so that it feels like a tease. Then it increases also slightly and eventually touches closer to home.This reminds me of a joke. Thes two friends are talking and the first one says. Hey Dale, if you had 50 millions would you give me one? Answers Dale: Sure Ronald of course you could have one.
Hey Dale, if you had 5 cars would you give me one? For sure I will says Dale.
Dale, would you give me one shirt if you owned 5 of them. No says Dale, no way!
Why not cries Ronald, why not one shirt but one million and one car?
Ronald, answers Dale, I do own 5 shirts!
Personally, I have been sold the tax as proposed by E Warren, but I have no illusions where this is heading. Likely, I will be long gone by the time they knock at my door.
However, I do believe that this may impact our consumerism quite a bit and have heard no one talk about that aspect of the tax.
Taxing is not the answer: the owners of capital need to share that with the workers. All firms operating in the US should have requirements to share a significant share of profits with employees as stock distribution. With employees sharing in the ownership of the firm, management and the employees should hopefully have a well rounded discussion on how capital should be deployed and the profits distributed.
123
@Eric Nielsen
Close the gap. No CEO needs to make thousands of times more than his employees, the real creators off his wealth, do.
85
@Eric Nielsen other than your first sentence you’re absolutely right, and Elizabeth Warren has a plan for that!
35
@Eric Nielsen
This would help the employees of these particular firms but not the population in general. Most Americans do not work for these companies.
31
There’s nothing stopping anyone from paying more in tax.
They don’t have to take the deductions they currently take. In fact, there’s actually a “make a donation to the US treasury” form available on the IRS website.
There’s also nothing stopping anyone from donating directly to the causes they care about, such as providing day care or buying toothbrushes and toothpaste for children in shelters - whether those children are at the border or in homeless shelters in cities.
The fact is most wealthy people already support their favorite charities. Rich Americans are the biggest philanthropists in the world. They give to churches and synagogues, clubs for kids, grade schools and universities. They give to medical research, hospices, and healthcare providers.
But that’s not enough that these letter signers. They don’t want you to support *your* causes they want you to support *their* causes.
Spending someone else’s money is always the most fun.
And they want you to do it via the most inefficient, bloated, top heavy institution on the planet - the US Federal Government.
96
Give it a break. It’s their money. If they call for a tax, so be it. I doubt very much is will affect you.
52
@JJ. It usually starts that way: one billion dollars this year, one million next, one hundred thousand . . .
10
Governments don’t run on donations, they run on taxes.
And your assertion that rich Americans are the biggest philanthropists on the planet?
If true, they are some of the richest human beings on the planet... one would hope that basic human decency would impel them to help spread the wealth a bit.
If that is insufficient (and for many, it certainly seems to be), a name on a new library plus a giant tax break does seem to help. Philanthropy isn’t really philanthropy when you get big benefits out of it, including a benevolent image and a tax write off.
In any case, the wealthy need to pay more. Full stop.
Since the Nixon administration, the economy has grown nearly 7 times over, yet lower income Americans are making less now than they did then. So much for philanthropy.
I think we all agree that the federal government could be better. Perhaps if the wealthy weren’t giving them bribes (sorry, campaign contributions) in support of their favorite causes (led by tax cuts for the poor oppressed wealthy) it would work better.
111
Let these frustrated billionaires write checks on their own. They are free to do so. Also, what is the average age of these supposedly generous billionaires? p.s., who really thinks a wealth tax that starts at billions will stay put any not creep down to fund pet projects?
4
The rest of us already pay a wealth tax. For most people, their greatest financial asset is their home and we are getting hammered with property taxes. Our wealth is being heavily taxed. Now, a home makes no money until it is sold, but we still have to pay taxes on it. We do not pay taxes on holding capital stock just for owning it, only if we sell it and realize a gain.
Property taxes are a horribly regressive tax that greatly inhibits the accumulation of wealth for the middle class and upper middle class. But yet the super wealthy can own all the capital stock in the world and pay no taxes on those holdings unless and until they are sold. Then they get to pass massive gifts through inheritance that still remain untaxed.
So yes, we need a wealth tax and it should apply to more than the just the top 75,000 families.
How in the world can we justify taking 25%, or even much more, of a person's social security check just for taxes when someone can own 1000 times that much in stock and pay nothing? How can we force people out of their homes that they have lived in for decades because of taxes but yet vast amount of wealth that have accumulated without any taxes paid gets passed to heirs with still no taxes paid?
Our property tax system is a top example of the tax burden being transferred from the wealthy to the rest of us. If we have pay taxes on our wealth, the wealthy should have to also.
406
@Bruce Rozenblit
Excellent points. The rebalancing absolutely needs these elements in the formula. The problem is with politicians. Let’s take them out of the equation and automate their jobs. Maybe the lobbyists can give them some busy work at minimum wage for all their loyal service over the years.
24
@Bruce Rozenblit
Re: Property and other taxes
I am retired; most of my income comes from my IRA distribution and my Social Security check. Currently, my property taxes amount to about five percent of my adjusted gross income (AGI on form 1040). My federal taxes amount to roughly 20-25 percent of AGI. Eighty-five percent of my Social Security check in included in the AGI.
Is that fair? Is that unfair? I do not know and do not really care. I have always lived "below my means", to be on the safe side, and paying what I owe has never been a problem.
I provide these figures just to put your comment into perspective, i.e. to say that I do not feel "victimized" by the IRS, and that I believe that higher taxes (for all) might lead to better schools, better roads, and better everything. More government regulations, not less!
38
@Bruce Rozenblit With property tax, you get the opportunity to live on land and in a house, use the services of the local government including fire, police, and garbage. You have access to water, electricity, and gas right to your door. You enjoy having street lights, stop signs, streets and street maintenance, local schools for your children, zoning, and retail stores and services from which to purchase food, clothes, and other items. Without property taxes, these services could not be provided to you. Are you suggesting these services should be provided to you for free?
Government gets paid taxes on investment income because they set up and monitor the financial markets in a way that provides fair and equitable trade of stocks, bonds, and other financial instruments.
