To address this inequality, the report presents a detailed case for reintroducing a
, which was abolished in India in 2016. It argues that the standard rebuttals against such a tax are unfounded. “First, consider the idea that taxing the rich damages the investment climate and discourages wealth creation,” the report states, countering that “economies grow when there is demand.
Public spending—funded through taxation—puts money in people’s hands, increases consumption, and creates the very conditions businesses need to invest and expand.” It points to historical evidence, noting that “in the mid-20th century, particularly between 1940 and 1980, countries like the United States and those in Europe experienced some of their highest growth rates—at a time when tax rates on the wealthy were significantly higher than they are today.”
The report outlines several taxation scenarios, using concrete examples to illustrate the potential revenue. A 2% annual wealth tax on the richest 100 individuals alone, it calculates, could have generated between ₹0.63 lakh crore and ₹1.86 lakh crore each year between 2019 and 2025. For context, it notes that a 2% tax on the top 10 richest individuals would yield ₹0.77 lakh crore, an amount nearly matching the entire union budget allocation for rural development.
The report then proposes a more progressive model for the 1,688 families with wealth of ₹1,000 crore or more, suggesting marginal tax rates ranging from 2% on wealth up to ₹25,000 crore to 6% on wealth exceeding ₹1,00,000 crore. Combined with a proposed one-third inheritance tax on annual wealth transfers, the report estimates a total revenue of ₹7.44 lakh crore. Factoring in multiplier effects from public spending, it argues this could translate into an effective fiscal capacity of “approximately ₹10.63 lakh crore annually.”
The report translates these figures into three concrete spending scenarios.
The first scenario proposes allocating ₹3.5 lakh crore each to education and health, raising their budgets by 1% of GDP each, and ₹3.6 lakh crore for a social security pension scheme, which would increase the central government’s contribution from a “shameful ₹200 per month” to ₹12,000 per month for the elderly.
A second scenario focuses on economic support, including ₹3.94 lakh crore to expand
MGNREGA by raising wages by an additional ₹500 per day, ₹4.49 lakh crore for
climate adaptation to meet the estimated 1.3% of GDP requirement, and ₹40,000 crore to run community kitchens to address the “raging LPG crisis.”
A third scenario combines climate adaptation, old-age pensions, support for street vendors, and a ₹50,000 subsidy per household to support rooftop solar for over two crore families. Common to two of the scenarios is an allocation of ₹1.5 lakh crore to expand minimum support price (MSP) procurement across crops.
The report concludes by framing the demand for a wealth tax as a fundamental political choice. “Wealth tax is of course no magic bullet,” it states, but it is a necessary step toward “actualizing the
spirit of the Constitution” and reversing a neoliberal doctrine that prioritizes profit over people.
Published by the Centre for Financial Accountability and the Tax The Top campaign, the document positions itself as a tool for social movements, intended to make the demand for taxing the super-rich “more tangible, more legible.” It ends with a call for a shift in political will, asking whether the nation will continue on a path of “super-profits for the super-rich” or adopt an alternative, pro-people vision that ensures well-being for the masses.
This article was originally published in Counterview and you can read here.
Centre for Financial Accountability is now on Telegram and WhatsApp. Click here to join our Telegram channel and click here to join our WhatsApp channel and stay tuned to the latest updates and insights on the economy and finance.