<\/p>\n
Elsewhere, policymakers continued pushing high-earner taxes through measures like New York City\u2019s pied-\u00e0-terre tax, Rhode Island\u2019s phased-in millionaire\u2019s tax, Washington\u2019s new income tax on households above $1 million, and similar \u201ctax the rich\u201d debates in Massachusetts and abroad.<\/strong><\/em><\/h3>\n <\/p>\n
Please find summaries of relevant articles with web links below.<\/strong> Please reach out to any member of your Brownstein National Tax Policy Group team with questions or to set up a meeting.<\/a><\/p>\nFederal<\/strong><\/h4>\nWhy We Need to Tax AI \u2013 Time Magazine<\/a>;\u00a0Sen. Elizabeth Warren on calls for AI tax, details of her two-cent wealth tax proposal\u00a0\u2013\u00a0CNBC<\/a>
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), argues that artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to exacerbate economic inequality by concentrating wealth among tech companies. She also highlighted that it would displace workers and raise costs, including energy prices tied to data centers. She calls for taxing AI as part of a broader overhaul of the tax code, including higher corporate and capital gains taxes, a wealth tax, and closing loopholes that favor automation over hiring. Sen. Warren also proposed targeted measures such as an excise tax on AI data centers\u2019 energy use, with revenue used to fund priorities like universal healthcare, education and jobs.<\/p>\nOn CNBC, Sen. Warren said argues that emerging AI technologies and extreme wealth concentration justify new forms of taxation, including targeted levies on AI and a broad-based federal wealth tax. She proposes an excise tax on AI data centers so firms \u201cinternalize\u201d the social and labor-market costs of automation and to fund health care, child care, and education. She also reiterates her call for a wealth tax, framing it as a simple way to bypass loophole-ridden income and capital-gains rules and ensure billionaires contribute based on their accumulated wealth rather than just realized income.<\/p>\n
Sen. Tim Scott: A wealth tax is a terrible idea\u00a0\u2013\u00a0CNBC<\/a>
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) argues against taxing unrealized gains and wealth taxes, calling them impractical and punitive, especially for asset\u2011rich, cash\u2011poor taxpayers like farmers. He said that lower capital gains rates historically increased federal revenue by encouraging realizations and reinvestment, while higher rates suppressed realizations and reduced receipts, so tax policy should focus on pro\u2011growth incentives rather than new taxes on wealth. Chairman Scott emphasized that the top share of earners already pay most federal taxes, the bottom half pay little or no net income tax, and the core problem is federal overspending, which he believes should be addressed through spending restraint, a balanced budget requirement, and bipartisan process reforms rather than wealth\u2011based taxes.<\/p>\nOpinion | Bernie Sanders: A.I. Belongs to the People, Not to Billionaires\u00a0\u2013\u00a0The New York Times<\/a>
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) argued that AI will be a transformative force with major economic and social consequences. He raised concerns about concentrated control among certain individuals and the use of publicly derived data without compensation. He claimed that because AI is built on collective human knowledge, its benefits should be broadly shared. He proposed creating an American AI sovereign wealth fund through a 50% one-time tax paid in company stock. The fund would give the public an ownership stake and governance role in major AI firms while generating revenue to support direct payments and public investments. He said that AI-driven wealth should benefit all Americans rather than a small group of private actors.<\/p>\nGallego Introduces Legislation to Crack Down on Billionaire Tax Loophole<\/a>
On June 2, Sen. Ruben Gallego introduced the ROBINHOOD Act.\u00a0The bill treats loans taken out by high net-worth taxpayers as \u201crealization events\u201d of unrealized long-term capital gains, triggering long-term capital gains equal to the amount of borrowing. This capital gain is thus subject to normal taxes, currently totaling 23.8% for these taxpayers.\u00a0After paying, the taxpayer would then be able to increase the basis of assets in their portfolio up to the value of the loan to avoid double taxation if the assets are later sold. The provisions of the bill apply to taxpayers who have an income over $100 million and\/or assets worth more than $1 billion.<\/p>\nCalifornia<\/strong><\/h4>\n2026 California Billionaire Tax Act: Details & Analysis \u2013 The Tax Foundation<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has constitutional vulnerabilities that create strong incentives for billionaires to leave the state during 2026. This article explains that tying liability to a \u201csnapshot\u201d residency date (January 1) and a later valuation date (December 31), without apportionment for part\u2011year residency and even taxing post\u2011departure wealth, may violate due process. Because courts may strike down or rewrite these provisions\u2014especially the retroactive imposition of a wholly new wealth tax and the attempt to tax wealth earned after a taxpayer leaves\u2014the Tax Foundation concludes that mid\u20112026 movers have credible legal arguments to reduce or avoid the tax, and that the measure\u2019s design is likely to fuel ongoing billionaire out\u2011migration even before any court rulings.\u00a0<\/p>\nCalifornia\u2019s Tax-Weary Billionaires Seek Refuge on Lake Tahoe\u2019s Nevada Shore\u00a0\u2013\u00a0WSJ<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is accelerating a shift of ultra-wealthy residents to the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe, where there is no state income, capital gains, or corporate tax. This tax-driven migration has fueled a surge in demand and record-breaking home sales in Nevada communities like Incline Village and Crystal Bay, with buyers paying premiums to reduce tax exposure.<\/p>\nOpinion: California\u2019s proposed \u2018billionaire tax\u2019 is moronic. We should do this instead.\u00a0\u2013\u00a0MarketWatch<\/a>
Brett Arends argues that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is poorly designed, likely to trigger avoidance and outmigration, and ineffective as a revenue solution, ultimately undermining the broader case for wealth taxation. Arends notes that while wealth inequality has grown significantly and justifies policy action, a better approach would be a modest, recurring national wealth tax (e.g., 1% annually) that is harder to evade, more stable for revenue, and less economically disruptive.<\/p>\nProposed ‘billionaire tax’ in California spurs controversy and heavy spending\u00a0\u2013\u00a0ABC News<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has become a polarizing ballot fight that is dividing Democrats and fueling massive, competing campaigns. Supporters argue the measure could raise about $100 billion over five years, with roughly 90% dedicated to shoring up the healthcare system and preventing a \u201ccomplete collapse.\u201d Opponents including Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and the \u201cBuilding a Better California\u201d group warn it could spur billionaire flight, damage the state\u2019s economic base, and be effectively nullified by rival ballot measures.<\/p>\nBillionaire \u2018Class Traitor\u2019 Steyer Wants to Tax His Fellow Rich \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a>
Tom Steyer has spent over $200 million of his own money into the race and calls for capping oil refinery profits, breaking up utility monopolies, and taxing the ultra\u2011rich, enraging business groups and prompting heavy attack ads. While critics question his authenticity and classify his campaign as performative or narcissistic, supporters argue he is using his wealth to challenge his own class.<\/p>\nProposed billionaire tax backed by majority of California voters \u2013 New York Post<\/a>
A recent Public Policy Institute of California poll finds that 54% of likely voters support the California\u2019s proposed wealth tax even as business groups, Gov. Gavin Newsom, and several studies warn it could trigger billionaire flight, major job and wage losses, and long\u2011term economic damage. Support is strongest among Democrats, lower\u2011income voters, renters, and residents in urban areas like Los Angeles. Republicans, wealthier voters, and homeowners are far more skeptical, and Central Valley voters lean against the measure.<\/p>\nThe risks California wealth tax advocates are ignoring \u2013 Press Telegram<\/a>
