Majority of Americans favor wealth tax on very rich: Reuters/Ipsos poll
Send a link to a friend
[January 10, 2020]
By Howard Schneider and Chris Kahn
WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - The idea of
imposing a wealth tax on the richest Americans has elicited sharply
divergent views across a spectrum of politicians, with President Donald
Trump branding it socialist and progressive Democratic presidential
contenders Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders prominently
endorsing it.
But it may have broad public support, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll
that found nearly two-thirds of respondents agree that the very rich
should pay more.
Among the 4,441 respondents to the poll, 64% strongly or somewhat agreed
that "the very rich should contribute an extra share of their total
wealth each year to support public programs" - the essence of a wealth
tax. Results were similar across gender, race and household income.
While support among Democrats was stronger, at 77%, a majority of
Republicans, 53%, also agreed with the idea.
A wealth tax is levied on an individual's net worth, such as stocks,
bonds and real estate, as well as cash holdings, similar in concept to
property taxes. It is separate from an income tax, which applies to
wages, interest and dividends, among other sources.
Asked in the poll if "the very rich should be allowed to keep the money
they have, even if that means increasing inequality," 54% of respondents
disagreed.
“Rich people have a right to blow their money on Lamborghinis and
world-wide cruises or whatever,” said Esin Zimmerman, 53, a lifelong
Republican from Madison, Minnesota, who wants higher taxes for the
wealthy. “But that money could be used in other ways that help people.”
Zimmerman said she would especially be in favor of a wealth tax that
would help pay for government programs for U.S. military veterans, or
help single parents with young children. “It could put the border wall
up,” she said.
The results may reflect how the economic changes of the past roughly 20
years, from globalization to the financial crisis, have shaped attitudes
about economic policy.
According to polling by Gallup, concerns about the rich paying too
little actually declined through the 1990s and early 2000s, a relative
boom period for the United States. But the concerns have been climbing
since the crisis years of 2007 to 2009, from 55% to more than 60% as of
2016.
The Reuters/Ipsos results suggested even stronger support for an annual
levy on total wealth, not just income. Warren and Sanders have touted
the idea as a way to help pay for major social programs like Medicare
for All and to reverse a stark rise in the share of wealth owned by the
very richest Americans, known as the "1 percent."
The poll also points to changing attitudes toward basic ideas such as
“keeping what you earn.”
[to top of second column]
|
The Charging Bull or Wall Street Bull is pictured in the Manhattan
borough of New York City, New York, U.S., January 16, 2019.
REUTERS/Carlo Allegri/File Photo
That notion, central to a winner-take-all brand of capitalism, got
mixed reviews. While 56% of Republicans agreed the very rich should
keep what they have regardless of the impact on inequality, 35% of
Republicans disagreed with the statement, as did 71% of Democrats.
Republican survey respondents interviewed by Reuters said they did
not see their support for a wealth tax conflicting with their party
ideals or their support for Trump.
Kathy Herron, 56, a Republican who lives in Santa Rosa, California,
said her support for Trump - a self-proclaimed billionaire - stems
from his hardline policies on illegal immigration. In her view, the
president would do well to support higher taxes on rich Americans.
“We’re taxed from one end to the other, and it just seems the rich
don’t pay their share," she said.
In recent years in particular, mainstream economic institutions like
the International Monetary Fund and the Federal Reserve have taken
seriously the possibility that high levels of wealth and income
inequality may be not just politically corrosive, but bad for
economic growth.
At the most recent Fed policy meeting, staff members presented
research on how families' differing access to credit might make a
recession worse — the sort of exercise that shows how unequal
starting points among households can influence national outcomes.
Economic and market trends have likely reinforced doubts about who
gets ahead, and how fast. Since the start in 2009 of a
now-decade-long recovery, the top 1 percent's share of national net
worth has grown from 27.8% to 32.2%, driven by a record-setting boom
in the stock market, according to Fed data.
Trump has cited the rise in equity markets as a selling point in his
campaign, which is centered on taking credit for historically low
unemployment, and a tariff-heavy trade policy that he says will
restore manufacturing jobs.
But that has not changed the country's wealth picture. While the
share of wealth held by the bottom 50% of Americans has increased
since the crisis, to 1.5% percent, longterm the trend is down, with
their share at less than half what it was in 1989. The shares of
wealth held by the middle and upper middle classes - or all other
Americans save for the richest 1 percent -- have all fallen since
the crisis.
(Reporting by Howard Schneider in Washington and Chris Kahn in New
York; Editing by Dan Burns and Leslie Adler)
[© 2020 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2020 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |