- Scott Galloway says billionaires should face a mandatory minimum tax rate of at least 50%.
- The entrepreneur and NYU professor said voluntary philanthropy alone can’t address rising wealth concentration.
- He says policy, not generosity, should ensure the ultra-wealthy contribute more to the system that enabled their success.
Billionaires should pay far more in taxes, and the minimum rate should start at 50%, according to Scott Galloway.
The NYU professor and entrepreneur said extreme wealth should come with a mandatory minimum tax rate of at least 50%, arguing the ultra-wealthy should contribute more to the system that helped create their fortunes.
Speaking during an “Office Hours” segment of “The Prof G Pod,” Galloway said relying on voluntary philanthropy from the ultra-wealthy isn’t enough to address growing wealth concentration and that policy, not generosity, should ensure the richest Americans contribute more to the system that helped create their fortunes.
Regulation Instead Of Waiting For Philanthropy
During the discussion, Galloway said relying on billionaires to voluntarily give back is unrealistic and that systemic policy changes are needed.
“I think once you get to a certain point of wealth, you have an obligation to give back and an obligation to protect it,” he said.
But he added that philanthropy alone cannot address the broader economic imbalance created by extreme wealth concentration.
“If you were waiting on the better angels of these guys, don’t hold your breath,” Galloway said.
Instead, he suggested a tax framework that ensures the ultra-wealthy contribute significantly more regardless of deductions or tax strategies.
“If your board wants to give you a trillion dollars, I’m actually down with unlimited compensation,” Galloway said.
“But for God’s sakes, let’s have an alternative minimum tax where you pay at least a minimum of a 50% tax rate.”
The idea, he said, would allow billionaires to continue earning massive sums while ensuring they pay a meaningful share of taxes.
Wealth And Civic Responsibility
Galloway also argued that reaching extreme levels of wealth should carry broader civic responsibilities.
He pointed to philanthropist MacKenzie Scott as an example of how wealthy individuals can redistribute large amounts of money through charitable giving.
Scott, the former spouse of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, has donated tens of billions of dollars since 2019.
Galloway said her giving stands out compared with many other billionaires, reinforcing his belief that relying solely on voluntary generosity creates inconsistent results.
“What we need is regulation,” he said.
Tax Strategies And Minimum Rates
Another reason Galloway supports a minimum tax is that ultra-wealthy individuals often reduce their effective tax rates using legal financial strategies.
These can include borrowing against assets, deductions and other tools embedded in the tax code.
Galloway said a minimum tax floor would ensure high earners still pay a significant share even after using those strategies.
“Take all your crazy deductions, borrowing against yourself, whatever it is,” he said. “But boom, alternative minimum tax.”
The approach would mirror earlier periods in U.S. history when top tax rates were significantly higher than they are today.
Galloway argued that those decades still produced strong economic growth.
“Be clear, boss, you are going to pay 50, 60, 80% of your income above $10 million,” he said, referencing historical tax structures.
Why Extreme Wealth Changes Behavior
Galloway also suggested extreme wealth can change how people behave, particularly when it comes to public criticism of political leaders or policies.
According to Galloway, many billionaires become more protective of their wealth and influence once they reach the top tier of global fortunes.
That dynamic, he said, helps explain why some high-profile business leaders avoid public political confrontation.
“I’m now under the impression that these guys would f*** their sister for an additional nickel,” he said.
The comment was part of a broader criticism of billionaire culture in Silicon Valley and other elite business circles.
Galloway said that instead of waiting for wealthy individuals to change behavior voluntarily, governments should implement policies that ensure economic contributions scale with wealth.
A Personal Turning Point
Galloway also reflected on his own approach to money and philanthropy.
He said his perspective shifted after realizing how much he had benefited from opportunities provided by the broader U.S. economy.
“The moment it happened was when I realized I’m not going to be around that much longer,” he said.
That realization prompted him to reassess how he used his wealth.
“I realized that as I got older, I realized I hadn’t been very very philanthropic and I wanted to give back,” he said.
He added that giving away money can also provide a personal sense of purpose.
“It makes me feel good,” Galloway said. “I want to be remembered as a good man and a good citizen.”
Bigger Debate Around Billionaire Taxes
Debates over taxing billionaires have intensified in the United States as wealth concentration continues to grow.
Policymakers have proposed a range of ideas, including wealth taxes, minimum taxes on billionaires and higher top income tax brackets.
For example, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) proposed an “Ultra-Millionaire Tax” several years ago that would impose a 2% annual tax on wealth above $50 million and 3% on wealth above $1 billion, a plan economists estimated could raise roughly $3 trillion over a decade.
More recently, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) proposed a 5% annual wealth tax on billionaires that supporters say could generate trillions in revenue.
Supporters argue such policies could reduce inequality and fund public programs, while critics say higher taxes on top earners could discourage investment and entrepreneurship.
Galloway said his preferred solution is relatively straightforward.
Allow entrepreneurs and executives to accumulate enormous wealth, he said, but ensure the tax system requires them to contribute a meaningful share of it
“If your board wants to give you a trillion dollars,” he said, “I’m actually down with unlimited compensation.”
But he reiterated that extreme earnings should come with a guaranteed tax floor.
However, he said the tax system should still require the ultra-wealthy to contribute a meaningful share of those earnings.
“For God’s sakes,” Galloway said, “let’s have an alternative minimum tax where you pay at least a minimum of a 50% tax rate.”
IMAGE CREDIT: ”Scott Galloway” by Xuthoria, via Wikimedia Commons. Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Image adjusted for layout.