Jack Layton's proposal for an inheritance tax appears to have the support of no less than Bill Gates Sr., Warren Buffett, David Rockefeller Sr. and other US billionaires. They haven't commented specifically on Layton's proposal, but they have been active in trying to stop efforts to abolish the tax in the United States. There it is called the estate tax. Gates, according to USA Today, said that 1% of U.S. households control 38% of private wealth. He expressed concern that further concentration of wealth could help a few control the national agenda.

The current form of the U.S. estate tax originates in legislation from 1916, but in recent years Republicans have attempted to abolish the tax that raises US $30 billion per year at the federal level. Most states have comparable taxes which, between all states, raises about US $5 billion. The debate over the US estate tax offers some useful instruction for those who would rush to criticize Layton. The tax only applies to 2% of estates. Compare that to the 40% of taxpayers who would benefit from Layton's proposal to eliminate personal income tax for people with less than $15,000 in income, or to everyone who would benefit from his proposal to eliminate the GST from household essentials.

Americans for a Fair Estate Tax argue that instead of repealing the tax it should be reformed. Their suggested reforms are precisely what are included in Layton's proposal, protections for small businesses and family farms. One of the coalitions' members, OMB Watch, argues that the Bush tax cuts are about shifting the burden away from wealthy Americans. That is certainly what British Columbians have seen with the Campbell tax changes, a shift from the top to the bottom. Stephen Harper's proposals would do the same.

Harper's income tax proposal would phase out the 22 percent tax bracket on income between $35,000 and $70,000 and raise the thresholds on all tax brackets. The Conservatives estimate their proposal will save $1,000 per year for a taxpayer earning $50,000 per year. There are currently four federal income tax brackets: under $32,183 is 16%, between that and $64,368 is 22%, between that and $104,648 is $26% and over $104,648 is 29%. Someone in the top bracket doesn't pay 29% on everything. That person pays the percentage in each of the lower brackets for the corresponding amount of income, and 29% on what is in excess of the top threshold. Harper's tax bracket proposal would benefit no one with less than $35,000 in income (his child deductible would reach all brackets). In 2002, the latest year for which data are available, over 67% of those who filed income tax returns had income less than $35,000. They would pay a higher percentage of the total tax burden under Harper's proposal.

Whether it is opposing a US style estate tax, or top loading income tax cuts, some parties seem to follow Bush's style of tax reform. Why do people at the top get incentives, while people at the bottom get the pain of service cuts? Shouldn't it be the other way around?