Skip to the content.
Last Updated: July 28, 2026

The Tax Justice and Economic Fairness Act

Restore Progressive Income Tax Rates

Return the top of the income distribution to the bracket structure that existed during America’s strongest period of broad-based economic growth (1950s-1970s, when top rates were 70-91%).

Tax Capital Income at the Same Rate as Wages

End the structural preference that taxes investment income below the rate paid by salaried workers.

Annual Wealth Tax on Net Worth Above $50M

A modest, narrowly-targeted assessment on the largest accumulated fortunes — affecting approximately 75,000 households (0.05% of Americans).

Two clarifications are essential to how this provision is understood and how it survives challenge.

Estate Tax Restoration

Reverse the systematic erosion of the estate tax that has created the conditions for dynastic concentration of wealth.

Financial Transaction Tax

A small fee on Wall Street trading that raises substantial revenue while reducing speculation-driven volatility.

Close Corporate Tax Loopholes

Reverse the systematic erosion of the corporate income tax base.

Social Security Solvency Through Lifting the Wage Cap

Restore Social Security to long-term solvency without benefit cuts or eligibility-age increases.

Sovereign Wealth Exit Tax

Prevent capital flight as wealthy individuals attempt to avoid the wealth tax through citizenship renunciation.

Constitutional Authority

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 (Taxing and Spending Clause — broad and well-settled federal authority to levy and collect taxes); Sixteenth Amendment (income tax, including capital income, ratified 1913); the wealth tax sits on contested ground — the Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co. (1895) precedent on direct taxation has been substantially superseded by the 16th Amendment, but the matter is not fully resolved and the wealth tax provisions are designed to also be structured as an income tax on imputed returns (“Mark-to-Market”) as a constitutional backup. Recent scholarship (Saez, Zucman, Eisinger, Avi-Yonah) and Moore v. United States (2024) suggest broad constitutional headroom. Financial transaction tax: Commerce Clause and Taxing Power, both well-established.

Rationale

America had a strong middle class and the fastest broad-based economic growth in its history during the era of high top tax rates (1950s-1970s). Returning the top of the income distribution to a fair contribution is not radical — it is restoration. The systematic shift since 1980 has moved the tax burden off of capital owners and onto labor income, off of corporations and onto households, off of the wealthy and onto the working and middle classes. This Act reverses that drift. It is not a tax increase on most Americans — the bottom 99% pays the same or less. It is a tax increase on a small population that has captured an outsized share of national income for four decades. The revenue funds the Foundations of the mandate: healthcare, education, infrastructure, accountability. Without it, those Foundations cannot be sustained.

Implementation Timeline

Fiscal Impact

Total new revenue: $730B-$1.19T annually at full implementation. Breakdown by provision:

Administrative cost: $8-12B annually (primarily IRS modernization and enforcement capacity rebuild). Net revenue: $720B-$1.18T annually. This revenue substantially funds the Twelve Acts agenda while still allowing for deficit reduction. Source assumptions: Joint Committee on Taxation scoring conventions, CBO dynamic scoring where applicable, Saez-Zucman wealth tax revenue estimates.

Political Considerations

This Act will be the most fiercely contested provision in the entire mandate — the population affected is small but extraordinarily resourced. Frame as: restoring the tax structure under which America had its strongest period of broad-based growth; ending the two-tier tax system where billionaires pay lower rates than their secretaries; closing loopholes that no one defends on the merits. Polling: 60-75% support for higher taxes on incomes above $1M; 70-80% support for closing corporate loopholes; 65-70% support for a wealth tax on fortunes above $50M (Gallup, Pew, CBS/YouGov, 2020-2025). Counter the “capital flight” argument empirically: actual cross-border wealth migration in response to tax changes is far smaller than predicted by tax-avoidance industry models. Counter the “this hurts the economy” argument with the historical record of 1950s-1970s growth under much higher top rates. The strongest political vulnerability is administrative complexity of the wealth tax — invest seriously in IRS capacity to administer it.

Have Suggestions or Feedback?

We welcome your input on this policy framework. Your insights help make Project 2029 stronger.

Send Feedback
This page is part of Project 2029: A Mandate for Economic and Political Justice