Daniel Bunn, CEO of the Tax Foundation, said that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is far riskier than advertised. He warned that it would be difficult to administer, likely unconstitutional in parts, and highly distortive in practice. Bunn highlights drafting flaws that could push effective tax rates on some founder stakes well above 100% of their value, create severe problems for privately held businesses, and accelerate the exodus of high-earning individuals and firms on which the state\u2019s revenue and philanthropic base depend. Comparing it to the European wealth-tax experience and California\u2019s already surging health and human services spending, Bunn said the measure would invite extensive litigation, undermine competitiveness, and fail to address the state\u2019s structural budget issues.<\/p>\nOp-ed: The Case for California’s Wealth Tax\u00a0\u2013\u00a0New York Times<\/a>
Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman argue that California\u2019s proposed billionaire tax is a modest but important response to rising uninsured-coverage risks and extreme wealth concentration. They write that roughly 250 billionaire households now hold wealth equal to more than half of California\u2019s annual economic output, while paying only a tiny fraction of that wealth each year in California income tax \u2014 about 0.26% on average from 2019 to 2025, and about 0.07% for the very richest. They present the measure as narrowly targeted, designed with protections for illiquid start-up holdings and a 5% fair-market-value cap on shares, and capable of raising about $100 billion over five years.<\/p>\nTexas dethrones California as top state for Fortune 500 headquarters\u00a0\u2013\u00a0Fox Business<\/a>
Texas has overtaken California as the state with the most Fortune 500 headquarters, now hosting 57 companies versus California\u2019s 56. Texas-based firms have generated about $2.8 trillion in revenue compared with $2.7 trillion for California-based firms. It links this shift to recent relocations by major corporations like ExxonMobil, Chevron, Samsung Electronics America, SpaceX and X, many moving from California to Texas, alongside billionaires and tech figures establishing residency in the state. Supporters of Texas\u2019s rise point to its business\u2011friendly regulatory environment, lower costs and population inflows, while noting that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax and broader tax policies are fueling concerns about job losses, and competitiveness.<\/p>\nMassachusetts<\/strong><\/h4>\nBoston Seizes on California Billionaire Tax to Lure AI Jobs\u00a0\u2013\u00a0Bloomberg<\/a>
Massachusetts business and political leaders see California\u2019s proposed wealth tax as a strategic opening to attract artificial intelligence investment and jobs to Boston. They argue that because so much AI talent already passes through local institutions like Harvard and MIT before decamping to Silicon Valley, California\u2019s new tax uncertainty could help Massachusetts convert its academic and biotech strengths into a larger share of the AI-driven economic boom. It would do so by positioning Boston as a more welcoming base for founders and high-growth companies.<\/p>\nNew York City<\/strong><\/h4>\nNew York passes Mamdani’s pied-a-terre tax. Who pays and how much – CNBC<\/a>
New York state has approved a pied-\u00e0-terre tax on nonprimary residences in New York City valued at $1 million or more. It is aimed at helping close the city\u2019s budget gap by raising an estimated $500 million a year. In the first two years (2026\u201127 and 2027\u201128), condos and co\u2011ops valued by the city above $1 million will face steep add\u2011on rates of 4% to 6.5% based on assessed value, though those assessments are currently far below market. Beginning in 2028\u201129, valuations will be reset based on comparable sales and tax rates will drop to about 0.8%\u20131.3% for properties above $5 million, still significantly increasing many property tax bills.<\/p>\nRhode Island<\/strong><\/h4>\nRevised FY27 budget takes up \u2018compromise\u2019 millionaire\u2019s tax, frustrating businesses and progressives – Rhode Island Current<\/a>
<\/u>Last week, Democratic members in the Rhode Island legislature included a phased-in \u201cmillionaires tax\u201d into their FY 2027 budget bill. The proposal would impose a 3% surtax on incomes over $1 million that would start at 1% in 2027 and rise to 3% by 2029. Over time, it would ultimately increase the top state income tax rate to 8.99%. The plan follows similar high-earner surtaxes in states like Massachusetts and Maine. The bill is scheduled for consideration in the full House on Friday.<\/p>\nWashington<\/strong><\/h4>\nMillionaires tax will likely appear on November ballot – FOX 13 Seattle<\/a>
Washington\u2019s new \u201cmillionaires tax,\u201d is now the target of a repeal initiative that is likely to appear on the November ballot. Organizers from the group Let\u2019s Go Washington say they have already gathered nearly 100,000 signatures in about a week and are confident they will surpass the roughly 324,000 needed by July 2. Governor Bob Ferguson (D) has publicly welcomed a voter decision and argued that the revenue will fund low\u2011income family tax credits, schools, and child care. He has pledged not to lower the threshold below $1 million, but the initiative\u2019s leader Brian Heywood, accuses Ferguson and state leaders of lacking credibility on income taxes, saying many signers do not believe those assurances.<\/p>\nFerguson vows to veto any expansion of WA \u2018millionaires tax\u2019\u00a0\u2013\u00a0\u00a0Union-Bulletin<\/a>
Gov. Bob Ferguson (D) has pledged to veto any future attempt to lower the income threshold or raise the rate, emphasizing the tax is meant only for top earners and will fund schools, healthcare, and other services. He and other Democrats see the reassurance as necessary to calm nonmillionaire voters wary the tax could eventually broaden, while opponents like \u00a0Brian Heywood and Republican lawmakers dismiss his promise as not credible, noting Washington\u2019s long history of rejecting income taxes and citing strong early signature-gathering as evidence of broad public resistance.<\/p>\nOther<\/strong><\/h4>\nHigh-Tax States and Competitiveness \u2013 The Tax Foundation<\/a>
Efforts by high\u2011tax states to close structural budget gaps by raising taxes on high earners and adopting wealth or \u201cbillionaire\u201d taxes are fiscally counterproductive and likely to backfire. It details how jurisdictions like California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Washington are imposing new surtaxes on top incomes or proposing net\u2011worth taxes, warning that these moves increase volatility, complicate administration and encourage wealthy, mobile taxpayers and capital to relocate to lower\u2011tax states. The Tax Foundation argues that because these measures target a narrow, highly mobile tax base and address structural deficits with unsustainable solutions, they risk eroding long\u2011term revenues and competitiveness. The Tax Foundation suggests spending restraint and broad\u2011based, neutral tax reforms rather than wealth\u2011focused taxes.<\/p>\nStates Taxing the Wealthy Are Mostly Targeting Income: Explained \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has become an example of state-level efforts to \u201ctax the rich,\u201d prompting both high\u2011profile exits and intense debate over its design and effects. It situates California in a broader landscape where many blue states are adopting or considering higher taxes on high earners with Washington, Maine, and others adding millionaire brackets. Voters in states like Colorado and Oregon are weighing progressive income or wealth\u2011style measures.<\/p>\nWealth tax or stealth tax?\u00a0\u2013\u00a0The Washington Times<\/a>
Chuck Flint, CEO of the Alliance for IRS Accountability, criticizes Sen. Warren\u2019s proposed \u201cUltra Millionaire Tax of 2026,\u201d arguing that taxing unrealized gains would require a massively expanded, $100 billion IRS enforcement apparatus that ultimately burdens middle\u2011class taxpayers and small business owners rather than just the ultrawealthy. Flint argues that annual mark\u2011to\u2011market valuation of assets like private businesses, farms, and volatile holdings (e.g., crypto) would force people to pay tax on paper gains they cannot readily access. Citing past audit patterns and the experience with boosted IRS funding under the Inflation Reduction Act, he warns that enforcement would drift toward less wealthy filers.<\/p>\nStarmer Leadership Strife Reignites UK Wealth Tax Debate \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a>
