The head of United Airlines, Scott Kirby, recently stated support for a national wealth tax and for inheritance taxes that could approach near-100 percent at certain thresholds. Kirby, whose total compensation was about $32.3 million in fiscal 2025, framed his remarks around rising economic disparity and the risks he believes it poses to social cohesion.
Alongside his tax proposals, Kirby defended airline pricing choices, explaining why carriers charge for aisle and window seats and why flying remains costly. The comments tie together debates over taxation of top earners and how corporations set consumer prices in a post-pandemic travel market.
Proposals on wealth and inheritance taxes from a corporate leader
Kirby argued that any meaningful wealth tax must operate at the federal level rather than by state, because affluent individuals could otherwise relocate to avoid state levies. He also suggested that inheritance taxes should, at some level, be structured to reach nearly 100 percent and said he personally would accept such rules for very large estates. He did not, however, specify the exact net worth thresholds or the precise rate structure he envisions for either measure.
Under current U.S. federal tax law, the estate tax applies at a top marginal rate of 40 percent to amounts exceeding the exemption. The federal basic exemption stood at $15 million per individual in 2026 which means only a small share of estates are subject to the tax. Kirby’s proposals would represent a significant shift from that framework by targeting accumulated assets during life as well as imposing heavier levies on transfers at death.
Public and political reaction to the remarks
Kirby’s comments prompted vocal responses from political figures and commentators. Some critics seized on his reported compensation figure—about $32.3 million in 2025—to argue his stance was at odds with his pay level, while others called for actions such as employee pay redistribution or boycotts. Supporters of higher taxes on the very wealthy have included several high-net-worth individuals over the years, and Kirby’s stance places him within that broader conversation about whether the tax code should be updated to address rising concentration of assets.
Policy proposals to tax unrealized gains or to impose additional levies on billionaires have been debated intermittently at the federal level, with varied legislative outcomes over time. Kirby’s argument that state-by-state approaches would be ineffective echoes longstanding concerns among advocates of uniform federal tax rules designed to limit avoidance through interstate moves.
Airline pricing stance and industry context
Separately, Kirby defended ancillary fees such as charges for selecting aisle or window seats, noting that differential pricing lets airlines cater to passengers with varying preferences. He explained that some customers are willing to pay more for particular seating and that charging for extra services helps airlines match product choice to demand. Kirby framed higher base fares this year as a correction from the artificially low ticket prices of the pandemic era, when widespread travel disruptions pushed many carriers to cut fares dramatically.
On inflation-adjusted comparisons, industry data show airline fares rose by about 20 percent from September 2019 to September 2026, while Kirby noted that covering the real cost of operating aircraft is essential for sustained service, even as consumers evaluate rising travel costs and optional extras.
How these remarks fit into broader debates
Kirby’s combination of tax advocacy and pricing defense links two active policy conversations: how to tax accumulated private wealth fairly, and how private companies set prices for differentiated services. His public willingness to accept high inheritance levies places him alongside other business figures who have at times supported steeper taxes on the ultra-wealthy, while his comments on ancillary fees reflect a wider industry trend toward unbundled pricing.
Whether Kirby’s proposals influence legislative action is uncertain: major changes to federal tax policy would require political agreement and detailed design, including clear definitions of taxable wealth, enforcement mechanisms, and exemptions. For now, his statements have intensified public debate by combining a corporate leader’s perspective on inequality with practical explanations of airline economics.
