By relying on an antiquated tax system better “suited to nineteenth-century New Zealand” than modern day America, the administration is missing out on a chance to redefine the top tax brackets in order to distinguish the “so-called rich” from the really rich. By so-called rich, Surowiecki is referring to the professional class—doctors, lawyers, even some journalists—while the really rich, or “executive suite” wealthy, are in a class of their own.

 

Critics of ending the Bush tax cuts claim that this would hurt small-business owners. That’s because someone making $375,000 a year is taxed at the same rate as someone making multiple millions. If more tax brackets were created at the top end of the scale, more revenue could be collected from the super rich, without putting an extra burden on the “sort of” rich.

 

Why force “someone making two hundred thousand dollars a year and someone making two hundred million dollars a year pay at similar tax rates,” asks Surowiecki. “LeBron James and LeBron James’s dentist: same difference.”

 

“This makes no sense—there’s a yawning chasm between the professional and the plutocratic classes, and the tax system should reflect that. A better tax system would have more brackets, so that the super-rich pay higher rates,” continues Surowiecki.

-Noel Brinkerhoff

 

Soak the Very, Very Rich (by James Surowiecki, New Yorker)