19
Why don’t the owners of these companies just redistribute their earnings back to the workers that make their companies run? I’m sure there are people working at Disney and BH that are making minimum wage who work greatly appreciate a raise.
110
@sara
Right, you are right. It shouldn't be about (just) taxing wealth, it's about how the wealth is accumulated (I won't even say earned). Begin at the beginning.
4
@sara Because it won't have the desired effect a) if only a small group of people do this and b) there isn't an organized way to distribute the money at a targeted problem, like daycare or college debt. If the government doesn't mandate it, you would have 50 out of 75000 families paying their share.
14
@sara because they are publicly traded companies and if they tried that their shareholders could sue them into oblivion.
Publicist traded companies are required by law to put the immediate financial interest of their stockholders first.
That’s why we need to changes the rules of the game. Altruism/philanthropy won’t work on its own.
5
My problem with the elite is not that they exist--there will alway be people that are smarter, more capable, or just harder working. And it's not really the details of how one makes a billion dollar (barring illegal activity). My problem is that the bulk of the elite got a huge head start based on their parents wealth and privilege. THAT is wrong, immoral, and inefficient.
A very high inheritance tax could fund truly equal education for everyone, getting us closer to where everyone gets an equal shot at success (if not an equal result, which cannot, and should not, be guaranteed).
You ought to pay for what you get, I grew up thinking that was the difference between America and all the rest.
148
If I become rich in my life the primary purpose would be to take care of my children and their eventual families. Isn’t that always the goal?
23
@J c The elite and wealthy are not inherently smarter, harder working or more capable than anyone else. They are just luckier or come from inherited wealth and privilege.
65
Yet much of the motivation for folks to work to achieve is the legacy they can leave for their children and grandchildren. Removing that incentive is akin to stripping the assets while they are alive and the practical effect will be to undermine their motivation to advance.
16
What is stopping any of the signatories from simply writing a massive annual check to the Treasury?
A letter is a publicity stunt; if someone thinks the Federal Government can make the best use of their money, they should be entitled to forward funds accordingly, irrespective of tax policy.
76
@Harpoon
US income tax return forms have a line for entering contributions to the federal government over-and-beyond tax payments.
31
@Harpoon
I doubt if it is merely a publicity stunt; but even if it were one, I'd rather view it it as an effort to kick start a process that may nudge some Senators to move in this direction.
A policy change is the only way that, besides reflecting the country's stance on taxation, can garner sufficient revenues to actually address and alleviate some of today's ills. These eleven sending additional monies to the Treasury department will not fund all the social programs identified in their letter.
76
@Harpoon
Because it needs to be ALL zillionaires. Not just the ones with possibly some moral compass.
the ones that need to be taxed DID NOT sign the letter.
259
This is not a publicity stunt. Every signatory of this letter has already put signicant portions of their wealth towards national or global economic justice.
Not every member of the 10% will do the same, nor is one letter "the answer." Why must we be critical of a good step? More comprehensive solutions will not come until we have a government committed to them. At the moment, we do not.
283
@Peter Engel
Peter, you've been had.
2
@Peter Engel Exactly! What they want is for ALL people in their wealth class to give more through taxation. If this is a "stunt," it's a very one IMO.
It bothers me that the wealthiest individuals can see the problem but the Republicans can not and essentially have compounded the problem with their much touted tax bill. Not only do we need to replace this president but we need McConnell out. I may not live in Kentucky but I will support Amy McGrath to replace him.
454
@JAF
"the wealthiest individuals can see the problem but the Republicans can not"
Can't see it?! They envisioned it, and worked for decades to make it reality!
14
Mitch and Don show gotta go!
10
@JA
I'll have no problem citing this letter in support of taxation, but I don't trust billionaires. At the same time their PR firms are convincing then to sign this letter, their lobbyists are hard at work in DC getting them special tax deals.
Ultimately, in a democracy, what .1% of the population thinks should have little affect on how We the People run our government. The problem is that the few thousand people who own, literally, half of everything on the planet, also own control controlling shares in all mass media, and make massive dark money contributions to our politicians.
We the People need to take control of our government and news outlets back from the mega rich so that we can make policy, not them.
We need to undo the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (signed by Bill Clinton) which encouraged media consolidation under the rich, giving rise to powers like Murdoch and Clear Channel.
We also need to pass an Amendment to the Constitution (before any other Amendments are passed under billionaire influence) that makes clear to the Supreme Court that,
Only humans, not corporations, are Citizens with Rights under the Constitution, and Money is Not Speech.
A corporation does not exist in nature. A corporation does not exist until a government charters it. A corporation is an interference in free markets by government. We the People do not want fictitious entities to dilute our power as citizens by impersonating us.
Be skeptical of ALL corporate news.
7
My maternal grandfather was a millionaire in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. He would regularly say “I am proud to pay taxes to live in this country” and he meant it. He was always in the 50 to 70 percent tax bracket. He was a patriot. He believed that education was the country’s most important investment. He was a staunch Republican.
Though he only completed eight grades all five of his daughters graduated with at least a four year degree. They graduated with NO DEBT!
My mother graduated from high school as Salutatorian and was given a full scholarship to a prestigious private college. My grandfather said that he could afford her college costs and insisted that they make her scholarship honorary allowing another student to receive the funding.
I would like to believe that every person would do the same. Seeing the charitable behavior of our president towards others and all the support he receives from his party... I’m afraid my old party has lost its way.
564
@cyn oddly enough I know of a republican millionaire from that era who hated paying the govt so much.
8
@cyn
Well said.
4
Your grandfather was sadly the last of a dying breed. My uncles were much like him in their thinking and how they saw paying their taxes, as the sons of German immigrants he took pride in his Country.
15
These billionaires understand that if things continue along this path, it will lead to either reform or revolution. And they stand to lose a lot more $$$ with the latter.
8
Does the NYT really need to give a platform to those with such wealth? The last people I trust to give a fair opinion on taxing the wealthiest Americans are those very same wealthy people.