Cahos in Prime Minister Keir Starmer\u2019s leadership has reopened the UK debate over taxing wealth, with figures on the Labor Party\u2019s left pushing various wealth-focused measures. Andy Burnham argues the UK \u201covertaxed labor and undertaxed wealth\u201d and backs higher land and property\u2011style taxes. Wes Streeting calls for a \u201cwealth tax that works\u201d by aligning capital gains tax rates with income tax, a move supporters say could raise up to about \u00a310\u201312 billion but an analysis suggests could actually reduce revenue if investors delay realizing gains.<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_cta title=”Want to learn more?” button_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/polling-and-research\/wealth-tax\/” button_text=”Visit our State and Federal Wealth Tax Tracker – Click Here ” admin_label=”State and Federal Wealth Tax Tracker CTA” _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”#fc2f36″ custom_padding=”13px||18px|||” global_module=”17129″ global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_cta][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”off|off|off” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Logo & About” _builder_version=”4.22.1″ text_font=”||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/www.bhfs.com\/” link_option_url_new_window=”on” border_color_all=”#FFFFFF” border_style_all=”none” global_module=”6751″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/brownstein-logo-positive-RGB.png\" "\\"\\"")
<\/p>\n
About Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck
<\/strong>Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck is a unique law firm. Walk into any of our offices and you\u2019ll immediately recognize a different type of energy. Complacency doesn\u2019t have a place here. Flexibility and inspiration do.\u00a0Our culture and enthusiasm allow our attorneys, policy consultants and legal staff to stay ahead of our clients\u2019 needs and provide them with the resources they require to meet their business objectives.<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”off|off|off” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Become a member text” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate-2\/” global_module=”5822″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
We hope you’ve enjoyed this article. While you’re here, we have a small favor to ask…<\/em><\/h4>\nAs we prepare for what promises to be a pivotal year for America, we’re asking you to consider becoming a member.<\/p>\n
The need for fact-based reporting of issues important to family owned businesses<\/a> and protecting a lifetime of savings<\/a> has never been greater. Now more than ever, successful families<\/a> and family owned businesses<\/a> are under fire. That’s why Family Enterprise USA<\/a> is passionately working to increase the awareness of issues important to family owned businesses<\/a> built on hard work, while continuing to strengthen our presence on Capitol Hill. The issues we fight for or against with Congress in Washington DC include high income tax rates<\/a>, possible elimination of valuation discounts, increase in capital gains tax<\/a>, enactment of a wealth tax<\/a>, and the continued burden of the gift tax<\/a>, estate tax<\/a> and generation skipping tax<\/a>.<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate\/” button_text=”Become a Family Enterprise USA Member” button_alignment=”center” disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Become FEUSA member button” _builder_version=”4.21.0″ _module_preset=”default” custom_button=”on” global_module=”6503″ global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_button][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_style=”dotted” divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”on|on|on” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_video_slider disabled_on=”on|on|on” admin_label=”Video Slider Family Business Stories 2″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_module=”6670″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=y9VszpRjVDM” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=03T2VODneEg” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=fHIxWaTwK64″ _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=TI7P07GbNdU&t=27s” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][\/et_pb_video_slider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”FEUSA Statement” _builder_version=”4.21.0″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate-2\/” global_module=”5910″ saved_tabs=”all” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
\nFamily Enterprise USA<\/a> promotes generationally<\/a> owned family business<\/a> creation, growth, viability, and sustainability by advocating for family businesses<\/a> and their lifetime of savings with Congress<\/a> in Washington DC.\u00a0 Since 2007, Family Enterprise USA<\/a> has represented and celebrated\u00a0all sizes, professions and industries of family-owned enterprises and multi-generational<\/a> employers. It is a bi-partisan 501.c3 organization.\u00a0Family foundations can donate.<\/a><\/p>\n
\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|on|on” admin_label=”Hash tags & Tags” _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_module=”6498″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
#incometax #CapitalGainsTax #R&DExpensing #DontPunishSuccess #GrantorTrusts #StepUpinBasis #likeKindExchanges #AcceleratedDepreciation #EstateTax #Deathtax #wealthtax #taxLegislation #CongressionalCaucus #incometaxrates #repealestatetax #AdvocatingForFamilyBusinesses #FamilyOwnedBusiness #WomenOwnedBusiness @FamilyEnterpriseUSA #FamilyEnterpriseUSA #FEUSA<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This week\u2019s wealth-tax debate spanned from federal proposals to tax AI-driven wealth and close billionaire borrowing loopholes to broader calls for public ownership or stronger taxation of extreme wealth. California remained the focal point, as its proposed one-time billionaire tax drew support from a majority of voters while also fueling legal challenges, relocation stories, and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":17501,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[48,92,115],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17499","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-family-businesses","category-multi-generational-business","category-wealth-tax"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17499"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17504,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499\/revisions\/17504"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17501"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17499"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17499"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17499"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Federal<\/strong><\/h4>\nWhy We Need to Tax AI \u2013 Time Magazine<\/a>;\u00a0Sen. Elizabeth Warren on calls for AI tax, details of her two-cent wealth tax proposal\u00a0\u2013\u00a0CNBC<\/a>
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), argues that artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to exacerbate economic inequality by concentrating wealth among tech companies. She also highlighted that it would displace workers and raise costs, including energy prices tied to data centers. She calls for taxing AI as part of a broader overhaul of the tax code, including higher corporate and capital gains taxes, a wealth tax, and closing loopholes that favor automation over hiring. Sen. Warren also proposed targeted measures such as an excise tax on AI data centers\u2019 energy use, with revenue used to fund priorities like universal healthcare, education and jobs.<\/p>\nOn CNBC, Sen. Warren said argues that emerging AI technologies and extreme wealth concentration justify new forms of taxation, including targeted levies on AI and a broad-based federal wealth tax. She proposes an excise tax on AI data centers so firms \u201cinternalize\u201d the social and labor-market costs of automation and to fund health care, child care, and education. She also reiterates her call for a wealth tax, framing it as a simple way to bypass loophole-ridden income and capital-gains rules and ensure billionaires contribute based on their accumulated wealth rather than just realized income.<\/p>\n
Sen. Tim Scott: A wealth tax is a terrible idea\u00a0\u2013\u00a0CNBC<\/a>
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) argues against taxing unrealized gains and wealth taxes, calling them impractical and punitive, especially for asset\u2011rich, cash\u2011poor taxpayers like farmers. He said that lower capital gains rates historically increased federal revenue by encouraging realizations and reinvestment, while higher rates suppressed realizations and reduced receipts, so tax policy should focus on pro\u2011growth incentives rather than new taxes on wealth. Chairman Scott emphasized that the top share of earners already pay most federal taxes, the bottom half pay little or no net income tax, and the core problem is federal overspending, which he believes should be addressed through spending restraint, a balanced budget requirement, and bipartisan process reforms rather than wealth\u2011based taxes.<\/p>\nOpinion | Bernie Sanders: A.I. Belongs to the People, Not to Billionaires\u00a0\u2013\u00a0The New York Times<\/a>
