search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
THE AGENDA Politics


23


Matthew Goodwin


Public opinion is turning against the ultra-wealthy, with the younger generation leading the opposition


T


he past year was not exactly smooth sailing for investors. The continued fallout from Covid-19, national lockdowns and new variants were followed by an uneven global recovery, renewed fears over rising infl ation, prophecies


of a market correction and a surge of geopolitical instability following America’s clumsy withdrawal from Afghanistan. Who would predict what 2022 has to offer? One of the less reported stories of this year is the apparent shift in the wider public mood towards HNWs. Against the backdrop of the recent fi nding that the world’s nearly 3,000 billionaires have seen their wealth surge by more than $5.5 trillion since the start of the pandemic, it appears the weather is changing. In July, the Pew Research Center released the fi ndings of a major


survey on how Americans feel about the ultra-wealthy. It found that a growing share of Americans now feel it is a ‘bad thing’ that some people have amassed personal fortunes of $1 billion or more. The percentage who say they feel this way is up from 23 per cent in January 2020 to 29 per cent. Only 15 per cent believe the existence of billionaires is a ‘good thing’, with the most popular option being ‘neither good nor bad’. Yet it is the generational shifts that I found most striking. Drill down into the data and you will fi nd that 50 per cent of people aged 18–29 felt that billionaires are a ‘bad thing for the country’, up from 39 per cent in 2020. This compares to only 19 per cent of over-65s, revealing a huge gulf between the young and old. To me at least, this is yet more evidence after very high levels of


tax’ on wealth above $50 million. ‘I want to see us tax wealth, however your wealth is tied up,’ Warren said to CNBC. ‘It shouldn’t make a difference whether you have real estate, or whether you have cash, or whether you have a bazillion shares of Amazon… Whatever form you have your assets – diamonds, yachts, paintings – I think there ought to be a tax on that annually.’ Warren has since fl eshed out her proposals to introduce what she


calls a ‘two-cent wealth tax’ that applies to the wealthiest 100,000 American households, ‘with a few cents more for the billionaires’. She claims it would raise $3 trillion in revenue over the next decade and is supported by 68 per cent of Americans, including a majority of Republican voters. Given Joe Biden’s lack of a clear majority, these proposals are


The emerging


Zoomers, who oſt en struggle to reap the benefi ts of capitalism, are far more receptive to anti-wealth,


pro-tax messages


support among Zoomers (Generation Z) for left-wing parties in the US and Britain that the emerging Zoomers, who often struggle to reap the benefi ts of capitalism, are far more receptive to anti-wealth, pro-tax messages. Many of these voters have struggled throughout the crisis, fi nding it diffi cult to get on the property ladder and being the most likely to have lost their job during the pandemic. As we look ahead to 2022, they may well have further


opportunities to voice these views. There is an old saying that what starts in America tends to happen elsewhere. In recent weeks, amid a broader debate about ‘progressive taxation’ in the US, Senator Elizabeth Warren has appealed to these views by reigniting her push for a tax on the wealth of the richest Americans, calling out Amazon founder Jeff Bezos in the process. Less than two years ago, during her campaign for the US presidency, Warren proposed a 2 per cent annual ‘ultra-millionaire


unlikely to go through. But they do refl ect a stronger appetite in politics for a broader move to tax wealthy individuals and families. The enormous fi scal impact of the Covid-19 crisis has changed the game, as Western politicians from Biden to Rishi Sunak look for ways to plug the holes by taxing the rich. Many of these leaders are also caught in a broader political realignment, with Biden needing to appeal to working-class non- graduates and Sunak and Boris Johnson needing to hold many of the same groups. Targeting tax at high earners in the context of a unique crisis appears to be where they are heading.


Biden has already announced measures to help the IRS with its tax enforcement, and through his recent tax plan he is


exploring ways of raising the top marginal tax rate, capital gains tax and making changes to inherited property. Progressives within his party such as Warren are urging him to go much further. Meanwhile, in countries such as the UK we already know there will be signifi cant increases in the rate of corporation tax and are now hearing talk of further changes to capital gains tax and pensions. The way these issues develop will have a signifi cant impact on the political landscape. After all, 2022 has a busy political calendar with a crunch set of mid-term elections in the US and rumours of an earlier than expected general election in early 2023 in the UK, for which the campaigning would begin in late 2022. In both those contests, how we price-in the crisis will be a major theme and, within that context, UHNWs may fi nd themselves in the fi ring line. S Matthew Goodwin is professor of politics and associate fellow at Chatham House


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100