Washington Post editorial board argues raising taxes on rich would be fruitless
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Raising taxes on top earners in the United States — a solution praised by many leading progressives — would be a fruitless endeavor, the Washington Post editorial board argued Monday, citing new research.
Post published a editorial The article, titled “Little to be gained by increasing taxes on the rich,” cites a paper by three members of the “strictly nonpartisan” Joint Committee on Taxation that concluded: “At top tax rates, large changes around the revenue-maximizing rate result in small changes in revenue.”
“Politicians who want to raise taxes on the wealthy will be disappointed to learn that they won’t get any extra money to spend by doing so, even though it will slow economic growth,” the publication said.
WASHINGTON POST PROVIDED U-HAUL DATA ON MIGRATIONS TO ‘GROWTH SUPPORTING’ STATES IN CALIFORNIA, SAID ‘DECLINE IS A CHOICE’
The Washington Post argued in an editorial on Monday that “increasing taxes on the rich does little good.” (Kevin Carter/Getty Images)
The research paper the Post cited states, “Laffer Curves Are Flat” was written by economists Rachel Moore, Brandon Pecoraro, and David Splinter and used the “Laffer Curve” to measure the trade-off between the top tax rate and income.
“They found that, holding the rest of the tax system constant, the highest federal rate that would maximize total government revenue would be 39%, which would raise long-term revenue by only 0.21%. Any top rate in the 30% to 45% range increases total revenue by about the same amount over the long run. Go higher and revenue declines,” the Post wrote.
In addition to determining the optimal cap rate, Post emphasized the importance of considering how federal tax rates interact with state and local taxes.
NY POST, WSJ, NY TIMES AND WASHINGTON POST PARTNER AGAINST TRUMP ADMIN OVER OPERATION ICE IN MINNEAPOLIS
“If further increases in federal revenue correspond to decreased state or local revenues, then there is little point in increasing it as other jurisdictions are likely to beg for funds from Washington,” the editorial board said.
As the Post notes, Moore, Pecoraro, and Splinter concluded that it was not crucial to precisely determine the maximum rate that maximized revenue.
The Washington Post editorial board noted a report by economists Rachel Moore, Brandon Pecoraro, and David Splinte that examined how raising top tax rates would affect economic growth and income. (DAMIEN MEYER/AFP via Getty Images)
“The relevant policy choice is between tax progressiveness and growth: the equity-efficiency trade-off,” the economists wrote.
Citing economists’ findings, the Post argued that “small changes achieved by raising the top rate” typically lead to “significant reductions in economic growth by doing so.”
CLICK HERE FOR MORE NEWS ON MEDIA AND CULTURE
The editorial board argued that “a more progressive tax code means a smaller economy” and that even modest increases in the top tax rate would lead to “an economy with millions less jobs and trillions less worth, and they with less income.”
Reflecting a broader trend for the historically liberal newspaper, the Post highlighted an argument long emphasized by conservative economists: further redistribution of income through higher taxes and increased government transfers would be counterproductive.
People attend a press conference and rally in support of fair taxation near the US Capitol in Washington, DC. On April 10, 2025. (Bryan Dozier / Middle East Images / Middle East Images via AFP)
“A recent report from the Congressional Budget Office [CBO] found that the federal tax and transfer system significantly reduces income inequality,” the publication noted. “While it is true that the top 1 percent have gradually earned a larger share of pre-tax income over time, their share of the federal income tax burden has increased more rapidly.”
Citing CBO’s findings, the editorial board noted that “social insurance, taxes, and transfers reduce the Gini coefficient, the most common measure of income inequality, by 28 percent.”
CLICK TO DOWNLOAD FOX NEWS APPLICATION
“Other rich countries have much less progressive tax systems, not because they tax the rich less, but because they tax the middle class more,” Post said. he added.
Summarizing its thoughts, the editorial board concluded that “it is not worth the trouble to make an already progressive income tax even more progressive.”
