Wealth tax on billionaires wouldn’t fund the government for a year, expert says

TL;DR Summary
Fortune cites Penn Wharton Budget Model director Kent Smetters arguing that wealth taxes on the ultrawealthy are an inefficient revenue tool: even seizing all wealth above $999 million would fund federal spending for only about seven to eight months, with high administrative costs and limited revenue. The piece notes that many OECD countries repealed wealth taxes due to low yields and cites California’s proposals as a case study in broader reform—advocating instead for stable, broad-based options like sales taxes or VAT and highlighting the political dynamics of tax policy and economic complexity.
- Making billionaires illegal by taxing their wealth wouldn’t even fund the government for a year, budget expert says Fortune
- How Much A Billionaire Tax Might Cost Mark Zuckerberg Or Kim Kardashian Forbes
- The Proposed California Wealth Tax Is Far Higher than 5 Percent Tax Foundation
- In San Francisco, Newsom rails against proposed billionaire tax, vows to protect homeless Californians Los Angeles Times
- Billionaire tax sparks intraparty war in California Politico
Reading Insights
Total Reads
0
Unique Readers
5
Time Saved
39 min
vs 40 min read
Condensed
99%
7,989 → 92 words
Want the full story? Read the original article
Read on Fortune