91–100 of 155 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
13.3% actually... this is why I don't understand why anyone starts a company in California when you can go to other states like WA that have no income tax
And yet the roads in WA are still better than most of CA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FBI? Also, who mentioned federal tax revenue or income tax? It wasn't me.
I'm not sure I understand the point. Are you asserting that the FBI is keeping muggers and highwaymen away from Elon Musk's money? Edit, to respond to your edit, which added "Also, who mentioned federal tax revenue or income tax? It wasn't me." The title of the article we are ostensibly discussing.
That's $593M taxes on $1.34B earnings on exercising stock options...44% tax rate is pretty harsh!
I got interested in the utility of money a while back and how the "value" of money is roughly logarithmic as it goes up. I found a couple of thought experiments regarding a "logarithmic flat tax". Anyway, going by that I think it's about right - it might still be a little bit high, though. Depending on how you calculate it those plans can be configured so that he should have paid more in the 35-40% range. Basically,…
That's $593M taxes on $1.34B earnings on exercising stock options...44% tax rate is pretty harsh!
That's $593M taxes on $1.34B earnings on exercising stock options...44% tax rate is pretty harsh!
For the US maybe. Income tax in the Netherlands (my country) in the top bracket is 52%. On the second hand, we have no capital gains tax so he might come out ahead when exercising options. On the third hand, we have a wealth tax of 1.2% on your entire capital above a certain floor (of about 20k) so he might not come out ahead in the end. It's always interesting to see the opinions of different cultures about how much…
I personally think that after the first 1.5 million that they tax rate should be 100%. That's still an incredibly large amount of money. After that we need the resources to tackle problems and we can't if people hoard them. I know that it sounds simple, and lots of people on this site will disagree, but I'm having trouble justifying this kind of extreme wealth to myself anymore. There are so many people in poverty an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I got interested in the utility of money a while back and how the "value" of money is roughly logarithmic as it goes up. I found a couple of thought experiments regarding a "logarithmic flat tax". Anyway, going by that I think it's about right - it might still be a little bit high, though. Depending on how you calculate it those plans can be configured so that he should have paid more in the 35-40% range. Basically,…
Sounds like reasonable policy but incredibly obtuse. All taxpayers should be able to calculate and file their own taxes. The more complicated the easier to game and manipulate. I'll go as far as to say simplicity should be the driving motivation, not equality.
It's very strange how people now seem to feel like they are entitled to see the tax returns of public or well-known figures. Tax returns are nobody else's business! Would you demand to see their medical records as well? The implicit subtext (especially with highly successful people like Musk) is that we do this to "make sure they pay their fair share". Here's the reality: the top 1% of US tax filers pay nearly half o…
That's $593M taxes on $1.34B earnings on exercising stock options...44% tax rate is pretty harsh!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And I believe a boring company, hyperloop, other efforts in AI, etc. A more substantive question is how that money would be spent by the relevant parties. I would argue that Musk would spend it better than the federal government and as such, he should have it.
How could that be? Suppose Musk controlled all the resources in the world. What motivation would he have to allocate them fairly?