51–60 of 292 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The first 250k in profits from capital gains are exempt. It is estimated that this tax only affects the 7000 richest individuals in Washington. Keep in mind we don't have any income taxes here.
These taxes always start off only affecting the richest of the rich, until the government decides it needs more revenue.
As a Washington resident, I think this is great. WA has one of the most regressive tax systems in the country, and this is a move in the right direction. It's crafted to have a very narrow impact. It is capital gains, but essentially only for stock sales, and only for stocks sales over a quarter million dollars. If someone sells half a million dollars worth of stock, it seems very fair the state gets some cut of that…
Ah, so this bill will tax gains from productive activities like investing in and building companies, while exempting gains from rent seeking activities like real estate. Why am I not surprised?
I recently came across this comment by Philip Greenspun: “if you bought an asset for $10,000 in 2000, for example, the BLS says you spent $15,700 in today’s mini-dollars; if you sell it for $15,000 in 2021 you’ve actually suffered a loss, but will owe capital gains tax nonetheless” ( https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2021/04/29/economic-wisdom... ). I’m not a finance person, and this had never occurred to me. Does he…
Absolutely. But really there should not be capital gains tax as it is double taxation - you have already paid income tax on the same dollar.
If you invest a dollar today and get ten dollars tomorrow you’ve gained 9 dollars. When were you taxed for that?
Details are sparse in this article. Looks like 7% capital gains tax, first $250K excluded, real estate excluded. Proceeds to primarily fund childhood education (for now). > For example, stock sales higher than $250,000 would be taxed at 7%. Real estate would not be. 7% (on top of federal cap gains, which are also increasing) is a significant tax rate to start with. If it was 1-2%, I could see people rolling with it.…
I recently came across this comment by Philip Greenspun: “if you bought an asset for $10,000 in 2000, for example, the BLS says you spent $15,700 in today’s mini-dollars; if you sell it for $15,000 in 2021 you’ve actually suffered a loss, but will owe capital gains tax nonetheless” ( https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2021/04/29/economic-wisdom... ). I’m not a finance person, and this had never occurred to me. Does he…
It would be great for the taxpayer if you could do that but the government would lose out on so much revenue. So I think any such proposal is dead on arrival.
I recently came across this comment by Philip Greenspun: “if you bought an asset for $10,000 in 2000, for example, the BLS says you spent $15,700 in today’s mini-dollars; if you sell it for $15,000 in 2021 you’ve actually suffered a loss, but will owe capital gains tax nonetheless” ( https://philip.greenspun.com/blog/2021/04/29/economic-wisdom... ). I’m not a finance person, and this had never occurred to me. Does he…
Absolutely. But really there should not be capital gains tax as it is double taxation - you have already paid income tax on the same dollar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These taxes always start off only affecting the richest of the rich, until the government decides it needs more revenue.
“The government” is legislators that we elect. They aren’t some external force that is imposed on us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The first 250k in profits from capital gains are exempt. It is estimated that this tax only affects the 7000 richest individuals in Washington. Keep in mind we don't have any income taxes here.
These taxes always start off only affecting the richest of the rich, until the government decides it needs more revenue.
The best part is this tax basically is a trojan horse. In it's present form it'll raise a small amount of money- $400M. Originally it was supposed to be a much lower threshold- ~10$k if I remember right. So it'll be ratcheted down of course.