Skip to main content

New top story from Time: To Build Back Better, Tax Ultra-Wealthy Families Like Ours

https://ift.tt/2Y1lvIB

After a summer of speculation, the contours of the deal needed to pass President Joe Biden’s popular “Build Back Better” agenda are becoming clear. To win key votes, Congress will have to find fresh sources of revenue to match new spending. Fortunately, there is an economically sound, overwhelmingly popular path that the President is endorsing: requiring ultra-wealthy families like ours to pay more in taxes.

Doing so would mean reforming a tax code that allows the wealthiest to build and maintain fortunes without paying their share in taxes. Ultra-wealthy families further reduce their tax burdens to a pittance by deferring sale of their appreciated assets, borrowing against those assets and structuring their charitable giving. From 2014 to 2018, America’s 25 wealthiest people amassed a combined $401 billion, but in some years paid zero federal income tax, according to ProPublica. The Biden Administration calculates that America’s richest 400 families pay an average annual income tax rate of just 8.2%.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]

Billionaires generate headlines, but a larger number of American families worth hundreds of millions—including ours—enjoy similar benefits. In 2018, a family in the most common income bracket (adjusted gross income of $50,000 to $75,000) paid average federal income taxes of $4,866. If their tax burden (relative to wealth) had been the same as our own, they would have paid less than $400.

Unless Congress acts, those who can afford to pay the most will continue to pay nothing, or relatively little, shortchanging urgent priorities. Unlike some, we do not view the existence of billionaires as a policy failure. But as investors, we see the tiny effective tax rates paid by the ultra-wealthy undermining innovation, competitive capitalism and ultimately U.S. democracy. A status quo in which people who work for paychecks pay more in taxes, proportionately, than the wealthiest Americans is driving cynicism and kneecapping our national ambition.

Recent developments suggest this status quo could soon change. Last week, Biden lent his support to a billionaire’s income tax—a new tax on currently untaxed investment income for anyone whose wealth tops $1 billion. He did so as Senate and House leadership announced a framework to fully pay for the $3.5 trillion reconciliation package, which contains much of the Build Back Better agenda.

While income from wages is taxed immediately, many kinds of investment income are not taxed until assets are sold—if ever. Unlike most Americans, billionaires do not need wages or salaries. Instead, many use investment income to help fund their lifestyles by borrowing against appreciated assets at extremely low rates without paying much in income taxes. Taxing billionaires’ untaxed investment income would raise hundreds of billions for public investments such as high-speed internet, quality child care and clean drinking water. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, has championed this proposal. Various House members have supported a one-time version of the tax.

Read more: The Pandemic Made the Top 1% Richer. Why We Need a Wealth Tax

In addition to a billionaire’s income tax, Congress should include a small annual tax of 2% on fortunes above $50 million to ensure that families like ours also pull their weight. That measure, which Senators including Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) have advocated for, would raise hundreds of billions annually to sustain economic growth. Wealthy countries including Switzerland and Norway have implemented versions of a wealth tax successfully, and it would be relatively cheap to administer across the roughly 100,000 U.S. households who would pay it.

Lawmakers should include both of these revenue provisions in the final reconciliation bill. They are smart policy and smart politics. Among Democrats, Republicans, and independents, few issues attract more support than raising taxes on the ultra-wealthy. An overwhelming majority (71%) of Americans supports an annual wealth tax on fortunes above $50 million, including 57% of Republicans. More than 60% of people with more than $1 million in investable assets support a wealth tax. Many billionaires even support it. In 1999, a certain former president currently residing in Florida proposed to tax himself with a wealth tax.

Including taxes on billionaires and ultra-millionaires dramatically increases support for infrastructure and other Build Back Better investments. Biden tweeted, amid the ongoing negotiations, that he was “sick and tired of the super-wealthy and giant corporations not paying their fair share in taxes.” It appears that voters, including those in crucial states, agree.

In West Virginia, funding the $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill with a billionaire’s income tax increases support from even (48% in favor, 47% oppose) to 2-1 in favor (65% in favor, 29% opposed)—a bipartisan supermajority. In Arizona, likely voters support the reconciliation bill when funded by a billionaire income tax by a 39-point margin (67% in favor, 28% opposed). These states are home to Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, respectively, whose votes will be needed to pass any final agreement.

