inequality is \u201ckilling us\u201d and the solution is to \u201ctax the rich\u201d<\/a>.<\/p>\nBut a growing cohort of critics is pushing back, accusing Mr Stevenson of prioritising emotion over evidence or practical solutions. <\/p>\n
They argue the 39-year-old is a salesman who monetises his following with subscriptions, despite holding himself out as a retired multi-millionaire (former colleagues have disputed his former success as a trader).<\/p>\n
Supporters, however, say Mr Stevenson translates complicated economic issues into language ordinary people understand, giving voice to frustrations about the rising cost of living.<\/p>\n
A viral clip in which London-based Australian entrepreneur and author Daniel Priestley took on Mr Stevenson has become fuel for critics. <\/p>\n
In a debate on the Diary of a CEO podcast in March 2025, the two men clashed over wealth, tax and a billionaire British aristocrat. <\/p>\n
\u201cI worked my t*ts off, and I paid 50 per cent top rate tax, plus national insurance \u2014 60 per cent, to bring my family out of poverty,\u201d Stevenson said in the exchange, which has since resurfaced online. <\/p>\n
\u201cAt the same time, the Duke of Westminster inherited \u00a310 billion and paid nothing \u2014 do you think that\u2019s fair?\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s not true. The Duke of Westminster is one of the highest taxpayers in the country,\u201d Mr Priestley shot back.<\/p>\n
Although the Duke avoided the standard 40 per cent inheritance tax on the bulk of his estimated \u00a310 billion fortune by holding the assets in a discretionary trust, he still paid a periodic tax of 6 per cent every 10 years, Mr Priestley explained. <\/p>\n
Mr Stevenson baulked at this, comparing the 6 per cent periodic tax with his income tax rate of 60 per cent, but Mr Priestley reminded him that the Duke paid income tax, too. <\/p>\n
\u201cYou\u2019re not comparing apples with apples,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Duke of Westminster pays income tax. He probably makes your bill blush… All the same taxes that apply to you, apply to him.\u201d<\/p>\n
The debate ended without a clear winner, but it raked in 5.5 million views; an example of how polarised clashes often draw bigger audiences than more measured discourse. <\/p>\n
Angel Zhong, associate professor of finance at RMIT University, said the exchange was more likely to harm financial literacy than improve it, leaving audiences with a false sense of being informed.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe format rewards whoever delivers the more compelling line, not whoever makes the more accurate argument,\u201d Ms Zhong told news.com.au. <\/p>\n
\u201cThere were moments where factual claims went unchallenged simply because the pace of the debate didn\u2019t allow for it. <\/p>\n
\u201cAudiences walk away feeling informed, when they\u2019ve actually just witnessed a performance.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ms Zhong said Mr Stevenson\u2019s staggering rise as a \u201cfinfluencer\u201d – with 1.6 million YouTube followers and thousands of paid subscribers – was indicative of a \u201cgap that mainstream finance has failed to fill\u201d.<\/p>\n
People were genuinely anxious about housing, investment, wages and inequality, and they were not getting accessible answers from traditional sources, she said.<\/p>\n
\u201cStevenson has identified that gap, and speaks to it effectively. My concern, having watched him in this clip, is that accessibility has come at the cost of rigour.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere were factual weaknesses and logical jumps that his audience is unlikely to have the training to identify.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ms Zhong said Australians should be wary of finfluencers charging subscriptions, mentioning that anyone providing personal financial advice in Australia is required to hold a licence. <\/p>\n
She said many influencers operate in a \u201cgrey zone\u201d between commentary and financial advice, and emotionally-charged financial content tends to be more persuasive and shareable than data-driven content, despite the \u201creal harm\u201d to households that can arise from acting on weak advice.<\/p>\n
In Australia, finfluencers like Mr Stevenson are aggressively competing with traditional experts for our attention, with 41 per cent of Aussies following financial content on social media, according to ING research. <\/p>\n
Gen Z were the most likely generation to use social media for financial advice or information, at 40 per cent, followed by Millennials (31 per cent), Gen X (11 per cent) and Baby Boomers (2 per cent).<\/p>\n
\u201cHe didn\u2019t share any facts \u2014 not one,\u201d Mr Priestley later reflected about his verbal sparring match with Mr Stevenson. <\/p>\n
The Aussie said his opponent had struggled to differentiate between basic economic concepts like revenue, profit, and assets.<\/p>\n
\u201cHe expects us to accept his entire philosophy based purely on his feelings… He believes higher taxes on wealth are the only way to improve the economy. <\/p>\n
\u201cHe sees no negative consequences, genuinely dismissing capital flight as a real issue. He seems undeterred that wealth taxes have been tried and failed many times globally.\u201d <\/p>\n
Mr Priestley concluded that, as much as he respected Gary\u2019s passion, \u201chis understanding of this topic appears low-resolution and I\u2019m not sure the country should be taking advice from him\u201d.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Gary Stevenson has built a passionate following in the often-dry world of economic commentary. The self-styled \u201cPeople\u2019s Economist,\u201d…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":661158,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[1724,64,63,689,319390,319384,99,319387,319391,9239,164,319386,88330,272752,6550,305004,36756,319385,5808,677,319383,319389,319392,319395,319388,319393,308004,34455,319394],"class_list":["post-661157","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-economy","tag-asia","tag-au","tag-australia","tag-australia-and-new-zealand","tag-bill-blush","tag-billionaire-british-aristocrat","tag-business","tag-challenges-influencer","tag-daniel-priestley","tag-eastern-asia","tag-economy","tag-enemy-state","tag-gary-stevenson","tag-harrison-christian","tag-income-tax","tag-income-tax-rate","tag-inheritance-tax","tag-london-based-australian-entrepreneur","tag-north-korea","tag-oceania","tag-paid-income-tax","tag-periodic-tax","tag-populist-nerves","tag-raw-emotional-appeal","tag-rogue-economist","tag-self-styled-whistleblower","tag-viral-clip","tag-wealth-inequality","tag-working-class-moral"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/661157","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=661157"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/661157\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/661158"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=661157"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=661157"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=661157"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}