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) argued that AI will be a transformative force with major economic and social consequences. He raised concerns about concentrated control among certain individuals and the use of publicly derived data without compensation. He claimed that because AI is built on collective human knowledge, its benefits should be broadly shared. He proposed creating an American AI sovereign wealth fund through a 50% one-time tax paid in company stock. The fund would give the public an ownership stake and governance role in major AI firms while generating revenue to support direct payments and public investments. He said that AI-driven wealth should benefit all Americans rather than a small group of private actors.<\/p>\nGallego Introduces Legislation to Crack Down on Billionaire Tax Loophole<\/a>
On June 2, Sen. Ruben Gallego introduced the ROBINHOOD Act.\u00a0The bill treats loans taken out by high net-worth taxpayers as \u201crealization events\u201d of unrealized long-term capital gains, triggering long-term capital gains equal to the amount of borrowing. This capital gain is thus subject to normal taxes, currently totaling 23.8% for these taxpayers.\u00a0After paying, the taxpayer would then be able to increase the basis of assets in their portfolio up to the value of the loan to avoid double taxation if the assets are later sold. The provisions of the bill apply to taxpayers who have an income over $100 million and\/or assets worth more than $1 billion.<\/p>\nCalifornia<\/strong><\/h4>\n2026 California Billionaire Tax Act: Details & Analysis \u2013 The Tax Foundation<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has constitutional vulnerabilities that create strong incentives for billionaires to leave the state during 2026. This article explains that tying liability to a \u201csnapshot\u201d residency date (January 1) and a later valuation date (December 31), without apportionment for part\u2011year residency and even taxing post\u2011departure wealth, may violate due process. Because courts may strike down or rewrite these provisions\u2014especially the retroactive imposition of a wholly new wealth tax and the attempt to tax wealth earned after a taxpayer leaves\u2014the Tax Foundation concludes that mid\u20112026 movers have credible legal arguments to reduce or avoid the tax, and that the measure\u2019s design is likely to fuel ongoing billionaire out\u2011migration even before any court rulings.\u00a0<\/p>\nCalifornia\u2019s Tax-Weary Billionaires Seek Refuge on Lake Tahoe\u2019s Nevada Shore\u00a0\u2013\u00a0WSJ<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is accelerating a shift of ultra-wealthy residents to the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe, where there is no state income, capital gains, or corporate tax. This tax-driven migration has fueled a surge in demand and record-breaking home sales in Nevada communities like Incline Village and Crystal Bay, with buyers paying premiums to reduce tax exposure.<\/p>\nOpinion: California\u2019s proposed \u2018billionaire tax\u2019 is moronic. We should do this instead.\u00a0\u2013\u00a0MarketWatch<\/a>
Brett Arends argues that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is poorly designed, likely to trigger avoidance and outmigration, and ineffective as a revenue solution, ultimately undermining the broader case for wealth taxation. Arends notes that while wealth inequality has grown significantly and justifies policy action, a better approach would be a modest, recurring national wealth tax (e.g., 1% annually) that is harder to evade, more stable for revenue, and less economically disruptive.<\/p>\nProposed ‘billionaire tax’ in California spurs controversy and heavy spending\u00a0\u2013\u00a0ABC News<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has become a polarizing ballot fight that is dividing Democrats and fueling massive, competing campaigns. Supporters argue the measure could raise about $100 billion over five years, with roughly 90% dedicated to shoring up the healthcare system and preventing a \u201ccomplete collapse.\u201d Opponents including Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and the \u201cBuilding a Better California\u201d group warn it could spur billionaire flight, damage the state\u2019s economic base, and be effectively nullified by rival ballot measures.<\/p>\nBillionaire \u2018Class Traitor\u2019 Steyer Wants to Tax His Fellow Rich \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a>
Tom Steyer has spent over $200 million of his own money into the race and calls for capping oil refinery profits, breaking up utility monopolies, and taxing the ultra\u2011rich, enraging business groups and prompting heavy attack ads. While critics question his authenticity and classify his campaign as performative or narcissistic, supporters argue he is using his wealth to challenge his own class.<\/p>\nProposed billionaire tax backed by majority of California voters \u2013 New York Post<\/a>
A recent Public Policy Institute of California poll finds that 54% of likely voters support the California\u2019s proposed wealth tax even as business groups, Gov. Gavin Newsom, and several studies warn it could trigger billionaire flight, major job and wage losses, and long\u2011term economic damage. Support is strongest among Democrats, lower\u2011income voters, renters, and residents in urban areas like Los Angeles. Republicans, wealthier voters, and homeowners are far more skeptical, and Central Valley voters lean against the measure.<\/p>\nThe risks California wealth tax advocates are ignoring \u2013 Press Telegram<\/a>
Daniel Bunn, CEO of the Tax Foundation, said that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is far riskier than advertised. He warned that it would be difficult to administer, likely unconstitutional in parts, and highly distortive in practice. Bunn highlights drafting flaws that could push effective tax rates on some founder stakes well above 100% of their value, create severe problems for privately held businesses, and accelerate the exodus of high-earning individuals and firms on which the state\u2019s revenue and philanthropic base depend. Comparing it to the European wealth-tax experience and California\u2019s already surging health and human services spending, Bunn said the measure would invite extensive litigation, undermine competitiveness, and fail to address the state\u2019s structural budget issues.<\/p>\nOp-ed: The Case for California’s Wealth Tax\u00a0\u2013\u00a0New York Times<\/a>
Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman argue that California\u2019s proposed billionaire tax is a modest but important response to rising uninsured-coverage risks and extreme wealth concentration. They write that roughly 250 billionaire households now hold wealth equal to more than half of California\u2019s annual economic output, while paying only a tiny fraction of that wealth each year in California income tax \u2014 about 0.26% on average from 2019 to 2025, and about 0.07% for the very richest. They present the measure as narrowly targeted, designed with protections for illiquid start-up holdings and a 5% fair-market-value cap on shares, and capable of raising about $100 billion over five years.<\/p>\nTexas dethrones California as top state for Fortune 500 headquarters\u00a0\u2013\u00a0Fox Business<\/a>
Texas has overtaken California as the state with the most Fortune 500 headquarters, now hosting 57 companies versus California\u2019s 56. Texas-based firms have generated about $2.8 trillion in revenue compared with $2.7 trillion for California-based firms. It links this shift to recent relocations by major corporations like ExxonMobil, Chevron, Samsung Electronics America, SpaceX and X, many moving from California to Texas, alongside billionaires and tech figures establishing residency in the state. Supporters of Texas\u2019s rise point to its business\u2011friendly regulatory environment, lower costs and population inflows, while noting that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax and broader tax policies are fueling concerns about job losses, and competitiveness.<\/p>\nMassachusetts<\/strong><\/h4>\nBoston Seizes on California Billionaire Tax to Lure AI Jobs\u00a0\u2013\u00a0Bloomberg<\/a>
Massachusetts business and political leaders see California\u2019s proposed wealth tax as a strategic opening to attract artificial intelligence investment and jobs to Boston. They argue that because so much AI talent already passes through local institutions like Harvard and MIT before decamping to Silicon Valley, California\u2019s new tax uncertainty could help Massachusetts convert its academic and biotech strengths into a larger share of the AI-driven economic boom. It would do so by positioning Boston as a more welcoming base for founders and high-growth companies.<\/p>\nNew York City<\/strong><\/h4>\nNew York passes Mamdani’s pied-a-terre tax. Who pays and how much – CNBC<\/a>
