An interesting question is "how far can the US go (in terms of extra tax revenue) by raising taxes on the top 1% — and the top 1% only?"

Short answer is: there& #39;s up to $800 billion/year in extra revenue to be collected by taxing the 1% more

Short thread explaining this

https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten" aria-label="Emoji: Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten">https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten" aria-label="Emoji: Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten">https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten" aria-label="Emoji: Rückhand Zeigefinger nach unten">

The top 1% earns about 20% of national income today, and has an effective tax rate (all taxes included) of about 30%.

This means the top 1% pays 20% x 30% = 6% of national income in taxes today.

Existing estimates suggest an elasticity of taxable income of about 0.25% for the rich (which could be reduced with stronger enforcement and fewer loopholes)

This elasticity implies a revenue-maximizing average tax rate (the top of the Laffer curve) of about 60% for the top 1%

Of course if the average tax rate of the top 1% was multiplied by 2, their income would fall — instead of earning 20% of national income, they would earn around 16%

So they would pay 16% x 60 % = close to 10% national income in taxes.

That& #39;s more or less the tax you can get

10% of national income is 4 points more than today = $800 billion extra per year

Over the 10-year window, that& #39;s something like $9.6 trillion in extra taxes that could be collected on the top 1% alone

That& #39;s the upshot of rising inequality: there& #39;s a lot of $$$ at the top

/end