Warren's Wealth Tax Could Drive Billionaires to Funds She Hates

(Bloomberg) -- Senator Elizabeth Warren's proposed wealth tax could be a gift to an industry she has accused of looting Americans -- private equity.

The Democratic presidential hopeful's plan to fund Medicare for All, denounced by prominent rich people like Bill Gates, hinges on a 6% annual levy on accumulated wealth in excess of $1 billion. One of the few ways for the extremely wealthy to preserve capital if such a tax were enacted would be putting their money into so-called alternative assets managed by firms such as Blackstone Group Inc., Carlyle Group LP and KKR & Co.

"A wealth tax is likely to result in some flow of funds away from public markets, where they can get easily valued, to investments where valuations are much harder," said Wojciech Kopczuk, a Columbia University economics professor. "It's possible that it will encourage higher risk, higher expected-return investments."

Yolanda Plaza-Charres, director of investment strategy and solutions for SEI Private Wealth Management, was more specific.

"We believe that such a tax would increase the use of alternative investments in the portfolios of the wealthy and ultra-wealthy," she said in an email response to questions.

For Warren, that would amount to an unintended consequence -- one that she's tried to address. In July, the Massachusetts lawmaker introduced the "Stop Wall Street Looting Act" to rein in private equity. The proposal would hold buyout firms liable for the debts of their portfolio companies, an idea that would be "industry-destroying," according to Argus Research Corp. analyst Steve Biggar.

Higher Returns

Gabriel Zucman, a University of California at Berkeley professor and an economic adviser for the campaigns of Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders, said it's unclear whether the wealth tax "in itself would affect the portfolio allocation of wealthy individuals."

"If they could get higher returns by investing in private equity, they should already be doing this today," he said in an email.

The Warren campaign didn't respond to requests for comment.

The very wealthy often put liquid capital in low-risk investments such as U.S. Treasuries and municipal bonds to keep their fortunes from eroding. That could change, however, in a financial landscape that requires a 6% return just to break even.

For a sense of how the wealthiest might react, consider how pension funds and endowments have adapted to low interest rates. They've increasingly turned away from stocks and bonds and concentrated more on private equity.

The average pension fund held 27% of its assets in alternative investments, a category that includes hedge funds and private equity, at the end of 2017, according to a Fitch Ratings Inc. study. That's up from 9% in 2001.

Warren has said that the 6% is just a fraction of what rich individuals can gain by investing in the S&P 500. And it's true that the average annual return for the index since 1928 has been 9.24%, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Past Results

But as any fund prospectus will tell you, past results aren't indicative of future returns. An analysis by Grantham Mayo Van Otterloo & Co. is downbeat on what the next seven years hold for investors. The firm's projections show only one traditional asset class -- emerging-market value stocks -- exceeding 5.3% in annual returns.

That might sound bearish, but assumptions from BlackRock Inc., the world's biggest asset manager, aren't much rosier. In its scenario, U.S. stocks and bonds lag the 6% threshold over the next seven years while private equity funds exceed it. Other projections -- such as Tobin's Q, Shiller's CAPE ratio and Warren Buffett's market capitalization to GDP -- all point toward an age of turbulence for U.S. stocks.

That doesn't mean private equity, which invests in a variety of assets -- such as distressed debt, real estate and underperforming companies -- would offer a safe harbor for smart money.

"If private equity involves the potential of losing 85% of your investment in something like WeWork, when it goes from $47 billion to $7.4 billion, it makes the wealth tax look more like a cost of doing business if your business is capital preservation," said Daniel Alpert, managing partner of Westwood Capital LLC in New York. "Risk can cost a lot more than the tax."

Leon Cooperman, an investor the Bloomberg Billionaires Index says is worth $2.2 billion, has publicly battled Warren over the wealth tax, calling it "a stupid idea" and a "nightmare." In an interview, he said that while he's willing to work half the year for the government and half the year for himself, his fellow 600 or so American billionaires might have other ideas.

"People," Cooperman said, "would try to find assets that they can hide."

--With assistance from Katherine Chiglinsky, Tom Metcalf and Peter Eichenbaum.

To contact the reporter on this story: Brandon Kochkodin in New York at bkochkodin@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story: David Gillen at dgillen3@bloomberg.net, Bob Ivry, Stephen Merelman

For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com

©2019 Bloomberg L.P.


More Related News

Iowa Poll: Pete Buttigieg rockets to the top of the 2020 field as a clear front-runner
Iowa Poll: Pete Buttigieg rockets to the top of the 2020 field as a clear front-runner

Pete Buttigieg's rise from 1% in the Register's March poll to the top of it reflects the selling point of Iowa's system, pollster J. Ann Selzer said.

Obama cautions Democratic hopefuls on tacking too far left
Obama cautions Democratic hopefuls on tacking too far left

Former President Barack Obama on Friday warned the Democratic field of White House hopefuls not to veer too far to the left, a move he said would alienate many who would otherwise be open to voting for the party's nominee next year. The centrist wing of the party has warned for months that a far-left nominee could alienate moderate Republicans and independent voters needed to oust President Donald Trump.

Trump Just Sabotaged His Own Supporters. Again.
Trump Just Sabotaged His Own Supporters. Again.

(Bloomberg Opinion) -- It didn't take long during the second day of public impeachment hearings, in which the House Intelligence Committee is questioning former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, to get not one, not two, but three examples of how President Donald Trump undermines those who try

Democrat Warren outlines three-year path to
Democrat Warren outlines three-year path to 'Medicare for All'

WASHINGTON/NEW YORK (Reuters) - White House hopeful Elizabeth Warren on Friday outlined how she would implement "Medicare for All" during her first term in office, including by passing new legislation in her first 100 days that would give all Americans the option of choosing the government health insurance plan. Warren's timeline envisions a progression that would initially retain many aspects of the current system, including employer-based private insurance, while slowly transferring Americans to the government's Medicare health insurance plan that covers individuals 65 and older. The proposal could help blunt criticism, including from a number of the Massachusetts U.S. senator's...

Warren says getting to
Warren says getting to 'Medicare for All' will take 3 years

Elizabeth Warren announced Friday that she would expand public health insurance during her first 100 days in office, but wouldn't push for passage of a "Medicare for All" program until the third year of her presidency, a timeline that acknowledges how tough it will be to shift to a system of government-run health care. The Massachusetts Democratic senator released a health care transition plan that first vows to build on existing programs, including the Obama administration's Affordable Care Act. Warren says she'll then work with Congress to pass pieces of a universal coverage proposal more gradually, with the whole thing being ready "no later than" her third year in office.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply


Top News: Economy