3 ms·
I don't really like this plan. First of all it would be near impossible to enforce, because if you were to make $100mm net this year you would move it all to a
by dkokelley 18y ago
I don't really like this plan. First of all it would be near impossible to enforce, because if you were to make $100mm net this year you would move it all to a place where it is untouchable by the wealth tax. You might change citizenship or find some other loophole to hide your assets from the wealth counters.
Second, retirement would have to be looked at entirely differently. I assume the retired would only be taxed at a much lower rate, or not at all. But assigning any wealth tax on the retired implies a government mandated death age, just like a government mandated retirement. See: 'The Giver'
Finally, if you knew that your liquid wealth would be taxed at a certain rate, wouldn't you spend it on something? Houses, cars, stocks? What if Mark Zuckerberg was taxed on his artificial wealth? He can't really sell his FB shares to pay for it. If people knew that they HAD to keep 10% of their millions liquid for the rest of their life they would be less likely to invest it, since eventually they would need it.
I like the unique way of looking at the issue, but I think it's ultimately unworkable.