OP / ED
The state of our nation is one of extraordinary innovation — and extraordinary inequality. While working families in Central Texas and across the country struggle to afford housing, healthcare and education, America’s wealthiest citizens continue to accumulate more than any society in modern history. The richest 1% now own more wealth than the entire middle class combined.
Income inequality is serious — but wealth inequality is far worse. Think of income as your checking account: it’s what you live off of week to week. Wealth, on the other hand, is your savings account, plus your home equity, stocks and other assets. It’s what determines not just how well you’re doing today, but how secure your future will be.
Here’s another way to see it: imagine income as gold entering a dragon’s lair. Wealth is the mountain of gold already in the lair. We’ve spent years debating how to tax the incoming gold, while the hoarded treasure — largely untouched — keeps growing.
Meanwhile, critical public programs go underfunded. Public schools face staff shortages and outdated materials. Medicaid is stretched thin, leaving low-income Texans without access to specialists. Housing Choice Vouchers only reach about one in four eligible households. The Social Security Trust Fund faces depletion within a decade, threatening retirees who paid into the system their entire working lives. The VA, SNAP, childcare subsidies and infrastructure upgrades — all suffer from chronic underinvestment.
We hear a lot about the national deficit, but what about the deficit of dignity, stability and opportunity? The cost of inaction isn’t abstract — it’s measured in shuttered schools, closed rural hospitals and dreams deferred.
I’m proposing a federal excise tax on the top 1% of wealth holders — those with net worths above roughly $10 million — not a traditional “wealth tax,” but a constitutionally sound privilege tax on the benefit of holding vast assets within a system built by all of us. In addition to the annual tax, we would impose a 40% “exit tax” on any ultra-wealthy individual who attempts to renounce their U.S. citizenship to avoid paying their fair share.
This idea builds on the efforts of Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Senator Warren’s 2021 proposal would have imposed a 2% annual tax on wealth above $50 million, and 3% on wealth above $1 billion. Experts estimated it could raise $3 trillion over 10 years, or $300 billion per year — roughly 9% of annual federal revenue. Expanding the base to include the full top 1% could generate even more, enough to fully fund universal childcare, end medical debt and eliminate tuition at public colleges.
To administer this, the bill earmarks a portion of the new revenue to modernize and expand the IRS’s ability to value assets, enforce compliance, and close loopholes — ensuring the tax is effective, fair and efficient.
But let’s be clear: a direct federal tax on wealth would face legal challenges under Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, which forbids unapportioned direct taxes. That’s why this proposal is structured as an excise tax — a levy on the privilege of holding extraordinary wealth, similar to how we already tax luxury goods or corporate activities.
The Supreme Court has long upheld this approach. In Knowlton v. Moore (1900), the Court ruled that inheritance taxes are legal because they tax the transfer, not mere ownership, of wealth. In Hylton v. United States (1796), a tax on carriage ownership was found to be an indirect tax, allowable without apportionment. The estate tax, the gift tax, and corporate privilege taxes all rely on this same logic.
This isn’t a radical departure — it’s legal precedent.
The ultra-rich didn’t build their fortunes in a vacuum. Their wealth depends on our infrastructure — roads, ports, internet lines. Our educated workforce — trained in public schools. Our legal system — to enforce contracts and protect intellectual property. Our security — provided by police, firefighters and soldiers. Our public investment — in everything from GPS to vaccines.
It’s not punishing success to ask billionaires to pay back into the system that made their success possible. It’s common sense.
Critics often point to failures abroad. France repealed its wealth tax after capital flight. Sweden eliminated theirs after reporting high administrative costs. We’ve learned from these mistakes. Here’s how our proposal avoids them: thresholds are modest and realistic, targeting the top 1%. Third-party reporting ensures valuation accuracy. Built-in anti-avoidance rules prevent offshoring and trust abuse. Graduated rates minimize liquidity pressures. Strong enforcement is supported by funding the IRS itself. And we avoid the unconstitutionality trap by using an excise framework, not a direct tax.
Opponents will say this is class warfare. But true class warfare is a system where a janitor pays a higher tax rate than a hedge fund manager. They’ll say the rich will flee. But where would they go? The U.S. offers the best legal, economic and social infrastructure in the world. They’ll say it’s too hard to administer. But we already assess estate taxes, corporate taxes and capital gains. This is well within the IRS’s capabilities with proper investment.
Extreme inequality is not just an economic issue — it’s a moral one. It divides our country into two classes: those with security, freedom, and power — and those without. That’s not the American promise.
America is not a caste society. And it never will be — not if we stand up, together, for a country where opportunity belongs to everyone, not just the heirs of billionaires.
Let’s build a system where prosperity is shared, not hoarded. Where the dragons pay their dues — and the village thrives.
