Debate: Capital Punishment

Matt Zwolinski

Intertax: International Tax Review2026https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2026004article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

This paper argues that an annual wealth tax is poorly matched to the goals most often invoked by its proponents – reducing inequality, protecting democracy, and strengthening social trust. The paper develops three difficulties that make an annual wealth tax an ineffective or counterproductive instrument: a valuation problem that cannot be solved by administrative refinement; a mismatch between ambitious democratic and social ends and modest fiscal means; and incentive effects that discourage saving, investment, and entrepreneurship. As an alternative, it proposes reforms within the income-tax base that target economic rents – the excess returns that fund durable political influence and reflect unfair, policy-created scarcities. Two design changes are emphasized: treating death as a realization event to reach decades of accrued gains and adopting a minimum tax on accrued gains for the ultra-wealthy, with mark-to-market for liquid assets and deferral with interest for others. Together these reforms better align means with ends, addressing both fairness and democracy without the knowledge and incentive costs of a wealth tax.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2026004

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{matt2026,
  title        = {{Debate: Capital Punishment}},
  author       = {Matt Zwolinski},
  journal      = {Intertax: International Tax Review},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2026004},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Debate: Capital Punishment

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.