1
Nothing is stopping Mr. Soros from writing checks of whatever amounts he desires to the Treasury. He’s really not saying “tax us”, he’s saying “tax them” (“them” being anyone who doesn’t agree with him).
5
There's nothing to stop these folks from cutting a check to the US Treasury at any time.
I wonder how many actually have written a check for an amount above what they owe? I'm guessing not many.
4
I agree - the super rich must pay more in taxes a la the Buffet rule! But shouldn’t this article also express the rationale of the naysayers, and debunk it?
1
I’m not interested in “more taxes.” I’m interested in “more taxes for X.”
Tax money right now is not being spent well. I don’t care if billionaires pay more, only for those extra dollars to further bloat the military - which already has billions in documented wastage.
Tax money to fund health and dental care, Meals on Wheels, IUDs for women who want them, subsidized childcare? Now you’re talking.
7
Most of these individuals are already generous donors, and many have foundations. But while waiting for government to tax them, they could pool the equivalent amount of money and immediately do a tremendous amount of goodwill: pay bond for every nonviolent offender being held in jail while waiting trial, pay off every Donor's Choose campaign for teachers needing school supplies, et al. They clearly want their money put to good use.
1
Voluntarily paying more taxes could be one way of getting more money into the system.
The problem is anytime the money is given to the government the expenses take too much of the money. If I were wealthy donating to causes would eliminate this cost of government.
1
Hardly an endorsement for 70-90% tax rates. The proposals are not for the top 1 tenth of 1 percent. Take a look at the tax proposal of the Governor of NJ. Hardly applies to Billionaires.
1
So perhaps initially, the best thing they could do is put their money to work electing key politicians who would actually implement such a progressive tax policy. Counteract the greedy Kochs and Adelsons - then I'll be impressed.
4
@KEF
I do not agree. The best thing they could, and can do is to sign checks made out to the Internal Revenue Service, in the additional amount they would have to pay if tax rates were fair.
They could also "agitate" for campaign-financing reforms and work to take money out of politics.
@Frannot unless the money is earmarked for the issues it is needed and until this administration changes that won't happen, the money will not be used properly.
1
Dear Billionaires,
Please put your skills to this project.
If you want this to be a “win-win-win-win,” think outside the box and get the vast majority involved. When the basics are in cogent form, they will flip the switch and make it law.
Non-billionaires, billionaires, the United States, and the world will thank the Billionaires’ Consortium for developing a sustainable model for representative governance based on free market forces, individuals to communities, worldwide.
It’s not a hard task when everyone has a seat at the table, and the basic forces of self-interest are balanced with those of the community within valid and viable social contracts. All that’s needed is the framework that keeps them strong and secure. In my opinion, America still has the power to do that.
4
Most American's object to increased taxes just because they think politician's will just blow the money on something. The solution for this to sell on across the political spectrum is for a large chunk of the revenue, something like 50% at least, should be dedicated to debt payoff - not deficit reduction - debt payoff. Show us you can be fiscally responsible.
1
As always, the “wealth tax” will filter soon down to the middle class, people who own homes and have investments. This is a Pandora’s box that will never close, once it is opened.
6
@Larry
It trickles down to the middle class because the super rich don’t pay their fair share.
3
Actually, evidence shows the opposite. The 39.6% top income tax rate has applied pretty consistenly to a fraction of the top 1% of filers for decades and has not, as the above commenter catastrophizes, blindly been extended to the middle class.
You should ask what the alternative is. The reality is that our government is dramatically underfunded -- which is how we have accumuled a debt of over $20 trillion -- and so at some point there is going to have to be dramatically more revenue. Do you want that to come through dramatically higher income taxes on everyone or higher taxes on the tiny sliver of people who have collected nearly all of society's growth in wealth over the last couple generations?
2
@Larry
Billionaires ask to be taxed more, and your first thought is to count your money and protect your investments!
1
Why not make it simple. Anything over $1million income however earned is taxed at 50% and anything over $150 million at death is taxed at 50% - no exemption for foundations, charities etc etc.
2
@MrC
Why not? Because it is oversimplified. What did Einstein say, “Make things as simple as possible, not simple.”
The problem is a tax only on billionaires won't raise enough money, and it will filter down to millionaires, reaching my 65 YO mom, who has a home and a retirement account, but no income from working (she would like to work, but age discrimination means tough for her to find work).
5
@Juanita K.
As I stated to Mr C, that’s oversimplified - and incorrect.
1
I would simply put a number to this and say that no one should be worth than 10 billion dollars.
Into each life, some rain must fall.
9
... worth more than 10 billion dollars.
1
This is a classic example of billionaires' disease. Having money doesn't make you a brain surgeon or a policy expert. However, they are free to set an example and voluntarily pay more in taxes, sparing the rest of us their lectures.
11
@LTJ
No. Volunteerism is not policy. This is a policy issue, and it requires law.
These guys are not dummies. They know severe imbalances in wealth ultimately destroys the economy, leads to war, and often both.
3
"A Message From the Billionaire’s Club: Tax Us"
a message from the plebeians: donate voluntarily to your favorite charity. many capitalists (including billionaires?) believe in limited regulation and government mandates, so why wait for legislative bodies, many of which also include a fair amount of fairly wealthy individuals, to debate and to haggle about what to do with your money?
you can't take it with you, but you can leave it for someone else. sharing is caring.
8
@thomas bishop
No - lets tax them so that the government can allocate the spending where it is most needed - not where the billionaire thinks will best provided his or her legacy
3
Sure sharing is a great way not to wait for policies. But that's not the point they are making. Charities do great work but they can't fund police or public school systems. They can't fund water and sewer and other important things government is usually responsible for. There is a place for charities and a place for smart quality government. Try waking up in the morning and not taking advantage of what government provides you. Try not open any faucets in your home. Try not walking in the sidewalk or the streets or stopping st a traffic light. Try not calling 911 if you need to. Try not to throw your litter on a public garbage disposal. Just try. If you succeed, congratulations you live completely off the grid in Mars somewhere. Otherwise you need a mix of government services. And for these services to exist we need everyone to contribute fairly.
