

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"This blocking attitude is at the heart of the budget crisis and also, as a result, of the current political crisis," said Gabriel Zucman after another French prime minister resigned.
On the heels of France losing yet another prime minister, Politico on Tuesday published an interview in which world-renowned French economist Gabriel Zucman argued that the recently departed leaders should have supported his proposed wealth tax.
Zucman, who leads the EU Tax Observatory and teaches at French and US universities, has advocated for imposing a wealth tax of at least 2% for the ultrarich in France and around the world. However, Sébastien Lecornu, who resigned as prime minister on Monday, after less than a month in office, did not embrace that approach, the economist noted.
Former Prime Minister François Bayrou also didn't support the "Zucman tax." He was in the post when the French National Assembly voted in favor of a 2% minimum tax on wealth exceeding €100 million, or $117 million, in February—and when the Senate ultimately rejected the policy in June. He resigned in early September, after losing a no-confidence vote.
Before both of them, Michel Barnier was prime minister. He resigned last December, also after losing a no-confidence vote. He, too, didn't embrace the tax policy, despite polling that shows, as Zucman put it, "there is a very strong demand among the population for greater tax fairness and better taxation of the ultrarich."
"The executive has so far remained completely deaf to both parliamentary work and popular democratic demands," Zucman told Politico's Giorgio Leali. "They didn't try to have a real dialogue with the opposition on this."
"The very wealthy individuals affected by this measure, and the media outlets they own, have spoken out very vehemently on the subject in an attempt to discourage the government from engaging in any form of reflection or discussion," he added.
On social media, Leali shared a quote from Zucman tying the former prime ministers' attitudes on the tax proposal and broader budget fight to the country's current political crisis—in which "increasingly isolated" President Emmanuel Macron faces pressure from across France's political spectrum to hold a snap parliamentary election or resign.
As Reuters reported Tuesday, "Resignation calls, long confined to the fringes, have entered the mainstream during one of the worst political crises since the 1958 creation of the Fifth Republic, France's current system of government."
Even Édouard Philippe—who, as France 24 noted, was "Macron's longest-serving prime minister from 2017 to 2020"—is urging him to step down, saying that the president must help France "emerge in an orderly and dignified manner from a political crisis that is harming the country."
After the anti-austerity "Block Everything" protests across France on September 10, Mathilde Panot of the leftist party La France Insoumise (LFI) announced that 100 members of Parliament endorsed a motion to impeach Macron.
LFI founder Jean-Luc Mélenchon said Monday that "following the resignation of Sébastien Lecornu, we call for the immediate consideration of the motion tabled by 104 MPs for the impeachment of Emmanuel Macron."
"Emmanuel Macron is responsible for the political chaos," he said, calling out "those in power" for failing to respond to not only the demonstrations on September 10 but also the union mobilizations on September 18 and October 2.
"The president is rejected by public opinion, which desires his departure, and he has lost the support of ALL the parties in his political coalition," Mélenchon added Tuesday. "Why does he remain? A return to coherence for the country requires his departure and a return to the voice of the people."
"Not only is it necessary to impose a stronger burden of justice on billionaires, but more importantly, it is possible."
Seven Nobel laureates on Monday published an op-ed advocating for "a minimum tax for the ultrarich, expressed as a percentage of their wealth," in the French newspaper Le Monde.
"They have never been so wealthy and yet contribute very little to the public coffers: From Bernard Arnault to Elon Musk, billionaires have significantly lower tax rates than the average taxpayer," wrote Daron Acemoglu, George Akerlof, Abhijit Banerjee, Esther Duflo, Simon Johnson, Paul Krugman, and Joseph Stiglitz.
Citing pioneering research from the E.U. Tax Observatory, the renowned economists noted that "ultrawealthy individuals pay around 0% to 0.6% of their wealth in income tax. In a country like the United States, their effective tax rate is around 0.6%, while in a country like France, it is closer to 0.1%."
Although the "ultrawealthy can easily structure their wealth to avoid income tax, which is supposed to be the cornerstone of tax justice," the strategies for doing so differ by region, the experts detailed. Europeans often use family holding companies that are banned in the United States, "which explains why the wealthy are more heavily taxed there than in Europe—though some have still managed to find workarounds."
The good news is that "there is no inevitability here. Not only is it necessary to impose a stronger burden of justice on billionaires, but more importantly, it is possible," argued the economists, who say that taxing the overall wealth of the ultrarich, not just income, is the key.
