In this paper I aim to expand and further develop the idea of ‘limitarianism’, which, in one formulation, is the idea that no-one should be excessively rich (Robeyns 2017). Since introducing that term, several worries and critiques have been voiced, both in (forthcoming) papers as well as through conversations. Do we really need ‘limitarianism’ if we already have the idea of egalitarianism? Is limitarianism not simply a version of sufficientarianism? What, if anything, makes limitarianism distinctive? In this paper I address these critiques by providing a more precise formulation of limitarianism, and hence providing an answer to the question: “Why limitarianism?”