1
@thomas bishop Charity masks injustice.
1
I don't understand why they don't just mail in an additional amount. You are completely allowed to pay extra tax dollars, and there's nothing stopping them from doing that. Why does a law have to be written to take from the other ones who may feel that they have already paid their fair share of taxes. Unfortunately, the real money is in the middle class, but today's politicians know that's where they get their votes, so tread lightly in taxing that group. You can take all the US billionaires money that you want, it won't solve the problem. A VAT on the other hand, likely gets you closer...that's another politically untenable solution.
13
@manko
The answer to that is simple. They want policy changes that benefit their personal agendas in return for their "contribution". If their motivation was truly altruistic they would just write a check and be done with it. They won't pay unless it results in someone else doing what they say they must.
12
@manko
Because those that think they have paid their fair share of taxes probably haven’t, they are deaf and blind to the fact they have an obligation to the society that made them wealthy, Donald Trump is the poster child for this attitude. And the rich are so obscenely rich these days that it is no longer true to say that taxes need to fall on the middle class to raise real revenue, note it is a wealth tax not an income tax that is being discussed here.
3
@manko
The answer is not simple. It requires law, and a VAT is worth inclusion, definitely.
Bravo! A lesson in how to be a responsible billionaire— but we do need to elect a Democratic President and Congress to make sure whatever money is collected is spent in a way that benefits society in general. One other caveat: I’m dubious about how the wealth tax would be effected even if legislatively enacted.
5
@Richard Levine
Yes, be very cynical about implementation. The current framework will not get it done.
There is a very simple solution for the people who have signed the letter to express their preferences: calculate the tax you would pay if your proposal were adopted and make a voluntary gift to the government in that amount. No need to pass a tax bill; just do it. And for those of us who do not agree with you, we will admire your willingness to put your money where your mouth is.
19
@Ralph Segall Does that also mean someone in the 99% can refuse to pay taxes they disagree with? No, a wealth tax is necessary if we're going to attempt to reduce the inequality of wealth. Don't worry. The wealthy won't go hungry or do without medical care or education---you know, like the 99% have to do.
30
@Ralph Segall
A tax or contribution will only address half of the problem.
Without legislation directing it towards child care, health care or housing, the money will disappear into the maw of a Federal budget that favors corporations and the military at the expense of the neediest.
7
@Ralph Segall How does it feel to confront open-hearted generosity with closed-minded stupidity? Asking for a friend.
2
Folks you are being played. It is unconstitutional to tax peoples wealth - net worth. No way your going to get that amendment through two thirds of the states. Jeff bazos wealth is not an accumulation of income but appreciation on stock value same with Bill Gates. It is just that simple. You can tax the gain when they sell or the estate on death but taxing worth is a bad idea and more power than a good government should want.
10
@Mkm I don't know about the federal constitutional issue, but we have taxes on capital at the state and local level in the form of property taxes.
7
@Mkm, it would be a near impossibility and bureaucratic nightmare to attempt to tax ones wealth each year. Guess what, the very wealthy would game the system just like they do now with regards to paying taxes on income.
3
@Mkm Can you specify why such a tax would be unconstitutional?
3
"Moderate"?....why not tremendous tax on the wealthy?
4
Thank you all.
Congress, be quick or be gone. Presidential candidates, please temper your campaigning on this until the vote is in.
Could this be the beginning of the end for Republicans relentless anti-tax campaign that started with Reagan? Even thoughtful billionaires recognize that fair taxation is needed to support infrastructure and policies that benefit the entire community and polls indicate that there's broad public support for a change.
6
Don't worry about the GOP changing its policy of reducing the tax burden on the ultra-rich. There are still plenty of greedy billionaires for whom their wealth can never be enough (e.g., Sheldon Adelson, the Kochs, Carl Icahn...). Moreover these are the billionaires who actively finance the GOP's campaign coffers, not the please-tax-us-more signatories of this letter.
1
I wish this same group (anybody) would demand the repeal of the discriminatory and regressive NJ Inheritance Tax of 1892. I got NJ to repeal the NJ Estate Tax effective 1/1/18. Predictably the unethical legislators of NJ (essentially all of their heirs are "lineal" and not impacted by NJ's other death tax) left the NJ Inheritance Tax of 1892 on the books. This is a tax on the POOR, middle class and wealthiest NJ decedents and is based on WHO you leave more than a paltry $500. If left to non-lineal family (i.e. brother, sister, niece, nephew) a tax of 16% per dollar is confiscated by NJ. To put in perspective, if a RICH NJ decedent leaves BILLIONS to a lineal heir (child) it transfers tax free. If a POOR NJ decedent leaves $1000 to a POOR non-lineal heir (a niece) IT'S TAXED. This death tax is a disgrace. I tried to get it repealed. Someone else I hope will suit up, show up and get it repealed.
6
@Susan
Excellent.
Yes, PLEASE, this will achieve more of what Democrats seek rather than trying to impose narrow minded bureaucratic climate change carbon taxing/cap-and-trade policy. Heck, Bloomberg has already indicated that he’d pay to shutdown existing coal-fired electric generating units. And Tom Seyer, who made a lot of money off of hedging on the price of fossil fuels should be made to pay for the health consequences peddling a fuel that leaves communities to deal with the environmental costs.
1
I would exempt Individual-1 from this onerous tax.
For him and his family, I would like to see a great tax cut, if not an outright suspension of all taxes, state and local.
His contributions to the welfare and future greatness of this country long ago exceeded the magnificent and are now fast approaching the superlative.
What's that you say?
He's already given this to himself?
8
... all taxes, federal, state and local.
2
I'm thinking now I should have made that "are now fast approaching the indescribable."
4
There is a big difference between raising taxes on billionaires and raising them on millionaires based on net worth. Millions of Americans have net worths over a million dollars, based mostly on the value of their homes and their retirement savings. Taxing those people's net worth would be ruinous. Worse yet, a tax on net worth will lead to vast loopholes and a new tax avoidance enterprise. We would be better off closing the carried interest loophole, but DEMOCRATS OPPOSED THIS!