New York state has approved a pied-\u00e0-terre tax on nonprimary residences in New York City valued at $1 million or more. It is aimed at helping close the city\u2019s budget gap by raising an estimated $500 million a year. In the first two years (2026\u201127 and 2027\u201128), condos and co\u2011ops valued by the city above $1 million will face steep add\u2011on rates of 4% to 6.5% based on assessed value, though those assessments are currently far below market. Beginning in 2028\u201129, valuations will be reset based on comparable sales and tax rates will drop to about 0.8%\u20131.3% for properties above $5 million, still significantly increasing many property tax bills.<\/p>\nRhode Island<\/strong><\/h4>\nRevised FY27 budget takes up \u2018compromise\u2019 millionaire\u2019s tax, frustrating businesses and progressives – Rhode Island Current<\/a>
<\/u>Last week, Democratic members in the Rhode Island legislature included a phased-in \u201cmillionaires tax\u201d into their FY 2027 budget bill. The proposal would impose a 3% surtax on incomes over $1 million that would start at 1% in 2027 and rise to 3% by 2029. Over time, it would ultimately increase the top state income tax rate to 8.99%. The plan follows similar high-earner surtaxes in states like Massachusetts and Maine. The bill is scheduled for consideration in the full House on Friday.<\/p>\nWashington<\/strong><\/h4>\nMillionaires tax will likely appear on November ballot – FOX 13 Seattle<\/a>
Washington\u2019s new \u201cmillionaires tax,\u201d is now the target of a repeal initiative that is likely to appear on the November ballot. Organizers from the group Let\u2019s Go Washington say they have already gathered nearly 100,000 signatures in about a week and are confident they will surpass the roughly 324,000 needed by July 2. Governor Bob Ferguson (D) has publicly welcomed a voter decision and argued that the revenue will fund low\u2011income family tax credits, schools, and child care. He has pledged not to lower the threshold below $1 million, but the initiative\u2019s leader Brian Heywood, accuses Ferguson and state leaders of lacking credibility on income taxes, saying many signers do not believe those assurances.<\/p>\nFerguson vows to veto any expansion of WA \u2018millionaires tax\u2019\u00a0\u2013\u00a0\u00a0Union-Bulletin<\/a>
Gov. Bob Ferguson (D) has pledged to veto any future attempt to lower the income threshold or raise the rate, emphasizing the tax is meant only for top earners and will fund schools, healthcare, and other services. He and other Democrats see the reassurance as necessary to calm nonmillionaire voters wary the tax could eventually broaden, while opponents like \u00a0Brian Heywood and Republican lawmakers dismiss his promise as not credible, noting Washington\u2019s long history of rejecting income taxes and citing strong early signature-gathering as evidence of broad public resistance.<\/p>\nOther<\/strong><\/h4>\nHigh-Tax States and Competitiveness \u2013 The Tax Foundation<\/a>
Efforts by high\u2011tax states to close structural budget gaps by raising taxes on high earners and adopting wealth or \u201cbillionaire\u201d taxes are fiscally counterproductive and likely to backfire. It details how jurisdictions like California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Washington are imposing new surtaxes on top incomes or proposing net\u2011worth taxes, warning that these moves increase volatility, complicate administration and encourage wealthy, mobile taxpayers and capital to relocate to lower\u2011tax states. The Tax Foundation argues that because these measures target a narrow, highly mobile tax base and address structural deficits with unsustainable solutions, they risk eroding long\u2011term revenues and competitiveness. The Tax Foundation suggests spending restraint and broad\u2011based, neutral tax reforms rather than wealth\u2011focused taxes.<\/p>\nStates Taxing the Wealthy Are Mostly Targeting Income: Explained \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a>
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has become an example of state-level efforts to \u201ctax the rich,\u201d prompting both high\u2011profile exits and intense debate over its design and effects. It situates California in a broader landscape where many blue states are adopting or considering higher taxes on high earners with Washington, Maine, and others adding millionaire brackets. Voters in states like Colorado and Oregon are weighing progressive income or wealth\u2011style measures.<\/p>\nWealth tax or stealth tax?\u00a0\u2013\u00a0The Washington Times<\/a>
Chuck Flint, CEO of the Alliance for IRS Accountability, criticizes Sen. Warren\u2019s proposed \u201cUltra Millionaire Tax of 2026,\u201d arguing that taxing unrealized gains would require a massively expanded, $100 billion IRS enforcement apparatus that ultimately burdens middle\u2011class taxpayers and small business owners rather than just the ultrawealthy. Flint argues that annual mark\u2011to\u2011market valuation of assets like private businesses, farms, and volatile holdings (e.g., crypto) would force people to pay tax on paper gains they cannot readily access. Citing past audit patterns and the experience with boosted IRS funding under the Inflation Reduction Act, he warns that enforcement would drift toward less wealthy filers.<\/p>\nStarmer Leadership Strife Reignites UK Wealth Tax Debate \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a>
Cahos in Prime Minister Keir Starmer\u2019s leadership has reopened the UK debate over taxing wealth, with figures on the Labor Party\u2019s left pushing various wealth-focused measures. Andy Burnham argues the UK \u201covertaxed labor and undertaxed wealth\u201d and backs higher land and property\u2011style taxes. Wes Streeting calls for a \u201cwealth tax that works\u201d by aligning capital gains tax rates with income tax, a move supporters say could raise up to about \u00a310\u201312 billion but an analysis suggests could actually reduce revenue if investors delay realizing gains.<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_cta title=”Want to learn more?” button_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/polling-and-research\/wealth-tax\/” button_text=”Visit our State and Federal Wealth Tax Tracker – Click Here ” admin_label=”State and Federal Wealth Tax Tracker CTA” _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”#fc2f36″ custom_padding=”13px||18px|||” global_module=”17129″ global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_cta][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”off|off|off” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Logo & About” _builder_version=”4.22.1″ text_font=”||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/www.bhfs.com\/” link_option_url_new_window=”on” border_color_all=”#FFFFFF” border_style_all=”none” global_module=”6751″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
About Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck
<\/strong>Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck is a unique law firm. Walk into any of our offices and you\u2019ll immediately recognize a different type of energy. Complacency doesn\u2019t have a place here. Flexibility and inspiration do.\u00a0Our culture and enthusiasm allow our attorneys, policy consultants and legal staff to stay ahead of our clients\u2019 needs and provide them with the resources they require to meet their business objectives.<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”off|off|off” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Become a member text” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate-2\/” global_module=”5822″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
We hope you’ve enjoyed this article. While you’re here, we have a small favor to ask…<\/em><\/h4>\nAs we prepare for what promises to be a pivotal year for America, we’re asking you to consider becoming a member.<\/p>\n
The need for fact-based reporting of issues important to family owned businesses<\/a> and protecting a lifetime of savings<\/a> has never been greater. Now more than ever, successful families<\/a> and family owned businesses<\/a> are under fire. That’s why Family Enterprise USA<\/a> is passionately working to increase the awareness of issues important to family owned businesses<\/a> built on hard work, while continuing to strengthen our presence on Capitol Hill. The issues we fight for or against with Congress in Washington DC include high income tax rates<\/a>, possible elimination of valuation discounts, increase in capital gains tax<\/a>, enactment of a wealth tax<\/a>, and the continued burden of the gift tax<\/a>, estate tax<\/a> and generation skipping tax<\/a>.<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate\/” button_text=”Become a Family Enterprise USA Member” button_alignment=”center” disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Become FEUSA member button” _builder_version=”4.21.0″ _module_preset=”default” custom_button=”on” global_module=”6503″ global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_button][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_style=”dotted” divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”on|on|on” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_video_slider disabled_on=”on|on|on” admin_label=”Video Slider Family Business Stories 2″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_module=”6670″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=y9VszpRjVDM” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=03T2VODneEg” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=fHIxWaTwK64″ _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=TI7P07GbNdU&t=27s” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][\/et_pb_video_slider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”FEUSA Statement” _builder_version=”4.21.0″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate-2\/” global_module=”5910″ saved_tabs=”all” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
