Politicians, activists, and the rich themselves variously describe rich people as hard workers, greedy tax avoiders, generous philanthropists, and more. Occasionally, such descriptions are wielded in attempts to legitimize or delegitimize high income taxes on the rich. However, we do not have a good understanding of which of these appeals are most successful. This article explores which attributes of the rich affect support for progressive taxation. First, I use an inductive approach to derive relevant attributes from open-ended survey responses and prior literature. Then, pre-registered experiments in the United States and Denmark show that when the rich exhibit pro-social behaviors (e.g., treating workers well, not using tax loopholes), this reduces public support for taxing them. In comparison, indicators of merit (e.g., working hard) are of secondary or even insignificant importance. I conclude that in redistributive politics, the perceived pro-social behavior of the rich is a key consideration for the public.
AarøeL.PetersenM. B. (2014). Crowding out culture: Scandinavians and Americans agree on social welfare in the face of deservingness cues. The Journal of Politics, 76(3), 684–697. https://doi.org/10.1017/s002238161400019x
2.
AchenC. H.BartelsL. M. (2016). Democracy for realists. Princeton University Press.
3.
AlesinaA.StantchevaS.TesoE. (2018). Intergenerational mobility and preferences for redistribution. The American Economic Review, 108(2), 521–554. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20162015
4.
AlmåsI.CappelenA. W.SørensenE. Ø.TungoddenB. (2022). Global evidence on the selfish rich inequality hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(3), Article e2109690119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2109690119
5.
AlvaradoM. (2024). Compensation and tax fairness: Evidence from four countries. British Journal of Political Science, 1–20, First View. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123423000698
6.
AtkinsonA. B.SøgaardJ. E. (2016). The long-run history of income inequality in Denmark. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 118(2), 264–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjoe.12143
7.
AttewellD. (2021). Deservingness perceptions, welfare state support and vote choice in Western Europe. West European Politics, 44(3), 611–634. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2020.1715704
8.
Ballard-RosaC.MartinL.ScheveK. (2017). The structure of American income tax policy preferences. The Journal of Politics, 79(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1086/687324
9.
Bang PetersenM. (2023). The evolutionary approach to political psychology. In HuddyL.SearsD. O.LevyJ. S.JeritJ. (Eds.), The oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 248–279). Oxford University Press.
10.
BartelsL. M. (2005). Homer gets a tax cut: Inequality and public policy in the American mind. Perspectives on Politics, 3(01), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592705050036
11.
BartonR.PistonS. (2021). Undeserving rich or untrustworthy government? How elite rhetoric erodes support for soaking the rich. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 10(5), 729–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2021.1884890
12.
BlackJ. F.DavidaiS. (2020). Do rich people “deserve” to be rich? Charitable giving, internal attributions of wealth, and judgments of economic deservingness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 90, Article 104011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104011
13.
Bower-BirJ. S. (2022). Desert and redistribution: Justice as a remedy for, and cause of, economic inequality. Policy Studies Journal, 50(4), 757–795. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12439
14.
CavailléC. (2023). Fair enough?: Support for redistribution in the age of inequality. Cambridge studies in comparative politics. Cambridge University Press.
15.
CavailleC.TrumpK.-S. (2015). The two facets of social policy preferences. The Journal of Politics, 77(1), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1086/678312
CoppockA.LeeperT. J.MullinixK. J. (2018). Generalizability of heterogeneous treatment effect estimates across samples. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(49), 12441–12446. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1808083115
18.
CosmidesL.ToobyJ. (2015). Neurocognitive adaptations designed for social exchange. In BussD. M. (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 584–627). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
19.
DeSanteC. D. (2013). Working twice as hard to get half as far: Race, work ethic, and America’s deserving poor. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 342–356. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12006
20.
DeutschM. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice?Journal of Social Issues, 31(3), 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1975.tb01000.x
21.
FinkelE. J.BailC. A.CikaraM.DittoP. H.IyengarS.KlarS.MasonL.McGrathM. C.NyhanB.RandD. G.SkitkaL. J.TuckerJ. A.Van BavelJ. J.WangC. S.DruckmanJ. N. (2020). Political sectarianism in America. Science, 370(6516), 533–536. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1715
22.
