[ad_1]
Sen. Elizabeth Warren 
Elizabeth Ann WarrenReport candidates in 2020 will face a thorough review of the links between Wall Street Bloomberg qualifies Trump as "CEO pretending" Senator Warren misses the target of the debate on the living wage MORE (D-Mass.) Takes a big step forward in taxes as she seeks to stand out in an overcrowded Democratic presidential primary field where many contenders will vie for progressive elections.
The Massachusetts senator, who recently announced the creation of an exploratory committee of the president, called for a special annual tax for those with a net worth greater than $ 50 million. The proposal quickly attracted the attention of the progressives, who commended Warren for his floating taxation, seen as a way to fight the inequality of wealth.
Warren said Thursday in an interview with MSNBC that this tax could generate revenue to "create opportunities for the rest of America. "
University of California at Berkeley, economics professors Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman told Warren that the tax would generate about $ 2.75 billion over 10 years.
" C & # 39; the kind of money where we could pay childcare fees. quality child care for all our children, "said Warren. "This is the kind of money where we could bring real relief to student loan debt. This is the kind of money where we could really start a Green New Deal. This is the kind of money where we could reduce the cost of health care. "
Warren's proposal, which she calls an" ultra-millionaire tax ", would impose an annual 2% tax on net worth between $ 50 million and $ 1 billion, and a tax over $ 1 billion. 3% dollars.
Tax could be deferred until five years, with interest, and the proposal includes provisions to prevent fraud, increased funding for the application of the law. IRS and exit tax for high net income – trustworthy people renouncing their US citizenship
"We will monitor and count them," said Warren.
Warren is inclined to join what should be a group of Democratic candidates for the presidency.looks for votes from the party's influential progressive wing.Already known for its interest in economic issues, Warren's proposal on the tax on fortune could l 39; to help strengthen his liberal credentials.
Michael Linden, a member of the Roosevelt Institute, on the left, said Warren has spent the last few years proposing solutions to this problem. she calls a broken economy. He added that the wealth tax plan was consistent with other proposals she had made on issues such as corporate responsibility and housing.
"A wealth tax is entirely in his diagnosis," he said. It is wise to launch the proposal more than before the Iowa caucuses, scheduled for February 3, 2020, and before other major candidates join the race.
"By publishing visionary ideas early in the cycle, it makes I am sure these ideas will not get lost in the storm of policy discourse we will likely see as the situation warms up," said Ben. Wikler, senior adviser to MoveOn.
In addition to allowing Warren to stand out among Democratic Candidates, the Wealth Tax could attract attention at a time when attention will remain at the center of concern Trump 
Donald John Trump A billionaire investor states that he would support his main challenger to Trump: the Trump report donates 0,000 of his salary to Alcoho lism research How the government will reopen MORE .
"Great bold ideas that captivate people's imagination and allow them to see the different world that would be possible with a progressive leader at the head of the country [are] to be very important," said Neil Sroka, a door (19659004) The main question now is whether Warren's ideas "will ignite with average voters in the same way as with progressive fools," he said. he says, he thinks they can do it.
The wealth tax proposal comes at a time when the left is discussing the best way to tax the richest people in the country and considers the ideas that the Democrats might have thought it too risky even in previous years Earlier this month, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez 
Alexandria Ocasio-CortezMost supporters of the policy to improve the health of women 9 environment, but are divided on paying for it: "GOP senators should be scared for their jobs in 2020 WaPo investigators reject Ocasio-Cortez's criticism of the rating:" She is wrong ". MORE (DN.Y.) Has been the focus of attention due to its marginal tax rate of 70% on revenues greater than $ 10 million.
Progressives want more federal income from the rich to tackle income inequality and offset the cost of spending priorities. And progressives say the tax debate has changed direction, saying politicians are now catching up with Americans who have long believed that the rich should pay more taxes.
Frank Clemente, executive director of Americans for Tax Fairness, said policymakers "can now have an in-depth debate on tax policy and not be bothered by Conservative-endorsed lies about what it's all about." is possible to do on the tax reform. many wealthy individuals who use legal loopholes to significantly reduce their tax burden.
"We have a major problem in terms of taxation of the very, very wealthy of this country," said David Kamin, a former Obama administration official, today a law professor at the University of New York. 39, New York University.
Steve Wamhoff, director of tax policy at the Institute of Taxation and Economic Policy, said that Americans already felt heavily taxed on their wealth because most of them are in their homes, which is accompanied by property taxes. For the wealthy, however, homes generally represent a smaller percentage of their financial assets.
Warren's proposal would ensure that the wealth of the high net worth taxpayer is treated in the same way as the wealth of the middle class, Wamhoff said. 19659004] But other tax experts, particularly but not exclusively right, have expressed concern about Warren's proposal.
Alex Brill, a resident of the American Enterprise Institute, said that he did not think that there should be a wealth. the tax because "the accumulation of capital in the economy is an important factor of our ability to grow as a country over time".
He also said that the rich would be encouraged to spend their time figuring out the way to avoid the tax, and the inclusion of an anti-avoidance provision suggests that the taxpayer would be better off. There are ways around the tax.
Howard Gleckman – Senior Researcher at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, headed by a former Obama administration official – With regard to aid, one wonders how the federal government could administer a wealth tax. He noted that several European countries imposed wealth taxes, but repealed them partly because of administrative difficulties.
Some tax experts have stated that the question of whether a wealth tax is even constitutional is questionable. According to the Constitution, Congress can impose direct taxes only if they are distributed according to the population of the states, apart from the income tax allowed by the 16th Amendment
but of Others are convinced that a wealth tax would have all its constitutional weight. A number of law professors said in a letter to Warren that his proposal would be upheld by a court.
"The Constitutional Text and its History Demonstrate That" Direct "Tax Is Better Interpreted as a Restricted Category That Would Not Include a Tax on the Net Worth", Law professors stated in a statement. of their letters.
[ad_2]
Source link
