Many also don't truly "pay" for things. They leverage debt against their assets, essentially like a fancy credit card that says "I own MegaCorp, you know I'm good for it, just send the bills to this wealth management firm".

So it's not out of the realms of possibility to say that a billionaire is actually spending very little money, ever. What they have is essentially gifts from whoever manages their assets, and that company just skims whatever things "cost".

IMO taxing wealth is what's needed, but it needs to be framed in a way that makes a billionaire want to invest in their country through high taxes. Make it a privilege that is praised, and ostracise those business that excuse themselves from contributing.

All countries would need to adopt it because now they can just register their company and summer resort under various identities in [insert tax haven here].

Billionaires don't have taxable income because they've successfully lobbied for carve outs that exempt them from taxation.

That's what makes a wealth tax impractical. How do you pass it through a Congress that's been wholely co-opted by a billionaire friendly caucus?

Chuck Schumer, the senior senator from Wall Street, isn't going to author a wealth tax. Kamala Harris, the former Senator from Silicon Valley isn't going to sign it. And the SCOTUS majority that's on the Harlan Crow payroll isn't going to uphold it.

1% tax on all registered securities, payable in shares of those securities. First $10,000,000 owned by a natural person is exempted.

All securities collected in tax are resold by IRS liquidators in small lots over time, constituting no more than 1% of total traded volume of each security.

Also immediately redefine income more broadly. Tax law says it's one narrow thing, but in reality a lot of money comes in. Let the law march reality.