García-SánchezE.ObsorneD.WillisG. B.Rodríguez-BailónR. (2019). Attitudes towards redistribution and the interplay between perceptions and beliefs about inequality. British Journal of Social Psychology, 59(1), 111. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12326
23.
GilensM. (1999). Why Americans hate welfare: Race, media, and the politics of antipoverty policy. University of Chicago Press.
24.
GuardinoM. (2019). Framing inequality: News media, public opinion, and the neoliberal turn in U.S. Public policy. Studies in postwar American political development. Oxford University Press.
25.
HainmuellerJ.HopkinsD. J.YamamotoT. (2014). Causal inference in conjoint analysis: Understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Political Analysis, 22(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpt024
26.
HansenK. J. (2018). Perceptions of rich and poor people’s efforts and public opinion about economic redistribution: PhD dissertation. PhD thesis. University of Aarhus, Institut for Statskundskab.
27.
HansenK. J. (2023). Greed, envy, and admiration: The distinct nature of public opinion about redistribution from the rich. American Political Science Review, 117(1), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055422000582
28.
HarrsS.SterbaM.-B. (2023). Fairness and support for welfare policies.
29.
Io-LowM. (2021). To tax or not to tax: Conservatives’ and liberals’ differing attitudes on the rich. In MPSA Annual Convention. Chicago, IL.
30.
JouW.DaltonR. J. (2017). Left-right orientations and voting behavior. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.
31.
KaneJ. V.NewmanB. J. (2023). What they have but also who they are: Avarice, elitism, and public support for taxing the rich. Public Opinion Quarterly, 87(2), 402. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfad016
32.
KimE. (2023). Entertaining beliefs in economic mobility. American Journal of Political Science, 67(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12702
33.
KinderD. R.KiewietD. R. (1981). Sociotropic politics: The American case. British Journal of Political Science, 11(2), 129–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123400002544
34.
KluegelJ. R.SmithE. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ views of what is and what ought to be. Aldine De Gruyter.
35.
KootstraA. (2016). Deserving and undeserving welfare claimants in Britain and The Netherlands: Examining the role of ethnicity and migration status using a vignette experiment. European Sociological Review, 32(3), 325–338. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcw010
McCallL. (2013). The undeserving rich: Beliefs about inequality, opportunity, and redistribution in American society. Cambridge University Press.
39.
McCallL.BurkD.LaperrièreM.RichesonJ. A. (2017). Exposure to rising inequality shapes Americans’ opportunity beliefs and policy support. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(36), 9593–9598. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706253114
40.
McClendonG. H. (2018). Envy in politics. Princeton University Press.
41.
MeulemanB.RoosmaF.AbtsK. (2020). Welfare deservingness opinions from heuristic to measurable concept: The CARIN deservingness principles scale. Social Science Research, 85, Article 102352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.102352
42.
MijsJ. J. B. (2021). The paradox of inequality: Income inequality and belief in meritocracy go hand in hand. Socio-Economic Review, 19(1), 7–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwy051
43.
MillerC. T.FelicioD. M. (1990). Person-positivity bias: Are individuals liked better than groups?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26(5), 408–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(90)90066-U
44.
MonizP.Ramirez-PerezR.HartmanE.JesseeS. (2024). Generalizing toward nonrespondents: Effect estimates in survey experiments are broadly similar for Eager and reluctant participants. Political Analysis, 32(4), 507–520. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2024.8
45.
MutzD. C.MondakJ. J. (1997). Dimensions of sociotropic behavior: Group-based judgements of fairness and well-being. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 284–308. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111717
46.
NewmanB.KaneJ. (2020). What they have or who they are? Avarice, elitism and public support for taxing the rich. Working {{Paper}}.
47.
O’BrienN. (2011). Attitudes to fairness, poverty and welfare reform(Research {{Note}}). Policy Exchange.
48.
OECD. (2023). Tax database. Table I.7. Top statutory personal income tax rates.
49.
OorschotW. van. (2000). Who should get what, and why? On deservingness criteria and the conditionality of solidarity among the public. Policy & Politics: Studies of local government and its services, 28(1), 33–48. https://doi.org/10.1332/0305573002500811
50.
PageB. I.JacobsL. R. (2009). Class war: What Americans really think about economic inequality. University of Chicago Press.
51.
PetersenM. B. (2012). Social welfare as small-scale help: Evolutionary psychology and the deservingness heuristic. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00545.x
52.
