The Big Problem With Wealth Taxes (It's Unconstitutional)

New York Times ^ | November 7, 2019 | Daniel Hemel and Rebecca Kysar

[karpov]

...

The constitutional objection to wealth taxation is based on two clauses that require any “direct tax” to be apportioned among the states based on population. So, since 12 percent of the population lives in California, Californians must pay 12 percent of any direct tax.

For the Warren and Sanders wealth taxes, that would be a deal breaker. To match revenue fractions to population percentages, as the Constitution’s direct tax clauses demand, we estimate that the wealth tax rate in West Virginia — the poorest state per capita — would need to be roughly 10 times the rate in more affluent California and more than 20 times the rate in prosperous Connecticut.

The Warren and Sanders wealth taxes would very likely be classified by courts as “direct taxes.” Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist No. 36 that taxes on “houses and lands” were direct taxes. Supreme Court majorities have said on at least seven occasions that federal taxes on real property (land and buildings) are “direct taxes.” Congress enacted at least five federal property taxes in the 18th and 19th centuries and apportioned them based on state population each time.

The proposed wealth taxes would apply to real property, which would seem to make them “direct taxes.” Both plans would also tax personal property, which encompasses all assets other than land and buildings, like securities and art. Some wealth tax defenders argue that even if a tax on real property is “direct,” a tax on real plus personal property is not. The idea is that — by some feat of constitutional alchemy — combining the concededly unconstitutional tax on real property with the purportedly less problematic tax on personal property erases the flaw with the former.

[karpov]

The authors introduce themselves as liberal Democratic law professors who have donated to Democratic candidates.

[Crazieman]

Wait, liberal democrats read the Federalist papers and didn’t burst in to flames?

[Savage Beast]

It also wrecks the economy and destroys prosperity, and everybody suffers (except rich, powerful, self-serving politicians, of course).

[Erik Latranyi]

Their voices mean nothing to the socialists.....people like this are the first ones sent to the gulags.

[from occupied ga]

The other problem that no one seems to be addressing is that it makes the accumulation of wealth much more difficult if not in many cases impossible. So where is the incentive to produce and to innovate? Answer: there isn't one.

If you can't enjoy the fruits of your labors, why labor? Of course this is the goal of leftists like the despicable Fauxcahantas. They want the flow of all wealth controlled by the government with politicians like her picking the winners and losers for arbitrary and capricious reasons. Filth like Warren and her fellow Democrats have not the intelligence or the right to direct the economy. Their stupidity has been tried many times before (Venezuela being the latest example) and it has ALWAYS failed to deliver what it promised.

Democrat voters are obviously made of dark matter.

[fruser1]

The writers math is off a bit based on how they explain this.

If CA pays 12% due to having that % of the population then WVA paying 10 times that rate means 120% of the population lives in WVA.

[Gay State Conservative]

For later

[I want the USA back]

It’s not a gd tax! It’s confiscation! The property “tax” is not a tax. It’s progressive confiscation, 3% per year. The wealth “tax” would be the same. Stop calling it a tax!

[central_va]

It also wrecks the economy and destroys prosperity, and everybody suffers

You are talking about the income tax, right?

[central_va]

The other problem that no one seems to be addressing is that it makes the accumulation of wealth much more difficult if not in many cases impossible. So where is the incentive to produce and to innovate? Answer: there isn't one.

No, that is what the income tax does.

[Savage Beast]

Well, I wasn’t, but it also applies. Excellent observation.

[from occupied ga]

No, that is what the income tax does

WHile income tax makes wealth creation more difficult it does not completely destroy it. If you want proof you simply have to look at the number of billionaires and millionaires in the country today. A wealth tax destroys accumulated wealth. (although property taxes and inflation do this as well)

[rdcbn]

I was wondering when someone was going to get around to mentioning that that slight little hang up on the wealth tax

[DIRTYSECRET]

Tell that to John Roberts.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Constitutional is whatever John Roberts says it is after getting out of bed and reading his reviews in the New York Times.

[ml/nj]

Who worries about little things like Constitutionality these days?

(They just passed some law about cruelty to animals. I’d love to know which enumerated power this fell under.)

ML/NJ

[RatRipper]

Amen to that

[PGalt]

Deranged megalomaniac criminals and their accomplice has a gun near the back of your head. (Whoa I didn’t see that shot coming. He was smiling and talking to me a few seconds ago.)

[Texas resident]

It is Unconstitutional, but when dimrats are in power, the Constitution is just a speed bump to them.

[ReleaseTheHounds]

As Ayn Rand wrote/said back in the 70’s when this was being floated, “By What Right?!!!” Where in the Constitution is there permission to take the wealth from citizens?

But these bast*ards never give up.