\nFamily Enterprise USA<\/a> promotes generationally<\/a> owned family business<\/a> creation, growth, viability, and sustainability by advocating for family businesses<\/a> and their lifetime of savings with Congress<\/a> in Washington DC.\u00a0 Since 2007, Family Enterprise USA<\/a> has represented and celebrated\u00a0all sizes, professions and industries of family-owned enterprises and multi-generational<\/a> employers. It is a bi-partisan 501.c3 organization.\u00a0Family foundations can donate.<\/a><\/p>\n
\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|on|on” admin_label=”Hash tags & Tags” _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_module=”6498″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n
#incometax #CapitalGainsTax #R&DExpensing #DontPunishSuccess #GrantorTrusts #StepUpinBasis #likeKindExchanges #AcceleratedDepreciation #EstateTax #Deathtax #wealthtax #taxLegislation #CongressionalCaucus #incometaxrates #repealestatetax #AdvocatingForFamilyBusinesses #FamilyOwnedBusiness #WomenOwnedBusiness @FamilyEnterpriseUSA #FamilyEnterpriseUSA #FEUSA<\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This week\u2019s wealth-tax debate spanned from federal proposals to tax AI-driven wealth and close billionaire borrowing loopholes to broader calls for public ownership or stronger taxation of extreme wealth. California remained the focal point, as its proposed one-time billionaire tax drew support from a majority of voters while also fueling legal challenges, relocation stories, and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":17501,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[48,92,115],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17499","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-family-businesses","category-multi-generational-business","category-wealth-tax"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17499"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17504,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499\/revisions\/17504"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17501"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17499"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17499"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17499"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), argues that artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to exacerbate economic inequality by concentrating wealth among tech companies. She also highlighted that it would displace workers and raise costs, including energy prices tied to data centers. She calls for taxing AI as part of a broader overhaul of the tax code, including higher corporate and capital gains taxes, a wealth tax, and closing loopholes that favor automation over hiring. Sen. Warren also proposed targeted measures such as an excise tax on AI data centers\u2019 energy use, with revenue used to fund priorities like universal healthcare, education and jobs.<\/p>\n
On CNBC, Sen. Warren said argues that emerging AI technologies and extreme wealth concentration justify new forms of taxation, including targeted levies on AI and a broad-based federal wealth tax. She proposes an excise tax on AI data centers so firms \u201cinternalize\u201d the social and labor-market costs of automation and to fund health care, child care, and education. She also reiterates her call for a wealth tax, framing it as a simple way to bypass loophole-ridden income and capital-gains rules and ensure billionaires contribute based on their accumulated wealth rather than just realized income.<\/p>\n
Sen. Tim Scott: A wealth tax is a terrible idea\u00a0\u2013\u00a0CNBC<\/a> Opinion | Bernie Sanders: A.I. Belongs to the People, Not to Billionaires\u00a0\u2013\u00a0The New York Times<\/a> Gallego Introduces Legislation to Crack Down on Billionaire Tax Loophole<\/a> 2026 California Billionaire Tax Act: Details & Analysis \u2013 The Tax Foundation<\/a> California\u2019s Tax-Weary Billionaires Seek Refuge on Lake Tahoe\u2019s Nevada Shore\u00a0\u2013\u00a0WSJ<\/a> Opinion: California\u2019s proposed \u2018billionaire tax\u2019 is moronic. We should do this instead.\u00a0\u2013\u00a0MarketWatch<\/a> Proposed ‘billionaire tax’ in California spurs controversy and heavy spending\u00a0\u2013\u00a0ABC News<\/a> Billionaire \u2018Class Traitor\u2019 Steyer Wants to Tax His Fellow Rich \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a> Proposed billionaire tax backed by majority of California voters \u2013 New York Post<\/a> The risks California wealth tax advocates are ignoring \u2013 Press Telegram<\/a> Op-ed: The Case for California’s Wealth Tax\u00a0\u2013\u00a0New York Times<\/a> Texas dethrones California as top state for Fortune 500 headquarters\u00a0\u2013\u00a0Fox Business<\/a> Boston Seizes on California Billionaire Tax to Lure AI Jobs\u00a0\u2013\u00a0Bloomberg<\/a> New York passes Mamdani’s pied-a-terre tax. Who pays and how much – CNBC<\/a> Revised FY27 budget takes up \u2018compromise\u2019 millionaire\u2019s tax, frustrating businesses and progressives – Rhode Island Current<\/a> Millionaires tax will likely appear on November ballot – FOX 13 Seattle<\/a> Ferguson vows to veto any expansion of WA \u2018millionaires tax\u2019\u00a0\u2013\u00a0\u00a0Union-Bulletin<\/a> High-Tax States and Competitiveness \u2013 The Tax Foundation<\/a> States Taxing the Wealthy Are Mostly Targeting Income: Explained \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a> Wealth tax or stealth tax?\u00a0\u2013\u00a0The Washington Times<\/a> Starmer Leadership Strife Reignites UK Wealth Tax Debate \u2013 Bloomberg Law<\/a> [\/et_pb_text][et_pb_cta title=”Want to learn more?” button_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/polling-and-research\/wealth-tax\/” button_text=”Visit our State and Federal Wealth Tax Tracker – Click Here ” admin_label=”State and Federal Wealth Tax Tracker CTA” _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”#fc2f36″ custom_padding=”13px||18px|||” global_module=”17129″ global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_cta][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”off|off|off” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck Logo & About” _builder_version=”4.22.1″ text_font=”||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/www.bhfs.com\/” link_option_url_new_window=”on” border_color_all=”#FFFFFF” border_style_all=”none” global_module=”6751″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n About Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck [\/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”off|off|off” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Become a member text” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate-2\/” global_module=”5822″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n As we prepare for what promises to be a pivotal year for America, we’re asking you to consider becoming a member.<\/p>\n The need for fact-based reporting of issues important to family owned businesses<\/a> and protecting a lifetime of savings<\/a> has never been greater. Now more than ever, successful families<\/a> and family owned businesses<\/a> are under fire. That’s why Family Enterprise USA<\/a> is passionately working to increase the awareness of issues important to family owned businesses<\/a> built on hard work, while continuing to strengthen our presence on Capitol Hill. The issues we fight for or against with Congress in Washington DC include high income tax rates<\/a>, possible elimination of valuation discounts, increase in capital gains tax<\/a>, enactment of a wealth tax<\/a>, and the continued burden of the gift tax<\/a>, estate tax<\/a> and generation skipping tax<\/a>.