Elizabeth Warren introduces a wealth tax

[citygator]

What would a proper tax policy look like?

Pretty much like ours now:
My structure

• 0% up to $40k
• 25% from $40k–$1M
• 30% from $1M–$10M
• 35% >$10M
• No deductions
• Capital = ordinary income

Federal Tax is not the only one. There are federal, state, local and city taxes and fees and other costs which add up. Examples would be toll roads and bridge tolls. Sales taxes. also. The same for all and costing the poorer the most. Do expensive unions cost the communities much more than they are worth. Just examples.

No debate there. I agree the poor are burdened beyond income taxes.

 

[citygator]

I didn’t say any of that! Wow….but you leftists get incensed when it’s suggested that everyone pitch rather than give a total pass to half the country.

The top 10% pay the bulk of the income taxes, while the bottom 50% pay nothing. We see who is getting a total pass.

You’re so brainwashed and hateful that you lash out without making sense.

The top 10% earn the bulk of the income and pay the bulk of the taxes. You know what that is called? MATH.

No one is lashing out snowflake. You guys struggle with math.

I am going to take you fishing to two ponds the same size. One will have 2 fish in it. The other will have 25. Which one are you fishing in?

 

[pknopp]

One wonders why they believe in such profound failure. They must want the economy to crash so they can rebuild it as socialist economy. Sanders has been a life long communist and supporter of the USSR and Castro. Both failures and oppressive. Thats not a normal mind. Warren is no different

Have you not paid attention to the markets? What until the high fuel prices really starts hitting.

 

[Winston]

I’d like to see a financial breakdown of how she arrived at this:

1) How much will this tax bring in, given that only 0.05% of people even have $50 million - the point at which the tax starts.

2) How many trillions would the proposals she wants (free college, Medicare for everyone, etc.) actually cost?

She’s counting on the ignorance of the American left.

Under the bill, the country’s wealthiest 260,000 households would pay a 2% annual tax on fortunes valued at over $50 million and an additional 1% on the net worth of households and trusts above $1 billion. The legislation would also impose a 40% “exit tax” on ultrarich individuals who renounce their citizenship for evasion purposes and would give the Internal Revenue Service $100 million in new funding.

'The Current Tax Code Is Rigged,' Plus 6.2 Trillion Other Reasons to Tax America's Ultrarich | Common Dreams

Three Democrats reintroduced the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, which would generate an estimated $6.2 trillion in revenue by taxing US fortunes over $50 million.

www.commondreams.org

There are 135 million households in the United States, so it works out to less hardly one tenth of one percent of households. Not many. But revenue?

about 260,000 American families (approximately the top .15%) would be liable for the wealth tax in 2026 and that the tax would raise $6.17 trillion over the ten-year budget window 2026-2035, of which $0.74 trillion would come from the billionaire 1% surtax.

https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/ultra-millionaire_tax_act_score.pdf

That is some serious change. And I know, it like makes no sense. Until you understand this,

“Nearly 50% of all consumer spending now comes from the top 10% of earners."

'100% Completely Unsustainable': Billionaire Wealth Manager Issues New Warning About US Inequality | Common Dreams

Wealth inequality in the US has reached unsustainable levels, with the top 10% of earners now accounting for nearly half of all consumer spending.

www.commondreams.org

Like the article says, that is completely unsustainable. It doesn't matter what your politics are. That type of dynamic can not sustain a society, period.

 

[HikerGuy83]

It's a tax on assets - "every dollar owned", including stock portfolios with unrealized gains. I'd bet peoples housing and property assessments are included in the net worth calculation.

It's always more welfare for people, nothing to pay down the national debt.

Government from cradle to grave.

Sigh....This is why I support common sense restrictions on the 19th amendment.

Sure, it won't go anywhere now but this is what we have to look forward to if the dems ever see total power again.

Did she mention the spending cuts we need in her legislation?

 

[HikerGuy83]

Under the bill, the country’s wealthiest 260,000 households would pay a 2% annual tax on fortunes valued at over $50 million and an additional 1% on the net worth of households and trusts above $1 billion. The legislation would also impose a 40% “exit tax” on ultrarich individuals who renounce their citizenship for evasion purposes and would give the Internal Revenue Service $100 million in new funding.

'The Current Tax Code Is Rigged,' Plus 6.2 Trillion Other Reasons to Tax America's Ultrarich | Common Dreams

Three Democrats reintroduced the Ultra-Millionaire Tax Act, which would generate an estimated $6.2 trillion in revenue by taxing US fortunes over $50 million.

www.commondreams.org

There are 135 million households in the United States, so it works out to less hardly one tenth of one percent of households. Not many. But revenue?

about 260,000 American families (approximately the top .15%) would be liable for the wealth tax in 2026 and that the tax would raise $6.17 trillion over the ten-year budget window 2026-2035, of which $0.74 trillion would come from the billionaire 1% surtax.

https://www.warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/ultra-millionaire_tax_act_score.pdf

That is some serious change. And I know, it like makes no sense. Until you understand this,

“Nearly 50% of all consumer spending now comes from the top 10% of earners."

