SNS: HANDICAPPING THE WEALTH TAX QUAGMIRE
 

 

"Next Year's News This Week"

Handicapping The WEALTH TAX Quagmire

By Berit Anderson

_______

Why Read: Ahead of the midterm elections, conversations about US wealth taxes - in all their varied forms - have become politically incendiary, rife with strong opinions but light on evidence. This week's Global Report looks to change that, combining analysis of domestic migration within and between states with historic responses of capital and investment to such policies across the US; and explaining how the states championing these policies - and their economies - are likely to be affected.

_______

No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar's worth of service rendered - not gambling in stocks but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means.

- Theodore Roosevelt, "The New Nationalism" speech, 1910

There are taxes that will slow down growth, like taxes on capital formation or labor, and there are taxes that will not affect growth, like taxes on, you know, well-to-do people like me. And I remind people, the world, when you slow down the economy, you are hurting the disadvantaged more than anybody else.

- Jamie Dimon, Chair & CEO, JPMorgan Chase,
CNBC interview, September 2020

 

The 2026 midterms are set to be a banner election for US wealth-tax initiatives in politically progressive tech states. For example:

  • Voters in California are weighing a 5% tax on the unrealized capital gains of the state's billionaires - a possibility that has prompted a rush on properties on the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe.

  • Voters in Washington state face an initiative to overturn the state's 9.9% tax on income over $1 million and prohibit future income taxes.

  • Colorado voters are facing two initiatives, one of which would eliminate the state's flat-rate income tax; the other would enshrine it in perpetuity.

Like conversations about police reform and Palestine, the topic of wealth taxation has become incendiary, dividing Americans sharply along economic and political lines.

 

Against Wealth Taxes: The Emotional Response

Among the very wealthy (or those who expect to become so), there is often a feeling of being wronged or targeted for having been successful. After creating hundreds or even thousands of jobs in a community, some high-net-worth achievers feel they are being forced out by way of taxes they feel they can't afford or don't want to pay. They don't want to move, but they believe there is no choice. Given their significant economic and political sway within their communities, they also tend to be very vocal about their options.

 

Against Wealth Taxes: The Rational Response

Common beliefs of those opposing wealth taxes include:

  • Wealth taxes will discourage the formation of new businesses in their communities.

  • Wealth taxes will cause large employers to leave or reallocate their investments elsewhere.

  • Wealth taxes will cause high-net-worth individuals to leave their state en masse and may make competitive recruitment more difficult.

  • Wealth taxes may actually reduce individual state tax revenues due to relocation.

 

For Wealth Taxes: The Emotional Response

By contrast, those on the lower end of the inequality spectrum are tired of how the wealth that successful entrepreneurs have brought to their community has warped affordability. Some work multiple jobs, and yet, with skyrocketing property costs, struggle to pay rent. They can't afford their healthcare. The public education of their children is declining. The small businesses in these economies struggle with rising rents, the cost of goods, and the increasing toll of paying their employees a living wage. Many are angry that all of this is occurring in the same reality in which the top 1.5% of global earners now own 48.4% of the world's wealth and believe that billionaires or the ultra-wealthy are deliberately undermining public infrastructure to augment their wealth.

 

For Wealth Taxes: The Rational Response

Common beliefs of those in support of wealth taxes include:

  • Wealth taxes will generate additional revenue that will improve affordability for housing, education, and/or other services.

  • Many high-net-worth individuals have built their wealth on the backs of community infrastructure - hiring employees educated by state revenues and transported on public transportation and roads.

  • Large employers who aren't willing to invest in the communities in which they operate shouldn't be able to benefit from the goods and services paid for by taxpayers.

  • Removing the adverse effects of those that relocate outweighs the benefits of their employment and creates room for additional values-aligned employers to move in.

I would encourage SNS members to avoid falling concretely to either side of this conversation - both of which oversimplify the likely outcomes of these types of initiatives. Like many similar national debates of this tenor, I believe this one has been weaponized by foreign and local actors to further political polarity, foment anger, and pump ratings.

Don't become a cog in the outrage machine.

Whether or not this election cycle's slate of wealth taxes passes, the patterns driving their popularity - inequality and inflation - seem to be accelerating, so we can expect them to stick around. As such, it's important that we understand their real, demonstrated impacts.

The reality, as usual, lies somewhere in the middle.

 

What Do We Know?

Let's focus on what we do know, the science that demonstrates outcomes of these types of policies, and where both sides of the debate would likely find agreement:

  • Inequality is a real problem in the US, with long-term economic consequences of its own.

  • Different types of wealth taxes - income tax, capital gains tax, unrealized gains tax - have different outcomes. (See Jamie Dimon quote above.)

  • The scale of a wealth tax - and not just its type - may change its outcomes.

  • The nature of state tax-law variability and affordability does affect migration patterns within and between states.