How is this different from a jurisdiction that requires property taxes based on the value of your home? I know the feds don’t do this but I haven’t heard the practice described as egregious.
ETA: Also, calculations of estate taxes are based on valuations too. And calculation of income for people that are not salaried employees can often involve all sorts of judgment calls.
Estate taxes are a fairly contested issue and many consider them egregious, even though so few people pay them. But if we are going to increase the effect of a tax on wealth, this would be a much better place to do so since it is already in place. I am not really sure what you mean by the bold. If they are hourly, that is pretty easy. If you mean a small business owner, sure the reality of the situation is accountants/owners make judgment calls, but those aren't
really supposed to be judgment calls. The pontoon boat that gets expenses for the small business, but it is just a toy for the owner isn't supposed to work that way. I would totally be in favor of clamping down on that kind of abuse, which is pretty common I think.
The property tax comparison is a solid one. I would argue that properties are a ton easier to value and that cities are almost always on the low side and follow a standard formula for the area. I literally just went through this. Got a letter regarding the valuation increasing. Went up 8.4%. They never visited my home. So I thought how can they just do that? Had a realtor come out because I planned on appealing it and we have been talking about moving for a long time so figured I would kill two birds with one stone. Realtor wanted to list our house for like 27k more than the city evaluation. So much for my appeal! But the city doesn't
ALSO charge you tax on your income, so the comparison somewhat falls apart there. But still a good one.
The whole concept of a wealth tax is just vote pandering. It is a way to definitively say "See, we want to stick it to the rich". In reality if they really wanted to make sure the government collected more taxes from these wealthy people, they would just raise the taxes for those thresholds that are already in place. Why create a whole new ridiculously laborious and inaccurate system? But that doesn't have the effect of a "wealth tax" campaign. It also isn't a sure fire failure constitutionally so they don't have that cover and would be forced to either actually put it in place, or find some other way out of it.
I don't really care if they want to increase taxes on people that have 50 million macaroons. I just would rather they be smarter about it. I see a wealth tax as something that would be very difficult to put in place, wildly inaccurate, and lead to a bigger IRS that is still ineffective. I also think it is mostly based on a myth. Jeff Bezos has tons of money tied up in stock. But he obviously also spends money, so he has plenty of income or realized gains too, which he is getting taxed on. If it is capital gains taxes and people think his % is too low, then why not just increase the % and change the thresholds? Just seems too easy in comparison.
If somebody is just hoarding shares of stock that keep going up, they aren't living in a mansion, driving a ferrarri and taking private jets to basketball games. You cant spend that money.
So the wealth tax solves a mythical problem. The person that lives a lavish lifestyle with private yachts and fancy cars and $52,000 bottles of wine, but zero taxes paid.
Sorry I failed to communicate my position better to you. 