<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate\/” button_text=”Become a Family Enterprise USA Member” button_alignment=”center” disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”Become FEUSA member button” _builder_version=”4.21.0″ _module_preset=”default” custom_button=”on” global_module=”6503″ global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_button][et_pb_divider color=”#397389″ divider_style=”dotted” divider_weight=”2px” disabled_on=”on|on|on” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_colors_info=”{}”][\/et_pb_divider][et_pb_video_slider disabled_on=”on|on|on” admin_label=”Video Slider Family Business Stories 2″ _builder_version=”4.27.4″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_module=”6670″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=y9VszpRjVDM” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=03T2VODneEg” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=fHIxWaTwK64″ _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][et_pb_video_slider_item src=”https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=TI7P07GbNdU&t=27s” _builder_version=”4.19.4″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” show_image_overlay=”off”][\/et_pb_video_slider_item][\/et_pb_video_slider][et_pb_text disabled_on=”off|off|off” admin_label=”FEUSA Statement” _builder_version=”4.21.0″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” link_option_url=”https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/donate-2\/” global_module=”5910″ saved_tabs=”all” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n Family Enterprise USA<\/a> promotes generationally<\/a> owned family business<\/a> creation, growth, viability, and sustainability by advocating for family businesses<\/a> and their lifetime of savings with Congress<\/a> in Washington DC.\u00a0 Since 2007, Family Enterprise USA<\/a> has represented and celebrated\u00a0all sizes, professions and industries of family-owned enterprises and multi-generational<\/a> employers. It is a bi-partisan 501.c3 organization.\u00a0Family foundations can donate.<\/a><\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][et_pb_text disabled_on=”on|on|on” admin_label=”Hash tags & Tags” _builder_version=”4.27.6″ _module_preset=”default” disabled=”on” global_module=”6498″ global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n #incometax #CapitalGainsTax #R&DExpensing #DontPunishSuccess #GrantorTrusts #StepUpinBasis #likeKindExchanges #AcceleratedDepreciation #EstateTax #Deathtax #wealthtax #taxLegislation #CongressionalCaucus #incometaxrates #repealestatetax #AdvocatingForFamilyBusinesses #FamilyOwnedBusiness #WomenOwnedBusiness @FamilyEnterpriseUSA #FamilyEnterpriseUSA #FEUSA<\/p>\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This week\u2019s wealth-tax debate spanned from federal proposals to tax AI-driven wealth and close billionaire borrowing loopholes to broader calls for public ownership or stronger taxation of extreme wealth. California remained the focal point, as its proposed one-time billionaire tax drew support from a majority of voters while also fueling legal challenges, relocation stories, and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":17501,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[48,92,115],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17499","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-family-businesses","category-multi-generational-business","category-wealth-tax"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17499"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17504,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17499\/revisions\/17504"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17501"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17499"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17499"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/familyenterpriseusa.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17499"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) argues against taxing unrealized gains and wealth taxes, calling them impractical and punitive, especially for asset\u2011rich, cash\u2011poor taxpayers like farmers. He said that lower capital gains rates historically increased federal revenue by encouraging realizations and reinvestment, while higher rates suppressed realizations and reduced receipts, so tax policy should focus on pro\u2011growth incentives rather than new taxes on wealth. Chairman Scott emphasized that the top share of earners already pay most federal taxes, the bottom half pay little or no net income tax, and the core problem is federal overspending, which he believes should be addressed through spending restraint, a balanced budget requirement, and bipartisan process reforms rather than wealth\u2011based taxes.<\/p>\n
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) argued that AI will be a transformative force with major economic and social consequences. He raised concerns about concentrated control among certain individuals and the use of publicly derived data without compensation. He claimed that because AI is built on collective human knowledge, its benefits should be broadly shared. He proposed creating an American AI sovereign wealth fund through a 50% one-time tax paid in company stock. The fund would give the public an ownership stake and governance role in major AI firms while generating revenue to support direct payments and public investments. He said that AI-driven wealth should benefit all Americans rather than a small group of private actors.<\/p>\n
On June 2, Sen. Ruben Gallego introduced the ROBINHOOD Act.\u00a0The bill treats loans taken out by high net-worth taxpayers as \u201crealization events\u201d of unrealized long-term capital gains, triggering long-term capital gains equal to the amount of borrowing. This capital gain is thus subject to normal taxes, currently totaling 23.8% for these taxpayers.\u00a0After paying, the taxpayer would then be able to increase the basis of assets in their portfolio up to the value of the loan to avoid double taxation if the assets are later sold. The provisions of the bill apply to taxpayers who have an income over $100 million and\/or assets worth more than $1 billion.<\/p>\nCalifornia<\/strong><\/h4>\n
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has constitutional vulnerabilities that create strong incentives for billionaires to leave the state during 2026. This article explains that tying liability to a \u201csnapshot\u201d residency date (January 1) and a later valuation date (December 31), without apportionment for part\u2011year residency and even taxing post\u2011departure wealth, may violate due process. Because courts may strike down or rewrite these provisions\u2014especially the retroactive imposition of a wholly new wealth tax and the attempt to tax wealth earned after a taxpayer leaves\u2014the Tax Foundation concludes that mid\u20112026 movers have credible legal arguments to reduce or avoid the tax, and that the measure\u2019s design is likely to fuel ongoing billionaire out\u2011migration even before any court rulings.\u00a0<\/p>\n
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is accelerating a shift of ultra-wealthy residents to the Nevada side of Lake Tahoe, where there is no state income, capital gains, or corporate tax. This tax-driven migration has fueled a surge in demand and record-breaking home sales in Nevada communities like Incline Village and Crystal Bay, with buyers paying premiums to reduce tax exposure.<\/p>\n
Brett Arends argues that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is poorly designed, likely to trigger avoidance and outmigration, and ineffective as a revenue solution, ultimately undermining the broader case for wealth taxation. Arends notes that while wealth inequality has grown significantly and justifies policy action, a better approach would be a modest, recurring national wealth tax (e.g., 1% annually) that is harder to evade, more stable for revenue, and less economically disruptive.<\/p>\n
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has become a polarizing ballot fight that is dividing Democrats and fueling massive, competing campaigns. Supporters argue the measure could raise about $100 billion over five years, with roughly 90% dedicated to shoring up the healthcare system and preventing a \u201ccomplete collapse.\u201d Opponents including Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and the \u201cBuilding a Better California\u201d group warn it could spur billionaire flight, damage the state\u2019s economic base, and be effectively nullified by rival ballot measures.<\/p>\n
Tom Steyer has spent over $200 million of his own money into the race and calls for capping oil refinery profits, breaking up utility monopolies, and taxing the ultra\u2011rich, enraging business groups and prompting heavy attack ads. While critics question his authenticity and classify his campaign as performative or narcissistic, supporters argue he is using his wealth to challenge his own class.<\/p>\n
A recent Public Policy Institute of California poll finds that 54% of likely voters support the California\u2019s proposed wealth tax even as business groups, Gov. Gavin Newsom, and several studies warn it could trigger billionaire flight, major job and wage losses, and long\u2011term economic damage. Support is strongest among Democrats, lower\u2011income voters, renters, and residents in urban areas like Los Angeles. Republicans, wealthier voters, and homeowners are far more skeptical, and Central Valley voters lean against the measure.<\/p>\n