3
They are not proposing a tax on someone with millions. But I agree with you on the carried interest loophole.
9
Taxing carried interest would raise a grand total of about 14 billion over ten years. Hardly a rounding error.
"A recent analysis of a Federal Reserve report found that over the last three decades, the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans saw their net worth grow by $21 trillion, while the wealth of the bottom 50 percent fell by $900 billion."
The only word for this is obscene--specifically because much if not all of that wealth came from tax policy designed to increase the wealth of the richest at the expense of the poorest.
Trickle down doesn't work, and trickle down led to this massive inequality in income and assets. Every time a Republican rails about rugged individualism, or that the middle and the poor need to work harder, I simply want to barf.
If a system is rigged and opportunity is only available to those who don't need it, that system is unjust. I'm happy these wealthy individuals wrote the letter, but since many have progressive leanings anyway, I don't expect things to change until Republicans get booted out of office across all branches of government.
71
@ChristineMcM
As always, the Times is half fact and half troll; well, these days, it’s more troll.
What about the 49% below the 1%?
What about the federal funding directed towards the bottom 50%?
The facts are incomplete, as usual.
It’s very much like the children who die in custody on the southern border. There is no mention of the mortality rate for the group demographic of those in custody versus the same demographic outside custody. If my memory is accurate, the mortality rate in custody is about 20% of the pre-custody rate. In other words, people don’t stop dying simply because they suddenly receive a relatively high level of health care (regardless of the Draconian and arguably barbaric conditions they endure).
The facts for complex problems are more than one mind can calculate; a group like Congress doesn’t stand a chance. But the free market? Ah, hope springs eternal.
The wealth tax concept is a job killer. The focus here is on the highly visible wealthy with ample means to pay the tax. Consider a firm owned by one individual that reaches 50 million in value with a net profit of 8%. Firm's like this are successful, employ staff and generate economic value. They are also often cash poor since firm growth demands continuous investment most often coming from internally generated cash flow. Tax that firm at 2% (if you tax the owner you tax the firm if it is privately owned...fact no nuances here). That tax will reduce or eliminate growth. After taxing the firm on it profits, the government is taking an additional $1,000,000 as a wealth tax.
Warren, Sanders et al have never run a business and do not have a clue regarding the challenges of getting from start up to what they view at the taxable wealthy such as Amazon. Enact this tax and you will not have the next Amazon to tax.
8
Are they racing firms or individuals?
3
@JJ
Individuals
If the democrats do win in 2020, I do believe that a wealth tax will be somewhere in the mix of proposals that helped them. Now, having said that, even if they gained control of both houses, I tend to believe that somehow this idea will vanish or even worse end up with even more loopholes that benefit the very rich.
3
Find a way to convince or replace Senator McConnell. Maybe then this would have a real shot. The rhetoric is reasoned, but any implementation--for now--is unrealistic.
9
This support comes from a small proportion of the wealthiest with the best hearing - they can hear the guillotines being sharpened by those at the lower end and want to head it off.
9
As the new democracy party has been addressing as an overall issue for the 2020 election, “Real Change is essential” — which is categorically different than the entrenched “rougher-talking” neoimperialist-con ‘R’ Vichy Party (aka, the Trumpian regime), and also different than the dying “smoother-lying” neoliberal-con ‘D’ Vichy Party of the exact same Disguised Global Crony Capitalist Empire.
This interesting voluntary letter and opening bid for constructive and people’s peaceful agreement for ‘change’ from the current situation that the U.S. finds itself considering to catch-up with other advanced countries, is only an opening bid: “a moderate wealth tax on the fortunes of the richest one-tenth of the richest 1 percent of Americans — on us.”
The sequence of alternatives to our currently unsustainable situation might reasonably contain a number of alternatives:
“Moderate wealth tax”
Moderate ‘Wealth Reform’
Social democracy
Democratic socialism
“Positive Externality Profits” as opposed to the current dumping of ‘negative externality costs’ on ‘others’ to generate faux profits.
A second American people’s peaceful “Political/economic & social Revolution Against Empire”
All of which would impose some level of constraints and improvements on this oppressive and tyrannous Disguised Global Crony Capitalist Empire — which is only HQed in, and ‘posing’ as our formerly promising and sometimes progressive country.
1
This is only 11, not even close to enough. Warren is spot on - tax but at least 2% all fortunes over $50million - I would start with her proposal. Not the proposal from the very people whose lives are such that they keep everyone below them down-pressed.
America is stupid. As are her ideas. Nothing but dumb right wing ideas like locking up asylum seekers and separating families.
7
Taxes? Let’s see Donald Trump’s!
5
This is the answer to the smug question "how're you going to pay for it?" whenever Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez propose a Green New Deal or affordable healthcare and education.
9
None of these people are stopped from taking huge amounts of their wealth and doing great things for the U.S. Could create a fund to help students pay down student debt faster, build shelters for illegal aliens and pay hospitals that write-off their unpaid medical bills, and so forth and so on. How many billions does a person need to be happy?
7
I expect the Democrats will include a wealth tax in their party platform, along with planks for tuition debt forgiveness, free college tuition, reparations for black Americans, and greatly increased estate taxes. The line for voters between the Democrats and Republicans will be brighter than ever. It'll be class against class and not all about Trump.
3
Anger is an energy! For forty years the rich have been kicking us up and down the street. There have always been a few of them that wanted to be responsible and they should set up a multi billion fund for Elizabeth Warren because she won’t take their money. Campaign slogan for the people is ‘the Rich need to pay!’ ‘And pay and pay and pay!’ Until equity, whatever that means, is restored to our nation. Economic equity has been written into law in Denmark. That seems like a great idea. That would take the smirk off McConnel’s face! And what a relief for all the hard working people to finally be assured that we all share in our collective fates! Campaign slogan; ‘Make them Pay!’
