Tipsheet

Jeff Bezos Makes the Case For Why the Working Class Should Pay No Federal Income Tax

Amazon founder and Executive Chair Jeff Bezos, in an interview with CNBC, mocked the idea that the United States needs a more progressive federal tax rate and argued that, because taxes on the working class make up such a small share of total federal revenue, the bottom half of the country’s socioeconomic ladder should pay nothing in federal income taxes.

The remarks came as part of a broader criticism of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Democrats of a similar political strain, whom Bezos accused of believing their poorly run government programs are genuinely helping the working-class people they claim to serve. Rather than expanding bureaucracies and administering government programs, the government would do better to simply put money directly into the pockets of the people it wants to help.

"People talk about, you know, making the tax system more progressive. How about we start by having the nurse in Queens not pay taxes? At all," Bezos said. "Why is a nurse in Queens who makes $75,000 a year paying more than $1,000 a month in taxes? That's $1,000 a month that could help with rent, groceries, or anything."

"And by the way, do you know what that all adds up to? The bottom half of income earners in this country pay only 3 percent of the taxes. It's only 3 percent. We can find 3 percent," he continued. "So we don't have, it's a small amount of money for the government, you know that. And really, the more I thought about it, to me, it's kind of absurd that we're doing this. You know, we shouldn't be asking this nurse in Queens to send money to Washington."

"Yes, the United States has the most progressive tax system in the world," Bezos wrote on X, following the interview. "The top 1% pay 40% of taxes, the bottom 50% pay 3% of taxes. We can make it even more progressive by zeroing out taxes on the bottom half. It’s a small amount of the total tax revenue but very meaningful to people in this group."

Bezos went on to highlight the difference between a government service and a private company like his own, Amazon. He argued that if his company operated like the New York City public school system, no one would be willing to pay for it.

Democrats like Mamdani, however, do not simply want to put money in the pockets of the people they seek to help; they want the government itself to be responsible for assisting them. In practice, that often means the government determines a person’s level of need, something it is frequently wrong about, while a large bureaucracy of government workers profits from administering the program inefficiently. 

There is perhaps no better example than the first of Mamdani’s five proposed city-run grocery stores, which is projected to cost taxpayers ten times more to open than a privately run store, despite being built on land the city already owns, while also likely carrying far higher operating costs.