Capital in the Twenty-First Century: A Critique of Thomas Piketty’s Political Economy

Potter, Michael

doi:10.22459/ag.21.01.2014.05

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As such, those that ‘have’ fare much better than those who ‘have not’. Piketty’s (2014) proffered solutions of a progressive annual tax on capital (15%) and inherited wealth (80%), along with an automatic exchange of banking data regarding information on assets held in foreign jurisdictions and the use of inflation to redistribute wealth downwards, have been applauded as a utopia (Mason, 2014; VanderMey, 2014) 15 and criticised as a confiscatory global tax based on flawed data and arguments (Potter, 2014).…”

Section: Theoretical Basis For Taxing Automation: Redistributing Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating the fourth industrial revolution: Taxing automation for fiscal sustainability

McCredie

Sadiq

Chapple

2019

Australian Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fourth industrial revolution has arrived; however, this industrial revolution is unlike those witnessed in the past. Equal opportunity and growth have been replaced by the 21st century trend of rising inequality, in which advancement through digitisation and automation brings fortune to the few and hardship to the many, as income and property stratification grows. As a result, current tax systems are under pressure with displaced workers requiring support, and the fiscal purse, which has historically been funded by income taxes, being eroded due to a decreasing number of workers to tax. Conceivably, it is up to governments to address this ‘double negative effect’, but it is unclear how this could be achieved and what theoretical basis should be leveraged to do so. This article provides a discussion of three important normative philosophies of distributive justice, utilitarianism, libertarianism and John Rawls’ theory of justice, to determine a theoretical basis on which the redistribution of income via a tax on automation is justified. The pertinent theory is then operationalised with the proposal of three alternate models of taxation: a Pigouvian tax, a tax on economic rents and an appreciation tax. Each of these models is evaluated alongside a discussion on the shift in global tax policy from taxing income to taxing capital. This article argues that this shift is necessary to reduce income inequality and to ensure even the lowest common denominator is provided for, for we are the 99%. JEL Classification: H23, H25, K34, O23

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Basis For Taxing Automation: Redistributing Imentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating the fourth industrial revolution: Taxing automation for fiscal sustainability

McCredie

Sadiq

Chapple

2019

Australian Journal of Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Others have focused their attacks on Piketty's methods for collecting his data. For instance, seePotter (2014). 2 Indeed, this natural result in a standard theoretical model is recognized byPiketty (2014, p. 360) himself.…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

Bequests, Imperfections in Factor Markets, and Long-Run Inequality: A Theoretical Assessment of Piketty

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reflection: Beyond Capital

Bowes

2022

Palgrave Studies in Ancient Economies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Capital in the Twenty-First Century: A Critique of Thomas Piketty’s Political Economy

Cited by 3 publications

References 20 publications

Navigating the fourth industrial revolution: Taxing automation for fiscal sustainability

Navigating the fourth industrial revolution: Taxing automation for fiscal sustainability

Bequests, Imperfections in Factor Markets, and Long-Run Inequality: A Theoretical Assessment of Piketty

Reflection: Beyond Capital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About