Vice President Kamala Harris’ tax policy proposal, particularly her plan to tax “unrealized gains,” faced fierce criticism this week on CNBC. During an interview, Harris’ economic adviser, Bharat Ramamurti, attempted to defend the proposal, only to be met with strong pushback from the hosts, who argued that such a tax would be not only economically destructive but also unconstitutional.
Unrealized gains refer to the increase in the value of an asset that has not yet been sold. Harris’ plan would impose a minimum 25 percent tax on both traditional income and unrealized capital gains for individuals with more than $100 million in total wealth. While the policy is intended to target the wealthiest Americans, critics warn it could have severe consequences for the economy and personal finances.
NEW: CNBC host Joe Kernen rolls his eyes and laughs after Harris’ economic advisor Bharat Rama tries arguing in favor of Harris’ unrealized capital gains tax.
Rama sat in silence as the hosts poked fun after he tried saying that property tax was an unrealized gains tax.
“It’s… pic.twitter.com/lK4jGL6phz
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) August 28, 2024
The central issue with taxing unrealized gains is that it taxes individuals on projected future income that they haven’t yet received. For example, if the value of your home increases by $50,000, under this plan, you could be required to pay a tax on that increase—even if you haven’t sold the house or have no liquid assets to cover the tax bill. This could force people to sell assets or take out loans just to pay the government, raising serious concerns about property rights and financial stability.
CNBC host Joe Kernen didn’t hold back, bluntly stating that such a tax would violate the Constitution. He, along with co-hosts, dismantled Ramamurti’s argument that the tax was similar to a property tax, pointing out the fundamental differences between the two.
Property taxes are based on the current value of the property you use, while an unrealized gains tax would essentially be a preemptive strike on wealth that hasn’t materialized as actual income.
Kamala Harris’s team is stone cold moronic: https://t.co/FjjSi8Dcdd
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) August 28, 2024
The Cato Institute has also weighed in, calling the Harris plan “economically destructive and administratively unworkable.” They argue that taxing unrealized gains is problematic because it taxes income that doesn’t yet exist, infringing on individual financial rights and potentially forcing people into difficult financial situations.
This proposal is just one piece of Harris’ broader tax agenda, which includes other controversial measures like price controls. Critics warn that these policies could lead to significant economic disruption, and they are urging voters to consider these implications as they head to the polls.
