I thought Gate's commentary was on Warren's proposal for a 2%/yr tax on all assets (not income) in excess of $50m. The article instead seems to be entirely abo

I thought Gate's commentary was on Warren's proposal for a 2%/yr tax on all assets (not income) in excess of $50m. The article instead seems to be entirely about marginal tax rates. A wealth tax has a lot more implications than changes to the marginal tax rates on income and capital gains-- it has different economic effects and requires far more invasive interactions from the government. E.g. the content of Gates' home is largely his own private business, but under a wealth tax will he have to account for all his possessions and report them to the government? If not, then why wouldn't the tax be avoidable by buying expensive art? In the past, including recently, Gates has been pretty consistent about supporting higher tax rates for the wealthy, in particular citing estate taxes and capital gains as areas that deserved focus. (https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/13/bill-gates-suggests-higher-taxes-on-those-with-great-wealth.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/13/bill-gates-suggests-higher-t...). To me this suggests that NYT is just trying to create a bad guy opponent to make a boring policy discussion sound like something that requires pitchforks.