[Cross-posted here with no answers for a few days]
I came - to the very best of my knowledge from reading the source - across the following statement in The Jackknife and Bootstrap, Shao and Tu, p. 87:
$$\sum_i(X_i-\bar X)^4\leq16\sum_i(X_i-\mu)^4,$$
where $\bar X$ and $\mu$ are the sample mean and expected value of the $X_i$, respectively.
The statement appears in the broader context of their Theorem 3.8, which of course has several conditions. However, since the result seems to be algebraical, I suppose none of these matter for the present question.
Even without the term 16, the statement is well-known (for any $a$, not only $\mu$) when we replace 4 by 2.
My hunch is that the proof uses Pascal's triangle, as there are 16 terms in the r.h.s. when adding and subtracting $\mu$ and multiplying out:
$$\sum_i(X_i-\bar X)^4=\sum_i(X_i-\mu)^4+4(X_i-\mu)^3(\mu-\bar X)+4(X_i-\mu)(\mu-\bar X)^3+6(X_i-\mu)^2(\mu-\bar X)^2+(\mu-\bar X)^4$$
My attempts at bounding the terms on the r.h.s. (other than the first one, which is already in the "right" format), including Hölder's inequality, however have not led anywhere useful.
n <- 10; mu <- 4; x <- rnorm(n, mu); xbar <- mean(x); sum((xbar-mu)^4); sum((x-mu)^4)
seems to suggest, so that one might expect the result to be easy to show - apparently, not. $\endgroup$