It’s popular, powerful politics for a simple reason: higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy can pay for urgent, shared needs without overburdening anyone. Less than 1,000 Americans would pay a billionaire’s income tax. Only one-twentieth of the richest 1% would pay the annual tax on fortunes over $50 million. Taxes like these on billionaires and ultra-millionaires wouldn’t damage their quality of life—it certainly wouldn’t hurt ours—and no one who wasn’t already an ultra-millionaire would pay a cent under either policy.

Taxing America’s wealthiest citizens is productive and patriotic, not punitive. Improved roads and railways, safer neighborhoods and high-quality schools in every zip code boost economic freedom and allow working people to build wealth of their own. Foundations bearing the names of billionaire families frequently advocate for government action on productive investments like health care, education and climate change. Taxing a fraction of the fortunes of billionaire families would pay for scaling the most effective solutions in a way that philanthropy cannot.

For those worried about a backlash, trust us: There may be some whining and bluffing, but a wealth tax won’t hinder the drive of the wealthiest to invest in entrepreneurs. Ultra-wealthy people won’t renounce their citizenship en masse. Our family’s relative tax burden will still be light; billionaires’ will be manageable, to say the least.

Not everyone agrees. In response to ProPublica’s report, billionaire Carl Icahn asked incredulously, “Do you think a rich person should pay taxes no matter what?” For Americans who prefer economic freedom to free-riding, the answer should be a resounding “Yes!”

All of our wealth, in one way or another, is built on investments our country has already made. Additional investments will empower more Americans to compete in the global economy, strengthen America’s ability to compete with China, and give the wealthiest investors more reason to create jobs at home. We can pay for solutions to short- and long-term challenges without asking wage earners, small-business owners or future generations to pick up the tab.

Voters across the political spectrum view a system that asks Americans with massive fortunes to contribute so little to America’s future as fundamentally broken. They are right. Our estate attorneys might not thank us for pointing that out—but our grandchildren will.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FOX NEWS: Intermittent fasting may cause muscle loss more than weight loss, study says Intermittent fasting might not be as healthy as some may have thought.

Intermittent fasting may cause muscle loss more than weight loss, study says Intermittent fasting might not be as healthy as some may have thought. via FOX NEWS https://ift.tt/2ShpJp3

New top story from Time: ‘We Are Standing up for Equal Treatment Before the Law.’ Pennsylvania Abolishes Prison Gerrymandering

https://ift.tt/3koSa1Z A Pennsylvania commission responsible for drawing the state’s legislative districts voted 3-2 on Tuesday to end prison gerrymandering, the practice of counting prisoners where they are incarcerated rather than in their last known residence before incarceration. Advocates have lauded the move as helping right an injustice that unfairly skews the state’s political power away from urban areas and communities of color. The change will apply to those incarcerated in a state correctional facility or state facility for adjudicated delinquents—but not to individuals in federal or county prison facilities or those serving a life sentence. (A spokesperson for Democratic House Minority Leader Rep. Joanna McClinton says that federal and county prison facilities were excluded because they don’t fall under the state’s jurisdiction, while people given life sentences were excluded because they are not expected to return to their homes.) [time-brightcove not-tgx=”t...

Nifty hits 14,000-mark on last trading day of 2020 https://ift.tt/3mZHV3K

On the last trading day of 2020, the National Stock Exchange breached the 14,000-mark for the first time to trade at 14007.5 at 10:40 am. 

New top story from Time: California Has the Second Confirmed Case of the Coronavirus Variant in the U.S.

https://ift.tt/3pz6pSY California on Wednesday announced the nation’s second confirmed case of the new and apparently more contagious variant of the coronavirus, offering a strong indication that the infection is spreading more widely in the United States. Gov. Gavin Newsom announced the infection found in Southern California during an online conversation with Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. “I don’t think Californians should think that this is odd. It’s to be expected,” Fauci said. Newsom did not provide any details about the person who was infected. The announcement came 24 hours after word of the first reported U.S. variant infection, which emerged in Colorado. That person was identified Wednesday as a Colorado National Guardsman who had been sent to help out at a nursing home struggling with an outbreak. Health officials said a second Guard member may have it too. The cases triggered a host of questions about h...

