Aligning capital gains tax rates with income tax rates seems to do that to me. First, there is no obvious logic why capital gains that are unearned should be taxed at a rate lower than that paid on income.
The entirety of the economics profession argues that returns to capital should be taxed more lightly, even if it they are to be taxed at all, than returns to labour on efficiency grounds. There are, of course, those who think that equity overcomes this efficiency argument.
But the argument that there is no obvious logic is simply an expression of the profoundest ignorance of matters economic.
Don’t forget what Ritchie is really arguing for. A 50% income tax rate, NI to be added to investment income. Assuming that he means employers’ NI (which he agrees comes out of wages anyway) then he’s arguing for a 65% tax rate upon capital income (and he has indeed argued for just that, a 15% surcharge on capital income as of old).
You can indeed make an equity argument for this: but not an efficiency one. And that he doesn’t understand that shows that he really is ignorant.
You know what my real fear is in this election? That Miliboy will win and then do a Glasman. Appoint this fool to the Lords.