United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby Faces Backlash Over Wealth Tax Call
Kirby says he would pay steep inheritance taxes as conservatives question his $32 million pay and United's fares
By AXY Business Desk ·
Key points
- United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby called wealth inequality a “danger to society” and backed a national wealth tax and inheritance taxes close to 100% in a New York Times interview.
- Kirby said he would pay the high inheritance taxes himself, which drew criticism from conservative politicians and commentators.
- Critics pointed to Kirby’s reported $32 million in 2025 pay, and Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry and others on X called for a boycott of United.
- Kirby is also defending high fares and a $70 aisle or window seat fee, saying prices must cover the cost of flying.
- A California vote on a 5% billionaire tax, due in about two weeks, is the next test of the wider debate.
Scott Kirby, the chief executive of United Airlines, is facing sharp criticism from conservative politicians and commentators after he called wealth inequality a “danger to society” and backed a national wealth tax and steep inheritance taxes. Kirby made the remarks in a recent interview with the New York Times, in which he was asked about falling public trust in chief executives and whether he felt any responsibility to restore it.
What Kirby told the New York Times
Kirby’s central words were blunt. “We should have a national wealth tax – it won’t work by state because people will just move,” he said. “And I think we should have inheritance taxes that get close to 100% at some level. I would pay them.”
Those sentences carry two separate ideas. A wealth tax charges a percentage on what a person owns, not on what they earn in a year. An inheritance tax is paid by people who receive money or property from someone who has died, and critics of such taxes often call them “death taxes.” Kirby’s point about states reflects a common argument in tax debates. If only one state taxes large fortunes, wealthy residents can move to a state that does not, taking their money and their future tax payments with them.
The question he was answering was about trust, but his reply moved quickly into the broader issue of who holds economic power and how the gains from a company are shared. That is why his comments have travelled beyond the usual business pages and into the political arena.
The backlash from conservative politicians and commentators
Criticism came fast. Several conservative news headlines focused on Kirby’s pay, reporting that he made $32 million in 2025. Glenn Beck, a former Fox News host, and other users on X called for a boycott of United Airlines.
Jeff Landry, the governor of Louisiana, also weighed in and called the statement “audacious.” In a post on X, he wrote: “How audacious from a guy that didn’t even build @united and makes $32 million a year,” and added a link to a government website where people can donate money to the government. He went on: “Better yet, he should distribute his salary to the employees at the bottom of the ladder @united!” He closed with: “Let’s see you step up and place your money where your mouth is!”
Landry’s post combines two arguments. The first is that Kirby did not found the airline, so his pay should be judged differently from that of an owner. The second is a challenge: if Kirby believes the wealthy should pay more, he should give up part of his own income. Both points are personal, which is why they travel well on social media, even though tax policy is a much broader question.
Why the $32 million figure draws attention
Pay for chief executives at large public companies is usually made up of a base salary, bonuses and stock awards. Total figures can swing sharply from one year to the next, depending on how those parts are valued and when they are paid. The source material does not break down how Kirby’s $32 million was made up, so readers should not assume how much of it was salary.
What the figure does show is the gap between a senior executive and the frontline workers who staff airport counters, load bags and fly the planes. That gap sits at the centre of the debate Kirby joined when he talked about inequality. A chief executive who says inequality is dangerous invites the question of whether his own pay is part of the problem.
Kirby’s offer to pay high inheritance taxes himself is what made his comments harder to dismiss as abstract policy talk. A general call for higher taxes on the rich is easy to debate in the abstract. A personal statement that he would pay them puts the speaker’s own money on the table, and it gives critics a direct point to press.
How the United States taxes large fortunes
The United States does not have a federal wealth tax. The main federal tax on individuals is the income tax, and the country also has an estate tax that applies to very large estates when their owners die. Because the estate tax only reaches the largest estates, it raises far less than the income tax and is a much narrower tool than the inheritance taxes Kirby described.
A wealth tax works differently. It takes a yearly percentage of a person’s net worth, which means the government has to value everything a person owns, including property, investments and shares in private companies. Those assets do not always have a clear market price, which is one reason supporters and critics of wealth taxes argue about how well they could work in practice.
Supporters argue that wealth taxes target concentrated fortunes that income taxes can miss, especially when much of a rich person’s gain is never sold and therefore never taxed as income. Critics say valuation is hard, that wealthy people can shift assets, and that residents may leave. Kirby’s “people will just move” argument rests on that last point. Economists still debate how large the movement of wealthy residents would be, and the answer depends on the design of the tax and the rules of each state.
California’s billionaire tax vote
The debate has a near-term test in California. Kirby’s remarks came just two weeks before voters in the state will decide on a so-called “billionaire’s tax.” The measure would put a 5% tax on the state’s billionaires. According to the source, wealthy residents have been spending millions of dollars fighting it.
That timing helps explain why Kirby’s comments landed so hard. A chief executive speaking about wealth taxes just before a high-profile ballot measure gives both sides a new example to cite. The result of the vote could shape how other states and lawmakers view the idea of taxing large fortunes at the state level, though the source material does not make that connection directly.
Fares, seats and the cost of flying
Kirby also addressed ticket prices, which have become a sore point for many travellers. He said that high prices this year were being compared with the “artificial low” fares of the pandemic, when travel largely stopped and the airline industry was badly disrupted. “We have to charge enough that it covers the cost of flying, and it’s expensive to fly airplanes,” he said.
He also defended a $70 charge that passengers pay to sit in an aisle or window seat if they are not frequent flyers with United. “The way to give everyone what they want is to charge for the services and products that those customers want,” he said, adding: “There are customers that pay more that get more.”
For travellers, the practical lesson is that the base fare may not be the full cost of a trip. Seat selection, checked bags and other extras are where airlines have increasingly separated customers by how much they are willing to pay. Kirby’s comments make that approach explicit, and they also connect it to the wider debate about fairness that his wealth tax remarks opened.
What to watch next
The source material does not report a response from United Airlines to the criticism, nor any change in company policy tied to the boycott calls. Readers should watch whether the company comments on Kirby’s remarks and whether the boycott has any measurable effect on bookings.
The California vote is the next concrete event. Its outcome will show whether voters in the state are willing to tax billionaires directly, and it will be read closely by people who favour or oppose wealth taxes elsewhere. Analysts expect the debate over executive pay to keep returning to the question Kirby was asked, which is whether business leaders should do more to win back public trust.
At the federal level, the source does not point to any proposal for a national wealth tax, so Kirby’s call remains an opinion from one executive rather than a policy under consideration.
Questions and answers
What did Scott Kirby say about wealth taxes?
Kirby said in a New York Times interview that the US should have a national wealth tax because a state-level tax would not work, since people would move. He also said inheritance taxes should get close to 100% at some level, and that he would pay them.
Why are people criticising United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby?
Conservative politicians and commentators criticised Kirby for his call for wealth and inheritance taxes, and for his reported $32 million pay in 2025. Glenn Beck and other users on X called for a boycott of United Airlines.
What is California’s billionaire tax?
The so-called billionaire’s tax would put a 5% tax on the state’s billionaires. Voters in California will decide on it about two weeks after Kirby’s comments, and wealthy residents have been spending millions to fight it.
What did Kirby say about the $70 seat fee?
Kirby said that the way to give everyone what they want is to charge for the services and products customers want, adding that there are customers who pay more and get more. The $70 fee applies to passengers who are not frequent flyers with United and want an aisle or window seat.
Topics: Scott Kirby, United Airlines, wealth tax, inheritance tax, CEO pay, Jeff Landry, California billionaire tax
Sources: The Guardian Business