Bernie Sanders offers bill to tax Billionaires wealth gains during pandemic

[NewYorkExpress]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/510939-sanders-offers-bill-to-tax-billionaires-wealth-gains-during-pandemic

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Thursday introduced legislation to impose a 60-percent tax on billionaires’ wealth gains from March 18 through the end of the year, and to use the revenue raised by the tax to direct Medicare to pay all Americans’ out-of-pocket health-care expenses for a 1-year period.

The bill from Sanders, a prominent progressive and runner-up in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, connects two of his longtime priorities: reducing inequality and providing federal health-care coverage for all Americans.

Sanders said Thursday that the measure is designed to help people who are struggling during the pandemic.

<snip>

Sanders introduced the bill along with Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.).

I like the idea, but there's no way it's passing the Senate. I'm not even sure it would pass the Senate if Democrats had the majority.

I am proud of Senator Gillibrand (my junior Senator) for co-sponsoring, though.

[GP270watch]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

[NewYorkExpress]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

Not high enough.

Needs to be 100%.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I am convinced that Bernie should of been the nominee, not Biden and I voted  correctly, if I am wrong so be it.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Great idea!

[GeneralMacArthur]

Are you even allowed to introduce ex post facto taxes like this?  I'm no legal expert but it seems to me that a tax is a penalty for an action and it's a violation of the 9th amendment to introduce penalties for actions that have already happened.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

Regardless of whether you think a wealth tax is a good idea or not, and regardless of whether you would agree with the ruling or not, there's the little problem that it definitely would be ruled to be a direct tax by SCOTUS, effectively making such a tax a nightmare to administer.

Take for example, the following: I live in South Carolina. I own stock in a Delaware corporation that is traded on the NYSE. Does my property get counted as being in South Carolina, New York, or Delaware for purposes of apportionment when it is subject to a Federal direct tax?

There are plenty of other ways to tax the rich without having to deal with the constitutional problems of a wealth tax.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Are you even allowed to introduce ex post facto taxes like this?  I'm no legal expert but it seems to me that a tax is a penalty for an action and it's a violation of the 9th amendment to introduce penalties for actions that have already happened.

Ex post facto and taxes would only intersect if the due date for a tax were set prior to the date the tax was enacted into law.

[T'Chenka]

I am convinced that Bernie should of been the nominee, not Biden and I voted  correctly, if I am wrong so be it.

Our Father who art on Atlas, hallowed be thy name

[GeneralMacArthur]

Are you even allowed to introduce ex post facto taxes like this?  I'm no legal expert but it seems to me that a tax is a penalty for an action and it's a violation of the 9th amendment to introduce penalties for actions that have already happened.

Ex post facto and taxes would only intersect if the due date for a tax were set prior to the date the tax was enacted into law.

But the tax is on income collected prior to the date the tax was enacted into law, so if you have collected income you already have no way to avoid paying the tax.

To my eyes, it's similar to if you were to say that everyone who wore red socks this year is going to prison, but the roundups won't start until 2021.  It's already too late for me to escape the punishment for wearing red socks, which had no consequences at the time.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

This quarantine period without the innovations created by these billionaires may have fully collapsed American society, and ol' Breadline Bernie's response is to institute an unconstitutional punitive tax/bill of attainder. America dodged a bullet in that primary twice.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

We already have a tax for when people get a lot richer in a particular year, it's called an income tax.

[VBM]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

We already have a tax for when people get a lot richer in a particular year, it's called an income tax.

It’s not enough.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

We already have a tax for when people get a lot richer in a particular year, it's called an income tax.

It’s not enough.

If that's the issue why not raise rates, maybe creating some new brackets, rather than a whole new kind of tax?

[GP270watch]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

We already have a tax for when people get a lot richer in a particular year, it's called an income tax.

 We have a tax code where the wealthy pay low taxes as a percentage of income on an increasingly concentrated share of all the wealth. So no the tax code is not adequate to deal with the problem of wealth inequality.

[GP270watch]

This quarantine period without the innovations created by these billionaires may have fully collapsed American society, and ol' Breadline Bernie's response is to institute an unconstitutional punitive tax/bill of attainder. America dodged a bullet in that primary twice.

 The quarantine without the resources of the Federal government would have collapsed society. Everything these billionaires "innovated" was created on the public backbone. GPS, The Highways, nearly the entire aviation system, USPS, The Internet, are massive government infrastructure that is really what is essential. For us to make the public investments we need for the next 100 years of innovation the government and the public can not be broke and thinking that billionaires are the real innovators is extremely shortsighted and ideological but not very logical or reality based.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Are you even allowed to introduce ex post facto taxes like this?  I'm no legal expert but it seems to me that a tax is a penalty for an action and it's a violation of the 9th amendment to introduce penalties for actions that have already happened.

Ex post facto and taxes would only intersect if the due date for a tax were set prior to the date the tax was enacted into law.

But the tax is on income collected prior to the date the tax was enacted into law, so if you have collected income you already have no way to avoid paying the tax.

To my eyes, it's similar to if you were to say that everyone who wore red socks this year is going to prison, but the roundups won't start until 2021.  It's already too late for me to escape the punishment for wearing red socks, which had no consequences at the time.

By that bizarre reasoning, it would be unconstitutional to ever increase the assessment or the millage rate on property tax.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Are you even allowed to introduce ex post facto taxes like this?  I'm no legal expert but it seems to me that a tax is a penalty for an action and it's a violation of the 9th amendment to introduce penalties for actions that have already happened.

