I would like to raise a different point from the many valid points already raised in this thread.
I understand this might depend on the definition of “wealth tax”, but if the founder uses the money they make in their 20s to, for example, buy a home; buy cars and other assets; invest in another company; give the money to charity... then the money remains largely intact. It is only by hoarding the wealth for 60 years that a founder would lose ~45%.
This doesn’t seem unreasonable, as people respond to incentives and will try to avoid the bad outcome by being proactive. This is akin to saying “if I have less than $1000 in my bank account, the bank will charge me a $5 fee each month. Then after just 16 years, all the money will be gone.” This is technically true, but no rational actor would actually just keep their money in the bank under these circumstances.
if the money was used to purchase assets, then those assets will end up being counted as part of your wealth even tho it's not liquid. So you'd either have to be forced to sell some of those assets to cover the wealth tax, or make up for it by using income (from said assets, or some other source of income).
Or you consume all your wealth asap, and leave no residual wealth remaining for investment. This , however, is not a good outcome, since residual wealth is where investment money comes from.
I understand this might depend on the definition of “wealth tax”, but if the founder uses the money they make in their 20s to, for example, buy a home; buy cars and other assets; invest in another company; give the money to charity... then the money remains largely intact. It is only by hoarding the wealth for 60 years that a founder would lose ~45%.
This doesn’t seem unreasonable, as people respond to incentives and will try to avoid the bad outcome by being proactive. This is akin to saying “if I have less than $1000 in my bank account, the bank will charge me a $5 fee each month. Then after just 16 years, all the money will be gone.” This is technically true, but no rational actor would actually just keep their money in the bank under these circumstances.