3
Simple. Stop voting republican. Vote out the republicans, after all they are the ones who created this unfair tax system (to benefit them self’s) to cheat the working man and enrich their donors. Then simply have a flat tax rate. I pay a nickel on the dollar and joe blow billionaire pays a nickel on the dollar. Everybody pays a nickel on the dollar. Simple fair and best of all nobody needs a CPA to understand their taxes for them.
7
Trickle down tax-onomics
1
Calling for a "moderate wealth tax" is an attempt to co-opt the whole progressive effort to bring my equity and justice to our economic system. Do not fall for this. Do not laud this pathetic, self-serving ploy.
1
Assuming people are going to come with pitchforks for these very-special billionaires, let's think about why that might be. It's probably not tax policy, which is basically a public decision about general matters not really involving a few people on the edge of the curve. Instead, my guess is that these very-special people are worried that they did personally-bad things to get their billion(s) and are concerned about the fallout. Confounding the question of how "progressive" tax rates might be ratcheted up to the levels of the socialist countries , with the question of people purloining money with muscle in illegal ways, for instance in violation of antitrust laws, are two different things. Such matters need to be distinguished by supposedly-sophisticated anlaysts like the Times.
1
Now is the time for the Walton family to step up to the plate.
2
That fact that third or fourth generation heirs like Simmons who never did a days work for their money (and in her case sued her relatives in a nasty fight over her share) exist call out for far higher inheritance taxes not wealth taxes to fix the problem.
2
While applauding this gesture, the bigger problem is that there are not enough signatories on this letter to begin with. For every one signer there are doubtless two or three zillionaires who would sign a letter to oppose it and then just continue to hire Mitch McConnell to yell “Socialism” any time something like this is proposed on the Senate.
6
". . . economic researchers estimate that the richest 0.1 percent of Americans will pay 3.2 percent of their wealth in taxes this year compared with 7.2 percent paid by the bottom 99 percent."
Good grief. I did not realize the disparity in percentage of taxes paid was that great. Even though 3.2% of a billion or million is a lot of money compared to 7,2% of only $85,000, in the end the very wealthy can afford to pay the higher amount whereas those struggling to get by can barely live on what they presently are making.
While on one hand I applaud the various members of the richest 0.1 percent of Americans who are endorsing a higher tax. But on the other hand, as long as the guy in the White House continues to support that godawful tax bill cut, this proposal is merely academic.
If those supporting members of the richest 0.1 percent of Americans truly feel that they should be taxed more, why wait until it becomes law? Why not donate whatever the added percentage would be to various programs that could help those in the greatest need? How many Americans go hungry every day - why not donate to the various food banks for starters?
There are a plethora of ways these wealthy individuals could help those in need. Why wait for their proposal to possibly become law? Why not make a difference TODAY?
6
Everything they taught us in junior high social studies about three branches of government elected by the people to carry out the will of the people is a lie. We all learn this eventually, one way or another. Well, some do. The reality is that we are a plutocracy. A coterie of billionaires use lobbyists and other means to hand legislation to the officials they help elect with dark money in order to have their way. They guide everything. They hide their money in corporations and institutions so they don't have to pay taxes. And they have no accountability for their role in all of our affairs from energy policies to finance code to agra business, big pharma, healthcare... "Democracy" is not the truth; it's the smoke screen to hide the truth. How noble that some billionaires should actually admit that they should pay taxes. Laughable.
20
A gesture.
No substitute for sound government policies on taxation and spending.
8
I suspect these billionaires understand the historical relationship to grotesque wealth. Either they allow themselves to be taxed to help support the people and infrastructure of the country that helped them amass their fortunes; or, they continue to support current Republican policies, and let their children wait for a revolution like France and Russia had, where wealth is redistributed in a less democratic way.
17
The problem is that progressives believe that someone else's money, tax dollars, are the tool to solve all social inequity. What they accomplish, though, is they destroy everything they touch, including the people they try to help. Democrat policies are and have always been, complete, utter, catastrophic failures.
12
Wealth redistribution has been going on for 40 years. From underpaid workers to overpaid management. Pay people fairly for their productivity and you don’t need to give them welfare. Example: Walmart workers getting food stamps. Your letter reveals a shallow understanding of what’s been going on. Dig a little deeper. Do you really think this crop of billionaires are so much better than businessmen from earlier eras? The playing field has been tilted, the rules rejiggered. Congress compromised. Voters uninformed. Incompetents on the court.
13
@RD Ayn Rand called, she wants her awful Objectivism back
3
@Gub Federally guaranteed student loans...an attempt to help the poor afford college, now no one can afford college...democrat policy disaster. Federal mandates to increase subprime loan holdings of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac collapsed the housing market thanks to Barney Frank and congressional democrats (read the Atlantic article from 2011 "hey barney frank, the government did cause the housing crisis") another progressive policy catastrophe, Johnson's great society incentivised single motherhood by paying welfare to poor single mothers...now 74% of all black children are born to single mothers, up from 24% in 1964. Another complete, utter disaster for the black community. Democrat ideas on economics are just dangerous. AOC talks about FDRs new deal as if it was a good thing. Another disaster. The last 100 years is littered with liberal policy failures
1
Better than then top wage earners..... who after all, are still working and who, even at the Tippett top, may be trying to acquire wealth despite having disproportionately high taxes. These are usually people at the peak of their careers and not the fat cats living off trust funds or off the proceeds from investments....
1
@ Mark Cheltenham - you’re right! Quietly contributing to reduce the federal debt without drawing attention to yourself is entirely possible.
Billionaires proposing to delay the feared revolution against them by dribbling a few bucks our way. Smacks of "let them eat cake".
3
Well these rich people have been talking about this for decades. So let’s get busy return Trumps tax breaks or stop buying your stock back and help zip codes across the country who are suffering. Outside of glittering lights rural,urban are suffering.
Every small town could deal with an organized infusion of cash . There is so much that could be done but sitting on money doesn’t get the hospitals to function for all doesn’t help climate change, doesn’t put food on the table.
Give us a list of these rich folks who want to be Americans again we can start calling them.
