> Any tax decrease "disproportionately" benefits the wealthy because they have more.
Untrue; consider, e.g., the adoption of EITC if it didn't already exist. It's a pre tax decrease, but wouldn't benefit the wealthy (in first order effects) at all.
Or abolishing payroll tax and transferring equivalent amounts into the various trust funds out of general revenue, a pre tax decrease that would slightly benefit the wealthy (because Medicare tax), but disproportionately benefit those whose income was primarily from labor, which isn't the wealthy.
Untrue; consider, e.g., the adoption of EITC if it didn't already exist. It's a pre tax decrease, but wouldn't benefit the wealthy (in first order effects) at all.
Or abolishing payroll tax and transferring equivalent amounts into the various trust funds out of general revenue, a pre tax decrease that would slightly benefit the wealthy (because Medicare tax), but disproportionately benefit those whose income was primarily from labor, which isn't the wealthy.