Ex post facto and taxes would only intersect if the due date for a tax were set prior to the date the tax was enacted into law.

But the tax is on income collected prior to the date the tax was enacted into law, so if you have collected income you already have no way to avoid paying the tax.

To my eyes, it's similar to if you were to say that everyone who wore red socks this year is going to prison, but the roundups won't start until 2021.  It's already too late for me to escape the punishment for wearing red socks, which had no consequences at the time.

By that bizarre reasoning, it would be unconstitutional to ever increase the assessment or the millage rate on property tax.

Well, assessments are built into a contract.  As for property tax, I don't know much about that but I would think those are typically raised for the upcoming year rather than for the previous/current year?

I could be wrong, I don't know.  Just phrasing my intuition.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

The revolution carries on. You can lose a primary, but you can't kill a idea.

[PSOL]

The revolution carries on. You can lose a primary, but you can't kill a idea.

Well, that and the fact that material conditions makes this policy kind of a major effort to prevent government revenue from crashing in the face of the worst economic crash in 90 years.

[Torie]

This is perhaps just about the worst idea introduced into the public square in a very long time. Take a snap shot in time to tax the unrecognized gain, ignoring the prior losses, and stick it to a very select few, based on the administratively difficult if not near impossible task of calculating their wealth, many of whom might be tempted to decamp and renounce their citizenship to avoid the tax. The idea of course will go nowhere. I doubt if even Bernie himself takes this idea very seriously.

Having said that, the estate tax is too low, particularly inasmuch as you get a step up in tax basis, so any unrecognized gains upon death go away, and the deduction for giving money away to charity upon death to divert money away from the federal coffers is too high. But that is all too technical for those raging bulls who need a red bandanna waived in their face to get animated.

While we are at it, we should "defund" the police too. Do those in the vanguard of the revolution even know what the word "defund" means?

Meanwhile we keep exploring how much we can ratchet up the debt without interest rates taking off. If they do take off, then the roof will fall in. A couple of trillion here, and a couple of trillion there, and before you know it, we start talking about really money.

[Orwell]

So correct me if I'm wrong wouldn't this make Musk, Bezos, etc. sell off large parts of their estates to be able to afford this? Of Bezos net worth 176/190 billion is tied up in amazon shares as he owns 54 million shares of the company. Also, it's interesting how Sanders proposes this for after March 18, which it seems to be the low point of many of these stock prices. Back to the point Bezos net worth has increased by 64 billion since March 18, so that transitions to about 39 billion I don't think Bezos has enough money to pay an additional 39 billion in Taxes.

This is perhaps just about the worst idea introduced into the public square in a very long time. Take a snap shot in time to tax the unrecognized gain, ignoring the prior losses, and stick it to a very select few, based on the administratively difficult if not near impossible task of calculating their wealth, many of whom might be tempted to decamp and renounce their citizenship to avoid the tax. The idea of course will go nowhere. I doubt if even Bernie himself takes this idea very seriously.

Having said that, the estate tax is too low, particularly inasmuch as you get a step up in tax basis, so any unrecognized gains upon death go away, and the deduction for giving money away to charity upon death to divert money away from the federal coffers is too high. But that is all too technical for those raging bulls who need a red bandanna waived in their face to get animated.

While we are at it, we should "defund" the police too. Do those in the vanguard of the revolution even know what the word "defund" means?

Meanwhile we keep exploring how much we can ratchet up the debt without interest rates taking off. If they do take off, then the roof will fall in. A couple of trillion here, and a couple of trillion there, and before you know it, we start talking about really money.

Based Old man!

[DINGO Joe]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

We already have a tax for when people get a lot richer in a particular year, it's called an income tax.

It’s not enough.

If that's the issue why not raise rates, maybe creating some new brackets, rather than a whole new kind of tax?

Well, of course, there is a whole industry devoted to ensure the wealthy man's income is funneled in a way to avoid pesky "income" taxes.

[Never Made it to Graceland]

This quarantine period without the innovations created by these billionaires may have fully collapsed American society, and ol' Breadline Bernie's response is to institute an unconstitutional punitive tax/bill of attainder. America dodged a bullet in that primary twice.

Please be satire.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Anybody who was crying about a wealth tax last year looks like a damn fool. Bezos lost 25% of Amazon in a divorce and is richer today than he was before the divorce, He's also sold large chunks of his shares too and yet he's richer than ever. A wealth tax as proposed by Elizabeth Warren on 2% over $50 million and 6% over a billion is needed.

We already have a tax for when people get a lot richer in a particular year, it's called an income tax.

It’s not enough.

If that's the issue why not raise rates, maybe creating some new brackets, rather than a whole new kind of tax?

Because this taxes economic activity and the rate at which one amasses a certain kind of economic power, not the power itself. That can have negative effects in the wider economy beyond a certain level (n.b. not net negative at the current level by a long way, IMO) and also cannot account for people who are so wealthy that they amass power off of interest. Slowing the rate at which more wealth is acquired does not really solve the problem of a class of people wielding excess influence off of the wealth they’ve already amassed.

Scaling down from billionaires as an example, there are often vast differences in the standards of living between households earning the same income because of ownership (or the lack of) property (in addition to other costs-of-living issues, although it’s far more important than most of the rest). Indeed, the black American middle class has especially suffered since the 2008 crisis (compared to exclusively white households with similar income levels) precisely because of property ownership. Income tax can be useful, but often too blunt a tool in isolation.