Daniel Bunn, CEO of the Tax Foundation, said that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax is far riskier than advertised. He warned that it would be difficult to administer, likely unconstitutional in parts, and highly distortive in practice. Bunn highlights drafting flaws that could push effective tax rates on some founder stakes well above 100% of their value, create severe problems for privately held businesses, and accelerate the exodus of high-earning individuals and firms on which the state\u2019s revenue and philanthropic base depend. Comparing it to the European wealth-tax experience and California\u2019s already surging health and human services spending, Bunn said the measure would invite extensive litigation, undermine competitiveness, and fail to address the state\u2019s structural budget issues.<\/p>\n
Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman argue that California\u2019s proposed billionaire tax is a modest but important response to rising uninsured-coverage risks and extreme wealth concentration. They write that roughly 250 billionaire households now hold wealth equal to more than half of California\u2019s annual economic output, while paying only a tiny fraction of that wealth each year in California income tax \u2014 about 0.26% on average from 2019 to 2025, and about 0.07% for the very richest. They present the measure as narrowly targeted, designed with protections for illiquid start-up holdings and a 5% fair-market-value cap on shares, and capable of raising about $100 billion over five years.<\/p>\n
Texas has overtaken California as the state with the most Fortune 500 headquarters, now hosting 57 companies versus California\u2019s 56. Texas-based firms have generated about $2.8 trillion in revenue compared with $2.7 trillion for California-based firms. It links this shift to recent relocations by major corporations like ExxonMobil, Chevron, Samsung Electronics America, SpaceX and X, many moving from California to Texas, alongside billionaires and tech figures establishing residency in the state. Supporters of Texas\u2019s rise point to its business\u2011friendly regulatory environment, lower costs and population inflows, while noting that California\u2019s proposed wealth tax and broader tax policies are fueling concerns about job losses, and competitiveness.<\/p>\nMassachusetts<\/strong><\/h4>\n
Massachusetts business and political leaders see California\u2019s proposed wealth tax as a strategic opening to attract artificial intelligence investment and jobs to Boston. They argue that because so much AI talent already passes through local institutions like Harvard and MIT before decamping to Silicon Valley, California\u2019s new tax uncertainty could help Massachusetts convert its academic and biotech strengths into a larger share of the AI-driven economic boom. It would do so by positioning Boston as a more welcoming base for founders and high-growth companies.<\/p>\nNew York City<\/strong><\/h4>\n
New York state has approved a pied-\u00e0-terre tax on nonprimary residences in New York City valued at $1 million or more. It is aimed at helping close the city\u2019s budget gap by raising an estimated $500 million a year. In the first two years (2026\u201127 and 2027\u201128), condos and co\u2011ops valued by the city above $1 million will face steep add\u2011on rates of 4% to 6.5% based on assessed value, though those assessments are currently far below market. Beginning in 2028\u201129, valuations will be reset based on comparable sales and tax rates will drop to about 0.8%\u20131.3% for properties above $5 million, still significantly increasing many property tax bills.<\/p>\nRhode Island<\/strong><\/h4>\n
<\/u>Last week, Democratic members in the Rhode Island legislature included a phased-in \u201cmillionaires tax\u201d into their FY 2027 budget bill. The proposal would impose a 3% surtax on incomes over $1 million that would start at 1% in 2027 and rise to 3% by 2029. Over time, it would ultimately increase the top state income tax rate to 8.99%. The plan follows similar high-earner surtaxes in states like Massachusetts and Maine. The bill is scheduled for consideration in the full House on Friday.<\/p>\nWashington<\/strong><\/h4>\n
Washington\u2019s new \u201cmillionaires tax,\u201d is now the target of a repeal initiative that is likely to appear on the November ballot. Organizers from the group Let\u2019s Go Washington say they have already gathered nearly 100,000 signatures in about a week and are confident they will surpass the roughly 324,000 needed by July 2. Governor Bob Ferguson (D) has publicly welcomed a voter decision and argued that the revenue will fund low\u2011income family tax credits, schools, and child care. He has pledged not to lower the threshold below $1 million, but the initiative\u2019s leader Brian Heywood, accuses Ferguson and state leaders of lacking credibility on income taxes, saying many signers do not believe those assurances.<\/p>\n
Gov. Bob Ferguson (D) has pledged to veto any future attempt to lower the income threshold or raise the rate, emphasizing the tax is meant only for top earners and will fund schools, healthcare, and other services. He and other Democrats see the reassurance as necessary to calm nonmillionaire voters wary the tax could eventually broaden, while opponents like \u00a0Brian Heywood and Republican lawmakers dismiss his promise as not credible, noting Washington\u2019s long history of rejecting income taxes and citing strong early signature-gathering as evidence of broad public resistance.<\/p>\nOther<\/strong><\/h4>\n
Efforts by high\u2011tax states to close structural budget gaps by raising taxes on high earners and adopting wealth or \u201cbillionaire\u201d taxes are fiscally counterproductive and likely to backfire. It details how jurisdictions like California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Washington are imposing new surtaxes on top incomes or proposing net\u2011worth taxes, warning that these moves increase volatility, complicate administration and encourage wealthy, mobile taxpayers and capital to relocate to lower\u2011tax states. The Tax Foundation argues that because these measures target a narrow, highly mobile tax base and address structural deficits with unsustainable solutions, they risk eroding long\u2011term revenues and competitiveness. The Tax Foundation suggests spending restraint and broad\u2011based, neutral tax reforms rather than wealth\u2011focused taxes.<\/p>\n
California\u2019s proposed wealth tax has become an example of state-level efforts to \u201ctax the rich,\u201d prompting both high\u2011profile exits and intense debate over its design and effects. It situates California in a broader landscape where many blue states are adopting or considering higher taxes on high earners with Washington, Maine, and others adding millionaire brackets. Voters in states like Colorado and Oregon are weighing progressive income or wealth\u2011style measures.<\/p>\n
Chuck Flint, CEO of the Alliance for IRS Accountability, criticizes Sen. Warren\u2019s proposed \u201cUltra Millionaire Tax of 2026,\u201d arguing that taxing unrealized gains would require a massively expanded, $100 billion IRS enforcement apparatus that ultimately burdens middle\u2011class taxpayers and small business owners rather than just the ultrawealthy. Flint argues that annual mark\u2011to\u2011market valuation of assets like private businesses, farms, and volatile holdings (e.g., crypto) would force people to pay tax on paper gains they cannot readily access. Citing past audit patterns and the experience with boosted IRS funding under the Inflation Reduction Act, he warns that enforcement would drift toward less wealthy filers.<\/p>\n
Cahos in Prime Minister Keir Starmer\u2019s leadership has reopened the UK debate over taxing wealth, with figures on the Labor Party\u2019s left pushing various wealth-focused measures. Andy Burnham argues the UK \u201covertaxed labor and undertaxed wealth\u201d and backs higher land and property\u2011style taxes. Wes Streeting calls for a \u201cwealth tax that works\u201d by aligning capital gains tax rates with income tax, a move supporters say could raise up to about \u00a310\u201312 billion but an analysis suggests could actually reduce revenue if investors delay realizing gains.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/strong>Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck is a unique law firm. Walk into any of our offices and you\u2019ll immediately recognize a different type of energy. Complacency doesn\u2019t have a place here. Flexibility and inspiration do.\u00a0Our culture and enthusiasm allow our attorneys, policy consultants and legal staff to stay ahead of our clients\u2019 needs and provide them with the resources they require to meet their business objectives.<\/p>\nWe hope you’ve enjoyed this article. While you’re here, we have a small favor to ask…<\/em><\/h4>\n
\n
\n