A Warren supporter took wealth tax idea to supermarkets of Palo Alto, California
vox.com
vox.com
Ultimately France admitted it was a mistake, and eliminated the wealth tax.
There are dozens of sources on this. It's lunacy that people don't read how this was already tried and FAILED.
...btw, you might be tempted to say "well, the French taxed people of much lower net-wealth", but remember that when the bill was first proposed, they had similar high thresholds, and as usual the legislative process broadened the scope of the bill to anyone with more than $1 million. The same would happen in the US.
Numerically, "losing" 2 or 3 percent is not insurmountable to most people it affects. We lose as much through core inflation and significantly more so if you include asset price inflation. The idea does feel invasive though but that may as well be conditioning.
In western nations, we accept income taxes as justified to have an egalitarian society, but this wasn't always the case. There are countries without income taxes and the concept is not perceived as justified at all. Governments have to make the case and condition people to support the measure when it is introduced until it is normalized and no one questions it.
A good question is whether production shifts to nations without wealth taxes. I haven't seen this addressed in research. There is evidence that suggests production shifting away from high corporate tax environments but this is also countered by evidence that significant intangible value is created in high tax environments and this keeps that productive capacity from leaving to cheaper environments.
Nope, they can move out before the law takes effect and retroactive ("ex post facto") laws are not legally valid.
But you are right; income taxes were once seen as a really radical and unlikely idea. I don't think that means that we should resign ourselves to eventually be facing both income and wealth taxes.