[lazide]

The argument was that it was ludicrous to say a wealth tax of x percent > income tax of x percent in actual impact, yes?

It is clearly the case if you try to apply the income tax rate as a wealth tax using concrete real world examples.

Even a 3% property tax makes it very difficult for many normal people to own those assets in many real world economic circumstances.

[harimau777]

I don't think that those issues would be too difficult to fix.

The tax could be made progressive so that it doesn't impact people who can't afford it.

Someone's primary home and vehicle could be omitted from the tax.

[lazide]

It does change that there is a multiplier. Even 5% is likely a deathknell for all but a couple percent of assets owned by the most aggressive ‘sharks’.

A good way to make owning anything unaffordable though! The carve outs would just defacto set a cap for normal people. No more than one house, etc.

[Dylan16807]

What's your definition of affordable here?

You can still own millions and billions of dollars of things, but you'll have to shrink your money pile over time to pay for those things if you don't have a source of income.

[lazide]

It depends on the asset and the ability to earn income from it.

The higher the rate, the harder it will be to do.

At some point, only speculators with deep pockets and the desperate with enough cash flow could do it.