The debate on economic inequality is more fervent than ever, and rightly so. A thorough analysis of our system reveals deep contradictions: although progressive on paper, in practice it favors the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a few. This complex dynamic includes privileged taxation of capital, a distorted perception of philanthropy, and the urgent need to reconsider tools like a wealth tax.

Currently, our taxation system appears progressive up to the 95th percentile of income, but then paradoxically becomes regressive. This means that beyond a certain threshold, the effective tax rate decreases. Most of the ultra-rich's earnings come from capital gains, taxed at a maximum of 26%, a significantly lower percentage compared to earned income. This disparity not only creates a perverse incentive, shifting the dominant mentality from creating value within society to seeking the most convenient tax regime, but it also prioritizes the preservation and increase of capital over innovation and widespread growth.

If there's a clear limit to define "extreme poverty," why isn't there an analogous concept to identify "extreme wealth"? This conceptual asymmetry hides an uncomfortable reality: the creation of colossal fortunes is often facilitated by exploiting the societal ecosystem. Infrastructure, public services, education, and security – crucial elements for business prosperity – are funded by taxes paid by everyone, including the less affluent. Accumulated wealth is therefore based, in part, on an unrecognized "debt" to the community.

Recent research by Oxfam sheds light on one of the most pressing critical issues: over 60% of the ultra-rich did not achieve their position through value creation, but through mere inheritance. This data demolishes the myth of wealth as a fair and meritocratic achievement, revealing it instead as a status quo that perpetuates over time, fueling generational and social inequalities. Social mobility is heavily impacted, crystallizing positions of privilege regardless of individual merit.

The idea that the rich are intrinsically philanthropic is, in many cases, a misleading narrative. Data shows that only 10% of those with large capital are genuinely engaged in philanthropic activities. Furthermore, the sums donated, while substantial in absolute terms, are often negligible compared to the total assets of these individuals. A 2% wealth tax on such capital, for example, would have a significantly greater order of magnitude in terms of wealth redistribution effectiveness. Not only that, a good portion of these donated funds are earmarked for elite organizations and activities, with almost no impact on the lives of the majority of the population. This raises questions about the true purpose of such donations, which in some cases could be configured as "money washing" or, more simply, as tools to improve public image without a real commitment to the common good.

The fear, instrumentally stirred up by the elites, that a wealth tax would indiscriminately affect less affluent segments of the population – from artisans to small business owners – is completely unfounded. In Italy, for example, a targeted wealth tax would affect approximately 0.1% of the population, or about 50,000 adult individuals with minimum assets of 5.4 million euros. It is, therefore, a measure that would not burden small and medium-sized enterprises or earned income, but only large fortunes. Contrary to the media narrative that attempts to divide public opinion on this issue, recent research shows that 70% of the population is in favor of a wealth tax. This data refutes the supposed "popular division" and reveals broad consensus for greater tax fairness.

It's time to openly address the issue of extreme wealth and its social implications. A tax system that favors capital accumulation at the expense of collective well-being, a culture that prioritizes passive income over value creation, and philanthropy that often turns out to be a mask for private interests, are all elements that contribute to growing inequality. The discussion about a wealth tax is not just an economic issue, but also an ethical and social one, aimed at re-establishing balance and promoting a society where wealth is a means for the progress of all, not just a few – indeed, very few.