Supreme Court will not hear challenge to Washington's Capital Gains tax
The U.S. Supreme Court said Tuesday it would not review Quinn v. Washington, the lawsuit challenging Washington’s capital gains tax.
The Legislature passed the tax in 2021 and payments first came due in April 2023. It’s a 7% tax on stocks, bonds and other investments or tangible assets above $250,000.
The tax brought in almost $900 million in revenue in its first year.
Opponents had argued it was a tax on income, and thus barred by Washington’s state constitution.
|
Washington wealth tax delivers huge income to the state
This spring, after decades of discussion, the state finally imposed its first wealth-related levy. The capital gains tax, passed in 2021 and upheld by the state Supreme Court in March, taxes not extreme wealth but the machinations of it — the selling of assets, mostly stocks, in amounts that lead to profits of more than $250,000 in a year.
Estimators modeled that Washington has about 7,000 people who live in this rarefied financial air. These one-tenth percenters would book roughly $8 billion in capital gains, mostly in stock options or returns from investment funds (real estate sales are not taxed). The 7% capital gains tax would then raise $440 million in 2023, to be used for schools.
What ended up happening blew the models out of the water.
According to the state, 3,190 people have paid a total so far of $849 million — nearly twice what was expected. That reflects about $13 billion in underlying capital gains booked by these 3,000-plus people in 2022. That's fewer people than expected. But they turned out to be far richer.
|
Why our economy favors ultra wealthy existing
A fantastic write up with awesome interactive elements that delves into the Yard-sale model. I especially like the visualization midway through which explores the impact of wealth redistribution's impact on the system.
Interestingly, there isn't a good Wikipedia entry for it. But there are some good additional reference sources at the end of the linked article.
|
Panama Papers Whistleblower Grants Interview After Six Years
After six years, two reporters for Germany's Der Spiegel were able to interview the anonymous whistleblower who leaked the Panama Papers. Here are just a few excerpts, though I heavily encourage you to read the full interview.
Notably the German daily Süddeutsche Zeitung, which broke the story of the Panama Papers, was not the whistleblower's first outlet that they reached out to: "I corresponded with many journalists who were uninterested, including at the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. Wikileaks, for its part, did not even bother answering when I reached out to them later on."
Another notable longer excerpt which delves into why the whistleblower has remained quiet since the leak:
DER SPIEGEL: So, you have remained silent now for six years. Why do you want to speak up now?
Doe: There have been several occasions over the past six years where I have been tempted to speak up. At each one of those points, it has seemed like the world was careening closer and closer toward catastrophe, and so the need to attempt to intervene has always seemed increasingly urgent. At the same time, however, I have had to balance a few factors.
DER SPIEGEL: What exactly are you referring to?
Doe: First, of course, is my own physical safety, and that of my family. And second is the fact that the world is a big place with a cacophony of voices all trying to get their point across. I wanted my words to carry meaning, not to get lost before the next Donald Trump tweet. In 2016, I wrote (Eds: in a manifesto) of my fear based on what I was witnessing, "that severe instability could be just around the corner." I am afraid that instability has finally arrived.
A very good interview both about the realities of being a whistleblower, and also the larger realities of the Panama Papers' importance especially in light of Russia's economic sanctions.
|
How Soccer Succumbed to the Global Elite
Deep down, there’s something about sport that reveals people’s natural conservatism. The experience of living through the decline of great players and great teams brings an acute sense of the passing of time and of loss—something you don’t get so obviously with states or empires, which take longer to fall. This is why documentaries about Michael Jordan’s Chicago Bulls continue to be watched by millions, and why TikTok seems to constantly offer me clips of old English Premier League players reminiscing about the good old days. These are all reminders of a more innocent age in one’s own life.
|
