Here is a survey and discussion among top economists on the wealth tax. They are not fans pretty much across the board for reasons already discussed. Acemoglu is one of the economists surveyed and he gives a shout out to your point of capital gains being taxed similarly:
Daron Acemoglu at MIT suggested, “What would be most successful would be a combination of relatively high estate taxes combined with taxes on capital income.” Acemoglu also noted, in response to the first statement of the poll, regarding enforceability, “Taxing capital income at the same rate as labor income would be simpler, more effective, and much less difficult to implement.”
Robert Hall at Stanford said, “We should focus on a progressive consumption tax structured as a value-added tax,” while William Nordhaus of Yale proposed, “Start with enforcing the current laws. This would be [a] highly progressive move and should be at [the] top of [the] tax agenda, way at [the] top.”
Among those who disagreed with alternative approaches, Saez commented, “Estate and realized capital gains taxes come decades after wealth accumulation . . . wealth tax is a useful withholding tax backstop,” while Udry concluded: “Unless the changes in capital gains and inheritance taxes were radical, they can't match the time path of the wealth tax.”
economist often say what they are paid to say, and where their funding comes from often denotes what their stance on an issue is.
where they hope to get funding from in the future can too.
they are in a continual state of auditioning for the next gig. (which can be in addition to their day gig).
that said, this topic doesn't need an economist, it isn't rocket science.
estate taxes are a once in a lifetime thing, literally, so not going to solve much.
value added taxes are regressive.
cap gains tax increases help a lot, but still don't address massive held wealth, and you don't want them higher than income tax rates.
top end income tax rates need adjusted up, to very high rates for very high incomes, which can be averaged over several yrs to account for a freak high yr. (say you win the lottery, but otherwise are a bum before and after).
a wealth tax is needed to address massive accumulations, and is difficult to completely steer around.
as for redistribution whining.. when distribution is more even, any redistribution will be less needed.
when it's $10,000 for me, $10 for you, redistribution is needed to correct the original inequity.
as for the "you didn't build it" argument, never before has that argument been so true.
anything internet based, deriving from anything internet based, with any integral internet component, exists on a platform totally conceived, built, serviced, and paid for by others.. uses public spectrum, easements, right of ways, etc.
Amazon is a store in the worlds biggest mall, and pays zero rent.
nor do they pay for the roads used to deliver their goods, or the spectrum that allows buyers to communicate with them.
same with Facebook, Google, etc.
Microsoft, Apple, Intel, all of silicon valley, are indirectly based rent free in that mall as well.
the banks? them too.
Wall St? Wall St is now entirely virtual. so they too.
same with any business that depends on the internet.
