Anti-tax politicians keep repeating that, when taxes go up, rich people go elsewhere. They claim that when states raise taxes, millionaires leave in droves, fleeing to lower-tax havens. Not true, say several recent studies.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s an article of faith among low-tax advocates that income tax increases aimed at the rich simply drive them away, says a New York Times article, entitled\u00a0 \u201cThe Myth of the Rich Who Flee Taxes:\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n As Stuart Varney put it on Fox News: \u201cLook at what happened in Britain. They raised the top tax rate to 50 percent, and two-thirds of the millionaires disappeared in the next tax year. Same things are happening in France. People are leaving where the top tax rate is 75 percent. Same thing happened in Maryland a few years ago. New millionaire\u2019s tax, the millionaires disappeared. You\u2019ve got exactly the same thing in California.\u201d<\/p>\n That, at least, is what low-tax advocates want us to think, and on its face, it seems to make sense. But it\u2019s not the case. It turns out that a large majority of people move for far more compelling reasons, like jobs, the cost of housing, family ties or a warmer climate.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Defenders of the millionaire-flight theory do, indeed, have some high-profile examples to cite: Tiger Woods, LeBron James, and even French actor Gerard Depardieu, who recently applied for tax-haven citizenship in Russia.\u00a0 They’re hardly typical, and they represent a minuscule fraction of people who earn $1 million or more in a single year.<\/p>\n Closer to home, millionaire-flight theorists like to use Maryland as an example. They point to statistics that indicate that, a year after the state enacted \u201cmillionaire\u2019s tax,\u201d 2,324 Maryland taxpayers who had reported net taxable income of \u00a0$1 million or more in 2008 no longer did so in 2009. Anti-taxers call that an \u201coutflow\u201d of millionaires.<\/p>\n