CNBC Hosts Skeptical of Biden-Harris Tax Proposal on Unrealized Gains

CNBC's Rebecca Quick and Joe Kernen engaged in a heated debate with Bharat Ramamurti, an adviser on Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign, over their proposed tax on unrealized capital gains. The hosts argued the tax was unfair and unconstitutional.

In a recent appearance on CNBC's "Squawk Box," hosts Rebecca Quick and Joe Kernen clashed with Bharat Ramamurti, an informal economic adviser to Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign, over the Biden-Harris tax proposal that would levy taxes on unrealized capital gains.

CNBC Hosts Skeptical of Biden-Harris Tax Proposal on Unrealized Gains

Ramamurti attempted to justify the proposal, arguing that many Americans already pay taxes on unrealized gains through property taxes. However, Quick and Kernen countered that property taxes are considered "use taxes" that fund essential services such as schools and emergency response.

"The value of your home never moves the way a stock moves," Quick argued. "Property tax is a use tax. You're paying for the schools, you're paying for the emergency services. Those are things that make absolute sense."

CNBC Hosts Skeptical of Biden-Harris Tax Proposal on Unrealized Gains

Kernen expressed doubt about the constitutionality of the tax, joking that it would likely "happen in your lifetime" before turning to Ramamurti and quipping, "it's probably unconstitutional."

Ramamurti maintained that the revenue generated by the unrealized gains tax would be used to provide more opportunities for Americans. However, Quick questioned this, stating that such revenue is often used to fund government programs that may not directly benefit taxpayers.

CNBC Hosts Skeptical of Biden-Harris Tax Proposal on Unrealized Gains

"It's not a use tax for the people who are actually using the services," Quick said.

The Biden-Harris proposal, which would include a 25% tax on unrealized capital gains for individuals with wealth exceeding $100 million and an increase in the corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%, is projected to yield approximately $800 billion in additional government revenue, according to a Peter G. Peterson Foundation analysis.

Economists have expressed skepticism about the proposal, arguing that it would stifle economic growth and discourage investment. Critics also argue that it is unfair to tax individuals on wealth rather than on realized capital gains, which only occur when assets are sold and profits are realized.

The debate over the Biden-Harris tax proposal is likely to intensify as the 2024 presidential election approaches. The outcome of this debate will have significant implications for the future of the U.S. economy and the taxation of wealth in America.