2
I would think that a bill answering this request would be something bipartisan that the House and Senate could finally agree about. How hard would it be to get it through? Not hard, since I doubt many elected officials would be affected by it. So, come on Congress, let's do it. If the Executive branch resists, that would tell us something important as well. With all the squabbles over bills and amendments, I think this idea is something all parties could say they did for the majority of Americans!
5
I hope these folks will use their vast resources to support local candidates up and down ballots across all 50 states that support more economic equality. We didn't end up here in one election cycle - but this message needs to be repeated over and over to counter the propaganda that has been broadcast over the past three decades, as others have pointed out. Laws and regulations reigned in these excesses once, legislators on the right side of this issue can do it again - provided they make it into office.
35
How frustrating the super rich have to request to be taxed and no one wants to do it. What is wrong with us.
163
Trump is so ignorant that he blames Amazon and Wal-Mart for not paying enough instead of blaming the tax code . But then he makes the tax rate even lower . We need a better President in 2020 .
11
@Jeanine
"Freedom, Liberty!!!!!"
Meanwhile, we could have really used that trillion and a half dollars recently given way. That is, interestingly, the amount they say we need to get the infrastructure project going. But I see the hand-wringing everywhere about 'how are we going to possibly pay for it'. We are what is wrong with us.
12
Something that has me concerned about Warren and her philosophy, she did not support Bernie in 2016, and now her platform is a carbon copy of Bernie 2016. She supported Hillary all the way even though their ideas clashed. Or did she want the Presidency herself and knew Bernie could have taken it all on a Sanders/Warren ticket.
We really could have beaten Trump. No doubt. If she is the nominee, I hope it Warren/Sanders.
The situation is critical, the prize should belong to the Democrats and played without a gamble.
2
If the wealthy want to do more for the public with their money, there are countless ways...build a school, build a hospital, build a homeless shelter, etc..all of which would be more cost effective and efficient use of money than paying it to the IRS.
Look at what percentage of tax revenue goes to war and debt payments today.
13
@Craig
Both can be done.
2
@Craig
A vote for Bernie.
A wealth tax is very difficult to administer and enforce. How to track and value all assets and liabilities, how to treat indirect interests like trusts, foundations, and other similar entities, how to determine which jurisdiction may tax assets located worldwide. This type of tax would be a great benefit for tax lawyers; not so much for government coffers.
8
The "Giving Club", led by Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, is an organization of 1%ers who have pledged to donate at least half of their fortunes to charity, either now or as part of their wills. It has 204 members and is growing quickly.
The wealth gap is at historic levels in the United States. A significant fraction of the fabulously wealthy recognize that this is bad for society and are not greedy.
Like the wealthy in this story, members of the Giving Club want to support the society that made it possible for them to be rich and should get more recognition.
16
@David
The Gates Foundation is more of a business that is involved in part, with pharmaceutical companies worldwide. You are being naive if you think Gates wants to share the wealth, they could be doing so much more for this country. They are not.
How many are homeless in Seattle? In the US? At least, every kid should have a computer and that would not put a dent in his bank account.
1
@s.whether
Please don't conflate the Gates Foundation with the Giving Club. They are entirely different organizations. Gates runs the foundation, but he is only a leader of the Giving Club.
The Gates Foundation is one of the ways that Gates is giving back. They have many laudable programs, although some have been mismanaged. It's unrealistic for them to tackle every issue in a dysfunctional world. His priorities may differ from yours, but at least he's doing something.
1
Yes very rich people should pay taxes but here is the way to do it.
1-Fair, not onerous amounts. In some states big corporations/individuals pay no tax or actually get rebates. In other states they pay a fair share and should not be penalized for the other ones.
2-Don't announce it as a holy war against corporations ie they will pay thru the nose until the country is turned into a communist state.
3-Last but not least don't have the democrats turn it into their number one issue instead of something like a universal, quality, health care system.
6
I am grateful to the people who wrote and signed the letter. A big shout out to Elizabeth Warren for her plan to tax the very wealthy. It is important to find solutions to the many problems America must face and this idea is an important contribution.
91
The problem with a wealth tax is defining and measuring wealth. How do you determine the value of a small business, for example? Or a work of art? Wealth taxes would require appraisals of all sorts of unique assets that have not had any recent comparable sale that would help set a value. Also, who would have to report their wealth on a wealth tax return? If the cutoff is $50 million, how would one know whether they need to file the return or not? Most people's net worth is just a guess.
I think a wealth tax would result in thousands of court cases where the wealthy are represented by fleets of high powered lawyers and expert witnesses going up against some poor government employee.
7
@Marty Even assuming everything you say is true, is that a reason not to collect it? The cost of such court cases would pale in comparison to the estimated $200B per year that a tax would generate.
This is the same argument that advocates for "gun rights" put against any gun control law. "It won't stop EVERY gun death, so why try at all?" That's not the question. The question is: on balance, will it help even a little? If so, then the answer should be: go for it.
18
@Marty I agree that I don’t know exactly how much wealth I have, but once it gets anywhere close to $50,000,000.00 I’ll hire a Republican with stubby little fingers to figure it out.
3
@Michael I think it would be easier to simply increase the marginal income and capital gains tax rates. All the infrastructure for collecting those taxes is already in place. All the mountains of rules, regulations, definitions, and procedures already exist. A new tax such as a wealth tax would require all sorts of planning, rule-making, and implementation, including huge battles in congress over all sorts of arcane details and loopholes.
I endorse this concept and applaud the enlightened self-interest of those understanding that failure to narrow the cavernous wealth gap will eventually lead to pitchforks and torches.
51
Disingenuous virtue signaling at best. Who on this list DOESN’T have a shell foundation or corporation to harbor capital away from potential taxation?
9
There is nothing to stop any of these billionaires from volunteering to write checks to the federal government for the amount of money they think they should be taxed.
21
@Sue
We're a society based on laws and rules, not just a collection of individuals. We need a societal solution, not one based on individual whims.
9
OoH!
Great solution.
What? Are you afraid they are going to come after you next?
I'm considered a millionaire, and I don't have a problem with wealthy people being taxed progressively.
