Mike Bloomberg’s presidential run could cost taxpayers billions


But in a very meaningful sense, Mayor Bloomberg is playing with what in the long run would be house money. The public is effectively picking up at least 40% of the tab for Bloomberg’s massively financed run. The reason is the existence of the US estate or “death” tax. The simple fact of the matter is that, as an aging billionaire many times over, Mayor Bloomberg sees the clock ticking on his ability to play Estate Planning 101: the simple advice to spend it all and die broke.

Let me explain.

If Bloomberg were to meet his maker still holding onto his full $62 billion, the federal government would take 40% of that sum, nearly $25 billion, in the estate tax — even after the tax’s dramatic weakening in the 2017 Trump tax cut. Of course, Mr. Bloomberg could try to dodge the estate tax through tax manuevers and get billions to his personal heirs, tax-free, as his fellow billionaire Sheldon Adelson and many others have reportedly done.
Or he could join with other billionaires like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett in pledging to give a majority of his wealth to charity. But there is nothing illegal about choosing Door No. 3, and going on a grand binge, as Jeff Bezos is doing to the tune of $1 billion a year on his pet project of outer space technologies. Any dollar spent today is a dollar not taxed tomorrow under the estate tax.
A presidential run can be one heck of a binge. If Bloomberg ends up putting in $5 billion, for example — a number not unrealistic given his spending to date — that could potentially save the Bloomberg estate $2 billion in estate taxes. In effect, we would all ultimately be paying in part for the mayor’s ride.
For once, Michael Bloomberg had a good night
Now, in fact, Mayor Bloomberg has signed a giving pledge, promising to give the vast bulk of his wealth “to support organizations that will make a better world.” And he has been a generous donor to many charities.

If you imagine that the alternative to Bloomberg spending $5 billion on his campaign would be for him to give it away, the fact that he’s splurging on his campaign is costing the charities dearly.

The charities will never see any of the spent money. So when Bloomberg spends $5 billion to run for president, we the people lose either $2 billion in tax revenues or $5 billion in public charity.

This is in no way a condemnation of Mayor Bloomberg, who has presumably earned his money legally, and can spend it however he wants, again perfectly legally. (And, to be fair to the mayor, running for President against Trump might indeed be a public-regarding act).

Establishment Dems freak out over Bernie Sanders
It is, rather, a condemnation of a tax system that both allows some billionaires to amass wealth and to spend it, tax free and with no questions asked. The current tax system encourages and rewards exactly the kind of high-end consumption binging that we see among the rich, including, but not limited to, Bloomberg’s campaign spending and Bezos’ rockets.
Contrast this with a progressive spending tax, a tax system touted by Gates, among many others. Under a spending tax with marginal rates of 90%, say, as the income tax had for decades, Mayor Bloomberg could still spend $5 billion running for President. But he would have to pay $45 billion in taxes — 90% of $50 billion, leaving $5 billion to spend — for the privilege of doing so. This is why I have argued in more formal academic work that a progressive spending tax might indeed be the last best hope for campaign finance reform.
Our current tax system encourages our growing number of billionaires to spend it all, now, on any whim or fancy. That’s crazy. Maybe it’s time to get a tax system that lets billionaires be billionaires, but that charges them an appropriately hefty fee when they binge on personal spending. If we don’t, we can expect many more “self-financed” campaigns of all sorts, not just Mike’s.

Read more at CNN.com