PetersenM. B.SlothuusR.StubagerR.TogebyL. (2011). Deservingness versus values in public opinion on welfare: The automaticity of the deservingness heuristic. European Journal of Political Research, 50(1), 24–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2010.01923.x
53.
PetersenM. B.SznycerD.CosmidesL.ToobyJ. (2012). Who deserves help? Evolutionary psychology, social emotions, and public opinion about welfare. Political Psychology, 33(3), 395–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00883.x
54.
PistonS. (2018). Class attitudes in America: Sympathy for the poor, resentment of the rich, and political implications. Cambridge University Press.
55.
RagusaJ. M. (2015). Socioeconomic stereotypes: Explaining variation in preferences for taxing the rich. American Politics Research, 43(2), 327–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x14539547
56.
RapaceA. (2020). Congressional candidates clash over minimum wage. njtoday.net.
57.
ReeskensT.van der MeerT. (2019). The inevitable deservingness gap: A study into the insurmountable immigrant penalty in perceived welfare deservingness. Journal of European Social Policy, 29(2), 166–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928718768335
58.
ReeskensT.van OorschotW. (2013). Equity, equality, or need? A study of popular preferences for welfare redistribution principles across 24 European countries. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(8), 1174–1195. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2012.752064
59.
RodonT.Sanjaume-CalvetM. (2020). How fair is it? An experimental study of perceived fairness of distributive policies. The Journal of Politics, 82(1), 384–391. https://doi.org/10.1086/706053
60.
SadinM. (2017). They’re not worthy: The perceived deservingness of the rich and its connection to policy preferences. In OorschotW. V.RoosmaF.MeulemanB.ReeskensT. (Eds.), The social legitimacy of targeted welfare: Attitudes to welfare deservingness (pp. 299–315). Edward Elgar Pub.
61.
SandsM.de KadtD. (2020). Local exposure to inequality raises support of people of low wealth for taxing the wealthy. Nature, 586(7828), 257–261. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2763-1
62.
ScheveK.StasavageD. (2016). Taxing the rich: A history of fiscal fairness in the United States and Europe. Princeton University Press.
63.
ScheveK.StasavageD. (2022). Equal treatment and the inelasticity of tax policy to rising inequality. Comparative Political Studies, 56(4), 435. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140221108415
64.
SchneiderA.IngramH. (1993). Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review, 87(2), 334–347. https://doi.org/10.2307/2939044
SlothuusR.BisgaardM. (2021). How political parties shape public opinion in the real world. American Journal of Political Science, 65(4), 896. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12550
68.
SteinerN. D. (2024). The shifting issue content of left–right identification: Cohort differences in Western Europe. West European Politics, 47(6), 1276–1303. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2023.2214875
69.
SterbaM.-B. (2022, June). The fairness of inequality due to risk and effort choices. {{SSRN Scholarly Paper}}, Rochester, NY.
70.
SuhayE.KlasnjaM.RiveroG. (2021). Ideology of affluence: Explanations for inequality and economic policy preferences among rich Americans. The Journal of Politics, 83(1), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.1086/709672
71.
ThelenK.WiedemannA. (2021). The anxiety of precarity: The United States in comparative perspective. In RosenbluthF.WeirM. (Eds.), Who gets what?: SSRC anxieties of democracy (pp. 281–306). Cambridge University Press.
72.
TrumpK.-S. (2024). Replication data for: When is it fair to tax the rich? The importance of pro-social behavior. Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/FHU7ET
Van HootegemA.AbtsK.MeulemanB. (2020). Differentiated distributive justice preferences? Configurations of preferences for equality, equity and need in three welfare domains. Social Justice Research, 33(2), 257–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-020-00354-9
75.
van OorschotW. (2006). Making the difference in social Europe: Deservingness perceptions among citizens of European welfare states. Journal of European Social Policy, 16(1), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928706059829
76.
van OorschotW.RoosmaF.MeulemanB.ReeskensT. (2017). The social legitimacy of targeted welfare: Attitudes to welfare deservingness. Edward Elgar Pub.
77.
WilliamsonV. (2017). Read my lips: Why Americans are proud to pay taxes. Princeton University Press.
78.
WolakJ.PetersonD. A. M. (2020). The dynamic American dream. American Journal of Political Science, 64(4), 968. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12522
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