What's your issue?
2
Yes there is: It's the IRS. They will calculate that you overpaid and send a refund.
Just about every one on that list on that list has created a tax exempt foundation which shelters their wealth from both income tax and estate taxes. Although their pet causes and projects may be worthy, all of those untaxed trillions are badly needed to improve pubic infrastructure, education, healthcare, social security and so on. Which would you rather have, Mark Zuckerberg, ( motto” move fast and break things”) deciding where his untaxed money is spent or a shiny new airport terminal and a social security check when you are old and frail? Come on billionaires, you can pony more than a “moderate wealth tax!
13
This is disingenuous. Anyone can contribute to reduce the Federal debt. What theyre really saying is to tax other people
16
Doesn't seem disingenuous, they say it explicitly. In essence: We will gladly pay and let's tax those who will not.
And there lies our National Debt.
$21 Trillion.
7
I’d like to sign a letter about the government spending less instead of taxing more.
13
@Midwest Josh
So that our infrastructure can deteriorate even more? So that even more bridges can crumble? So our teachers, police, and firefighters can be even more underpaid? So that our air and water can be dirtier?
Taxes pay for public goods that are essential to living a happy life. Why is it that so many Americans do not see the connection between taxes and their own wellbeing? Because for decades they have been sold a bill of goods by people who do not have Americans’ best interests at heart and are only interested in their own wallets.
114
@Midwest Josh Why not both?
1
@Midwest Josh
I want both!
Wealth taxes are difficult because they cause people to hide their wealth. Income and inheritance taxes with high cutoffs will work just fine. During the most prosperous era in American growth the top tax bracket was 70%. And we were the world's largest creditor, not the world's largest debtor. Wonder why?
11
@Jonathan
The French had a wealth tax but abolished it in 2018 because of difficulties with evaluation and enforcement. They replaced it with a real estate tax for properties anywhere in the world. Not sure how properties held by LLCs or shell corps are treated.
Fantastic. This DOES make a major difference.
Trickle Up, baby.
16
@EC
Yes, money is buoyant; it will naturally drift to the top. So we need pumps to push the wealth to the bottom, where it will drift upwards again, benefiting the economy of everyone.
Nobody has even wondered why those who don't need a tax break are the only ones that get tax breaks. And why poor people keep voting for the slobs that give those tax breaks? To some its obvious but others have been so heavily propagandized with made to influence phrases like job creators, socialism, freedom caucus, and on and on to the point they actually believe that taxing the wealthy is undemocratic. Probably the most insane notion ever planted in the heads of the zombie population. And then they march. They march to the polls and vote for Republicans. They march to the rallies and shout racist slogans. They march to the church where they are told to vote Republican because of abortion, a health issue disguised as a political issue to dupe these very people. They march to the gun store and buy tons of ammunition to protect against the federal government that's coming to get them when they've already been gotten. Then, after all that marching, they get angry and shoot up a school, or a church, or a disco. And those responsible, those getting away with the crime laugh all the way to their second and third yacht. Wake up America, you are being had.
338
@JW beautifully written. the saddest thing of all is each year there are fewer a fewer Americans smart enough to understand this and instead become part of the Zombie Marchers that you so eloquently describe
30
@Zenster I totally agree with you all. Majority of The conservatives are poor or uneducated and they vote simply because it is their tradition. The agenda like abortion is not typically relevant to their lives. But being uneducated they keep shooting themselves in their foot.
18
@Zenster
Add in the perversion of language to that.
Some in the lowest income worry more about the wealthiest peoples' taxes then their own.
The grotesque description of progressives is the real kicker here, considering it is pure projection on the part of the gop. Wake up indeed.
15
Why do we need more tax money? In my opinion the govt already wastes enough money on things like stupid military expeditions to far off places we have no business in setting foot on. What’s all this extra money going to bring? Just more govt bureaucracy to control the lives of the average America while the rich continue to do as they please (or just expatriate)
8
@Dom
Agree about the useless wars, but what about:
Education
Infrastructure
Maintaining Social Security and Medicare
Job programs for displaced workers
Disaster relief after flooding and hurricanes
R&D for tech, medicine, and climate solutions
We're all paying into this while the ultra-wealthy and many corporations enjoy a free ride with their tax breaks, offshore accounts, and loopholes. Is this fair? And can any country sustain itself this way?
120
@Dom
The extra money will reduce our deficit.
This won’t impact any wealth gap. This is a publicity stunt.
10
Yes this Tax will start on the richest billionaires but we all know where this will end ... as a tax on all successful individuals with wealth of of let's say $10M and then later to those with wealth of $1M ...
27
One step at a time.
14
@David
One might even call it... progressive taxation.
8
@David
the horror !!!
3
The theme is correct - increase taxes on targeted groups that pay less than the average person. Hillary Clinton defines wealthy as earning $250,000 or more. This is not correct as any in a SALT state will attest to.
Taxing wealth over 50 million is a good starting point but it is not enough. There is other low hanging fruit such as taxing carried interest as ordinary income, a tax on the stepped up basis on inherited wealth, municipal bond income, and capital gains.
149
@Brian
$250,000 is is more than three times my household income. I could live like a queen on that.
8
@Brian If one wants to tax the rich more and also generate the most revenue, while simultaneously reducing cheating and making sure the wealthy pay more than the poor, eliminate all deductions and pay a flat tax above a certain minimum (for example, 15% on any income above $15,000 a year). The countries that take this approach are able to fund the greatest amount of social services, partly because people feel it is fair and those who make more, pay more for the same services (a person making a million pays 100 times what someone making $25,000 pays, even though they get the same public health benefits, educational system, transportation and other public infrastructure). The Morman church has its member VOLUNTARILY give their 10% because of the perceived equity of such a tax. An added benefit; we would no longer need an army of accountants and lawyers whose only job is to prevent the wealthy from paying taxis.
19
@Brian A wealth tax eliminates all the financial shenanigans like the carried interest rule that the ultra wealthy engage use to avoid tax. There would be no benefit to doing it because you would still pay the wealth tax.
12