>> A few billionaires might have additional vacation homes, but they are not going to consume a million homes, much less 10 million.

> Sumner is somehow unfamiliar with the concept of a landlord or vacant property investment.

I'm sure he is not unfamiliar with either...

Not sure what landlords have to do with anything since washing machines are often included as part of a rental (or the apartment doesn't have a washing machine, but what does that have to do with landlords?).

And vacant property investment is a small fraction of total property ownership in the US. It's more common that people have a vacation home and rent it out part of the year.

>> progressive consumption taxes

> When someone proposes one, let me know.

They have been proposed...many times. In fact, the US's system has elements of a progressive consumption tax already since people can put retirement savings in IRAs/401ks. What would make it a more complete progressive consumption tax would be to either raise the limits on contributions to these retirement accounts (and remove income limits), and also introduce accounts like these that are meant as more universal savings vehicles. This is preferred (in my view at least) to just cutting dividend and capital gains rates to 0% since that would benefit existing rich people.

Landlords provide a useful service for anyone who doesn't want to live in a house for a long time. There are pros and cons to renting vs buying. If you are against landlords you are also against anyone who buying a house is a bad decision.

Vacant property investment exists, but it is a small factor in all markets.

Presumably, the percentage of taxation is a function of the price of the item? You can have a different curve or base rate for different harmonization codes.

The word "consume" is important. Billionaires might own a million average family homes, but that's not the same thing as actually using the home. A normal family will eventually lease the house and use it, unless it's left vacant.

I'm not sure vacant property investment holds up in a world with radically higher numbers of houses getting built. The billionaires either stop investing and let house prices drop, or they keep investing until they run out of money, at which point they have no choice but to stop. This only holds up for houses themselves and not for land, but hey, you can solve that with a land tax.