New top story from Time: A ‘History of Exclusion, of Erasure, of Invisibility.’ Why the Asian-American Story Is Missing From Many U.S. Classrooms

https://ift.tt/2Pdr7LQ On the morning of March 17, Liz Kleinrock contemplated calling out of work. The shootings at three Atlanta-area spas had happened the night before, leaving eight dead including six women of Asian descent, and Kleinrock, a 33-year-old teacher in Washington, D.C., who is Asian-American, felt the news weighing on her heavily. But instead of missing work, she changed up her lesson plan. She introduced her sixth graders over Zoom to poems written by people of Japanese ancestry incarcerated during World War II. Her lesson included “My Plea,” printed in 1945 by a young person named Mary Matsuzawa who was held at the Gila River Relocation Center in Arizona: “ I pray that someday every race / May stand on equal plane / And prejudice will find no dwelling place / In a peace that all may gain.” “I feel like so many Asian elders have been targeted because of this stereotype that Asians are meek and quiet and don’t speak up and don’t say anything, and the...

FOX NEWS: Top baby names list for 2021 reveals familiar trends For the second year in a row, these two names are the most popular for girls and boys – leading BabyCenter's Top 100 Baby Names list.

Top baby names list for 2021 reveals familiar trends For the second year in a row, these two names are the most popular for girls and boys – leading BabyCenter's Top 100 Baby Names list. via FOX NEWS https://ift.tt/2ZZEl3u

FOX NEWS: Top baby names list for 2021 reveals familiar trends For the second year in a row, these two names are the most popular for girls and boys – leading BabyCenter's Top 100 Baby Names list.

Top baby names list for 2021 reveals familiar trends For the second year in a row, these two names are the most popular for girls and boys – leading BabyCenter's Top 100 Baby Names list. via FOX NEWS https://ift.tt/2ZZEl3u

Watch San Francisco’s Bike Network Bloom

Watch San Francisco’s Bike Network Bloom By Eillie Anzilotti From just a few stretches of scattered lanes in 2013, San Francisco’s protected bike network now stretches like a green web connecting more and more of the city. See how much has changed over the last eight years:   In just the blink of an eye, San Francisco has become one of the most bike-friendly cities in the U.S. To date, San Francisco has 464 miles of bikeways, including: 42 miles of protected bike lanes 78 miles of off-street paths and trails 21 miles of buffered bike lanes 139 miles of striped bike lanes As we’ve expanded the network of safer bicycle routes through San Francisco, more people are choosing to ride bicycles for recreation and transportation every year. Since 2006, travel by bicycle has grown by 184 percent citywide. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, bike counts hit an all-time high: in 2019, approximately 52,000 bicyclists were observed at 37 locations during peak periods, a 14 percent incre...

Punjab farmers stir is to siphon off taxpayers' Rs 6,500 crore: Vijay Sardana https://ift.tt/3fN9niY

Farmers' protest against the Centre's three agriculture laws on Monday entered the fifth day. The farmers are demanding from the government to withdraw the three laws which according to them is not in the interest of the farming community. However, noted agriculture sector expert and economist, Vijay Sardana, said that the agitation is not about the laws, but it is about the traders who will be at loss.

New top story from Time: How Liberal White America Turned Its Back on James Baldwin in the 1960s

https://ift.tt/2QBsNzv In discussions about race relations today, the works of James Baldwin continue to speak to the present, even decades after they were written. So it is worth remembering that, at the very height of his influence, Baldwin experienced the same frustration that some Black activists, particularly on campus, feel about white liberals today: their refusal to acknowledge their complicity in the regime of white supremacy. In Baldwin’s case, the liberal backlash was widespread, and effectively marginalized him for a time. The very first piece on the front page of the very first issue of The New York Review of Books , Feb. 1, 1963, was a review of Baldwin’s The Fire Next Time by F. W. Dupee of the Columbia English department. Dupee (a former Communist Party organizer) took exception to Baldwin’s apocalyptic tone. “Do I really want to be integrated into a burning house?” Baldwin had written. The answer, Dupee wrote, is that “[s]ince you have no other, yes; and t...