The wealth tax approach, they wrote, "is effective because it targets all forms of tax optimization, whatever their nature. It is targeted, as it applies only to the wealthiest taxpayers, and only to those among them who engage in tax avoidance."
💡 "One of the most promising avenues is to introduce a minimum tax for the ultra-rich, expressed as a percentage of their wealth."Seven Nobel laureates in economics advocate for the Zucman tax in their latest op-ed.Read the full @lemonde.fr article 👇www.lemonde.fr/idees/articl...
[image or embed]
— EU Tax Observatory (@taxobservatory.bsky.social) July 7, 2025 at 8:05 AM
The anticipated impact would be significant. As the op-ed highlights: "Globally, a 2% minimum tax on billionaire wealth would generate about $250 billion in tax revenue—from just 3,000 individuals. In Europe, around $50 billion could be raised. And by extending this minimum rate to individuals with wealth over $100 million, these sums would increase significantly."
That's according to a June 2024 report that French economist and E.U. Tax Observatory director Gabriel Zucman prepared for the Group of 20's Brazilian presidency—which was followed by G20 leaders' November commitment to taxing the rich and last month's related proposal from the governments of Brazil, South Africa, and Spain.
"The international movement is underway," the economists declared Monday, also pointing to recent developments on the "Zucman tax" in France. The French National Assembly voted in favor of a 2% minimum tax on wealth exceeding €100 million, or $117 million, in February—but the Senate rejected the measure last month.
The economists urged the European country to keep working at it, writing that "at a time of ballooning public deficits and exploding extreme wealth, the French government must seize the initiative approved by the National Assembly. There is no reason to wait for an international agreement to be finalized—on the contrary, France should lead by example, as it has done in the past," when it was the first country to introduce a value-added tax (VAT).
"As for the risk of tax exile, the bill passed by the National Assembly provides that taxpayers would remain subject to the minimum tax for five years after leaving the country," they wrote. "The government could go further and propose extending this period to 10 years, which would likely reduce the risk of expatriation even more."
Families including Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg now control a combined $2.6 trillion in wealth, according to renowned economist Gabriel Zucman.
A new analysis by a leading chronicler of the United States' exploding inequality shows that the 19 richest American households added $1 trillion to their collective fortunes last year and saw their share of the nation's wealth jump at a record-shattering pace.
The analysis by Gabriel Zucman, a professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley, estimates that the 19 wealthiest U.S. families now control 1.8%—or $2.6 trillion—of the nation's total household wealth.
In 2024, those ultrarich households saw the largest single-year wealth increase on record.
The Wall Street Journal noted in its Wednesday write-up of Zucman's analysis—based on data from Forbes, Fortune, and the Federal Reserve—that the families in his "research on the top 0.00001% in the U.S. are worth at least $45 billion per household and include Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and private-equity investor Stephen Schwarzman."
Their wealth is largely tied up in the U.S. stock market, which rose more than 23% in 2024. The richest 10% of U.S. households control 93% of stock market wealth, according to the Federal Reserve.

Zucman, whose analysis dates back to 1913, told the Journal that the U.S. has recently seen a "dramatic acceleration in the rise of the share of wealth owned by the truly superwealthy"—a trend that would continue if President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress pass tax legislation largely benefiting the rich.
"If there's one glimmer of hope it is this," Zucman wrote on social media last month, pointing to a packed "Fighting Oligarchy" rally held in Denver by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
"There is a strong anti-oligarchic current in America, and it has a formidable champion," Zucman added. "Fight!"
The Journal reported Wednesday that "a household in the top 0.1%—roughly 133,000 households each worth at least $46.3 million—accumulated an average of $3.4 million a year since the third quarter of 1990, in 2024 dollars."
"In comparison, the wealth of the rest of the top 1%—roughly 1.2 million households each worth at least $11.2 million—grew by an average of $450,000 per household, per year," the Journal added.
Meanwhile, families at the bottom of the U.S. income and wealth distribution have struggled due to what the Economic Policy Institute recently described as "policy-induced wage suppression."
A February working paper by the think tank RAND estimated that the bottom 90% of U.S. workers would have earned $3.9 trillion more in 2023 alone had the income distribution been more even rather than flowing disproportionately to the top.
"Since 1975, nearly $80 trillion in wealth has been redistributed from the bottom 90% of Americans to the top 1%," Sanders said last month in response to the paper. "The massive income and wealth inequality in America today is not only morally unjust, it is profoundly damaging to our democracy."