Bezos urges zero federal income tax for bottom half

On May 20 Jeff Bezos proposed eliminating federal income taxes for the bottom 50% of earners during a televised interview and followed up on social media; the clip drew millions of views. He used a New York nurse who earns $75,000 a year as an example, saying the worker pays more than $12,000 annually — more than $1,000 a month — money that could go toward rent or groceries.

In the interview he said, “A nurse in Queens shouldn’t be sending money to Washington. Washington should be sending her an apology,” and repeated the line on social media.

Bezos argued that a large share of federal income tax revenue comes from a small group of high earners and that wiping out the bottom half’s federal income tax would put money back into households without materially reducing overall receipts. He rejected the view that substantially higher taxes on the ultra-wealthy would close federal shortfalls, adding that a large increase in his own tax bill would not change the deficit picture.

Tax Foundation data show the top 1% of filers paid about 40.4% of federal individual income taxes in 2022, while the bottom 50% accounted for about 3.3% in 2023. With annual federal individual income tax receipts near $2.4 trillion, that 3.3% slice equals roughly $80 billion.

Bezos pointed to New York City school spending as an example of what he described as inefficient public outlays, citing a $44,000 per-student figure. Federal Reserve Bank of New York data place recent per-student spending in the city at about $39,304.

Eliminating federal income taxes for half of filers would require congressional action and decisions about whether changes would be permanent, how they would interact with payroll and other taxes, and how lost revenue would be offset. The Treasury projects a roughly $2 trillion federal deficit for fiscal 2026.

The proposal was presented to the public via the televised interview and social media; whether lawmakers adopt any part of it remains unclear. Debate in Congress would need to address trade-offs among tax relief for lower earners, spending priorities and deficit impacts.