'100% Completely Unsustainable': Billionaire Wealth Manager Issues New Warning About US Inequality | Common Dreams

Wealth inequality in the US has reached unsustainable levels, with the top 10% of earners now accounting for nearly half of all consumer spending.

www.commondreams.org

Like the article says, that is completely unsustainable. It doesn't matter what your politics are. That type of dynamic can not sustain a society, period.

Really don't care.

They don't stop spending money....they can shove their tax increases.

Warren, the woman paid 350K to teach a single class.

 

[1srelluc]

Did she mention the spending cuts we need in her legislation?

No, just more grift streams. It's what the vile dems live on you know.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I support a very hefty wealth tax...


applied to all the movie stars who open their trap to virtue signal at every opportunity.

 

[HikerGuy83]

No, just more grift streams. It's what the vile dems live on you know.

Winston and the rest of the jealous class just can't get over the idea that the government really isn't big brother.

It's more like alcoholic Uncle Joe.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Under the bill, the country’s wealthiest 260,000 households would pay a 2% annual tax on fortunes valued at over $50 million and an additional 1% on the net worth of households and trusts above $1 billion. The legislation would also impose a 40% “exit tax” on ultrarich individuals who renounce their citizenship for evasion purposes and would give the Internal Revenue Service $100 million in new funding.

Post ex-facto.

Never going to fly.

 

[Winston]

So when all those people have to immediately convert hard assets to liquid assets, prices for those assets will drop requiring more selling, and more value drop...

If you want to destroy an economy, a wealth tax is a sure way of doing it.

As if that is going to happen. If nothing else, they will borrow the money. I mean you people really are clueless. Probably be an interest only loan and they will write the interest off as an expense. LMAO.

 

[martybegan]

As if that is going to happen. If nothing else, they will borrow the money. I mean you people really are clueless. Probably be an interest only loan and they will write the interest off as an expense. LMAO.

And by borrowing swallow up all the equity everyone else needs, if they can find lenders.

It's a bad idea any way you try to justify your envy of others.

 

[Winston]

I am going to take you fishing to two ponds the same size. One will have 2 fish in it. The other will have 25. Which one are you fishing in?

The one in which the fish are hungry.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Post ex-facto.
Never going to fly.

Never mind the constitution does not give the federal government the power to tax "wealth".

 

[HikerGuy83]

I am going to take you fishing to two ponds the same size. One will have 2 fish in it. The other will have 25. Which one are you fishing in?

The deeper one.

Think about it.

I love how I look at your stupid posts from time to time and am quickly reminded why I have you on ignore.

 

[Winston]

And by borrowing swallow up all the equity everyone else needs, if they can find lenders.

It's a bad idea any way you try to justify your envy of others.

What do you think those people are doing now? Seriously. That is where you have no clue. Yes, we see people make it big, and we make a big deal about it. But there is entrenched multi-generational wealth within this country that you can't possibly imagine. It is not a "Deep State", it is not even a state. It is not part of those conventions of the ultra-wealthy, at least not the ones covered by the press.

 

[task0778]

1. I think a wealth tax is a definite possibility if and when the democrat regain their majorities in the House and Senate and also run the White house.

2. They always do a linear calculation of the revenue increase without considering the behavioral changes that people make when taxes go up or down. It is NEVER as much as they say.

3. How the hell do you determine what a person's true wealth is? Are you going to include unrealized gains in various investments, not just stocks and bonds by real estate and everything else? And how many new IRS employees will be needed?

4. There will be a blowback here, as wealthy people find ways to reduce their exposure to this wealth tax, and that could mean a substantial reduction in investments that result in higher economic growth and more jobs. I've often marveled at how the democrats can believe they can screw the rich without any consequences.

5. Does everyone realize what happens when the gov't takes in more revenue? Yup, they spend it. I can see where maybe the annual deficit goes down from $1.9 trillion to $1.8 trillion, whoop-de-do. The gov't will never get its fiscal house in order until they find a way to control their spending. And democrats such as Warren will never allow that to happen.

 

[martybegan]

What do you think those people are doing now? Seriously. That is where you have no clue. Yes, we see people make it big, and we make a big deal about it. But there is entrenched multi-generational wealth within this country that you can't possibly imagine. It is not a "Deep State", it is not even a state. It is not part of those conventions of the ultra-wealthy, at least not the ones covered by the press.

There's that envy again.

And yet you think government taking their $$ will reach down to you, unless of course you are one of the fraudsters sucking at the government teat