Global Financial Strategy

Search the site   >>Advanced search
First for financial regulatory news and views
HOME   |   REGISTER   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   NEWS   |   ANALYSIS   |   INTERVIEWS & FEATURES   |   EVENTS   |   MUTTERS   |   JOBS   |   MY ACCOUNT
EUROPE   |    US & CANADA   |    ASIA PACIFIC   |    MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA   |    LATIN AMERICA & CARIBBEAN   |    OFFSHORE   |    SINGAPORE   |    HONG KONG
TRADING   |    CASINO MARKET   |    BANKING   |    INSURANCE   |    FINANCIAL REPORTING   |    TAXATION   |    MACROECONOMIC   |    PROFILES   |   CONTACT   |   
  • MF Global spoke of 'strong' finances
  • EC: No corp gov powers for ESAs
  • FSA appoints senior investment bank adviser
  • GFS has now closed
  • Czechs join UK on fiscal compact sidelines
  • Davos stalemate on EU's IMF funds
  • Tucker: Resolution regime 'top priority'
  • Saudi Arabia increases central bank role
  • FSB urges Canada for one securities regulator
  • CFTC set for committee to scrutinise HFT
  • Fitch downgrades Belgian banks
  • What corruption really costs
  • UK FSA pushes for Mifid II rethink on OTCs
  • Shanghai boosts global financial status
  • Canada aligns credit rating rules with EU
  • Bowles blasts lack of women at ECB
  • Sarkozy to introduce French FTT in August
  • Barnier warns on further bonus reforms
GFS LinkedIn
GFS Facebook
GFS Twitter
GFS RSS feed
You must be logged in to use this function.


The 70% tax solution

Thursday 1 December 2011 – by J. Bradford DeLong / Project Syndicate


There are compelling arguments for raising taxes to 70 per cent for the super rich – in fact, we have a moral obligation to tax them so heavily that we raise the most possible money from them, argues J. Bradford DeLong, professor of economics at the University of California at Berkeley.

Via a circuitous Internet chain – Paul Krugman of Princeton University quoting Mark Thoma of the University of Oregon reading the Journal of Economic Perspectives – I got a copy of an article written by Emmanuel Saez, whose office is 50 feet from mine, on the same corridor, and the Nobel laureate economist Peter Diamond.

Saez and Diamond argue that the right marginal tax rate for North Atlantic societies to impose on their richest citizens is 70 per cent.

It is an arresting assertion, given the tax-cut mania that has prevailed in these societies for the past 30 years, but Diamond and Saez’s logic is clear.

The superrich command and control so many resources that they are effectively satiated: increasing or decreasing how much wealth they have has no effect on their happiness.

So, no matter how large a weight we place on their happiness relative to the happiness of others – whether we regard them as praiseworthy captains of industry who merit their high positions, or as parasitic thieves – we simply cannot do anything to affect it by raising or lowering their tax rates.

Related articles:
US millionaires want to pay higher taxes
Backlash against ‘Buffett tax’ on US rich
French super-rich follow Buffett’s lead
Omaha Sage eyes tax rises for the rich

The unavoidable implication of this argument is that when we calculate what the tax rate for the superrich will be, we should not consider the effect of changing their tax rate on their happiness, for we know that it is zero. Rather, the key question must be the effect of changing their tax rate on the well-being of the rest of us.

To read this article in full, please visit our partner site, Project Syndicate, by clicking here.

J. Bradford DeLong, a former assistant secretary of the US Treasury, is professor of economics at the University of California at Berkeley and a research associate at the National Bureau for Economic Research.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2011. www.project-syndicate.org



WHAT DO YOU THINK?
 
Name:
   
Email:
   
Comment:
   
Post as Anonymous
  Display name
   
Please, enter security code
   
 

No comments yet.
Login Register Most read Most commented
Username

Password

>> Forgotten your password?
>> Sign Up  

GFS is pleased to offer you a two-week free trial. You will receive a daily email bulletin of the latest regulatory news and analysis and a weekly email round-up. Please complete the free trial form. You will also receive full access to our online site.

EDITOR’S CHOICE

  • Diamond warns against ‘Balkanisation’
  • ABI: UK insurers must keep EU links
  • EU Parliament site hit by hacktivists
  • George Soros: New year, same crisis
  • FSB: Swiss regulator needs more teeth
  • OCC: Deriv fears are an overreaction
  • ‘Major wave’ of Solvency II drafts in May
  • IMF paper urges Aus bank capital boost
  • BoE: Limit bonuses to boost bank capital
  • 2012 vision: Increased regulatory exposure looms
  • Barnier offers hope to NYSE/Boerse
  • Esma rushes short selling consultation
  • Bowles re-elected as Econ chair
  • Hoogervorst hints at accounting slowdown
  • Asia in the year of the dragon
  • Barnier: FTT will not be forced on UK
INTERVIEWS & FEATURES

STRAW POLL

Will markets in 2012 have a tougher time than 2011?

Yes

No

Don’t know

View results

FIND A REGION
 
Global Financial Strategy - [email protected] | Home | Legal | Contact design by SDV