Eating the Seed Corn

A growing movement is underway to impose a global minimum tax of 2 percent on the world’s 2,700 billionaires. This would raise an estimated $250 billion annually. One stated purpose of the movement is to “clampdown on tax evasion.” In truth, such a tax would be akin to eating the seed corn.

To eat the seed corn is to consume that which could and should be used for future production. A farmer who consumes all of his corn this year has nothing to plant next year. The same principle applies to taxation, and particularly taxation of the wealthy.

The wealthy do not put their money under the mattress. It is invested, and that investment fuels current and future production. It provides the capital to build or expand a factory, to start a new business, build housing, and countless other productive activities.

In contrast, the recipients of taxes—governments—produce nothing. Whether they are funding the military, building roads, or handing out entitlements, governments are consumers. And what they consume is the wealth produced by private individuals and businesses.

Every dollar taken by the government is one less dollar to be invested in production by the private sector. One of the complaints being voiced is that billionaires shelter their income by investing in real estate—i.e., production. The estimated $250 billion raised by the global minimum tax is $250 billion that will be consumed, rather than used for productive purposes.

While billionaires are the current target, the global income tax will inevitably be expanded to include those with less wealth. It is worth remembering that when the U.S. income tax was implemented in 1913, a tax rate of 2 percent was imposed on those earning between $20,000 (about $621,800 in 2023 dollars) and $50,000 000 (about $1.55 million in 2023 dollars). Those earning more than $500,000 000 (about $15.5 million in 2023 dollars) paid a 7 percent tax.

By 1918, those earning between $20,000 000 (about $407,000 in 2023 dollars) and $22,000 000 (about $448,000 in 2023 dollars) were paying 21 percent. For each additional $2,000, the tax rate was increased 1 percent, with a top rate of 77 percent for those earning more than $1 million 000 (about $20.4 million in 2023 dollars).

The above numbers illustrate that governments may initially tax high income earners at a modest rate. However, they quickly increase both the rate and who must pay higher rates. Nearly everyone gets sucked into the blackhole of insatiable government spending.

Imposing special taxes on the wealthy will do nothing to fix the world’s problems. Indeed, it will add to the problems. A farmer only eats his seed corn when his survival is at risk. Though he may survive today, his future production is threatened when he eats his seed corn. Increasing taxes threatens future production to the detriment of all.

Similar Posts

  • Virtual Mayoral Candidacy

    In February 2009, I announced my “virtual” candidacy for Mayor of Houston. It was a campaign conducted solely through my blog, Live Oaks, and was intended to demonstrate the positions that a freedom-loving candidate would take. Below is my platform. Over the past few months I have previewed some of the potential candidates for the…

  • |

    New Education Metrics

    According to Politico, the budget passed by the Texas Legislature in the recent session establishes new metrics for evaluating school success rates that shift focus away from “performance statistics,” such as standardized test scores, and toward “success statistics,” like graduation rates, enrollment rates in post-secondary education like college or vocational school, and estimated income of…

  • Cronyism in Cedar Park

    The Dallas Morning News reports that government officials in Cedar Park recently approved a plan to create a special tax zone in the city’s downtown area. The plan is expected to generate $160 million in investments in the area. Such tax zones are used throughout the state to generate funds to improve the infrastructure in…

  • The Ike Dike

    Texas politicians have been pressuring the Trump Administration to fund the Ike Dike as a part of infrastructure improvements. On the surface, this might seem like a great benefit for Texans and a number of justifications have been offered, including issues of national security. But surface benefits are only a part of the story. While…

  • |

    A Flood of Money

    In the wake of Hurricane Harvey, officials in Harris County have announced plans to buy some homes that have flooded multiple times. The argument is that it is cheaper for taxpayers to buy the homes, demolish them, and turn the land into green space rather than continuing to rebuild. While this may be true, it…