> The website alleges That's an unfortunately dismissive way to refer to ProPublica. They're more accomplished than most news rooms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ProPublica#Awards
Dismissive? It's factual. As in, "the prosecution alleges..."
Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
21–30 of 185 posts
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do tax capital gains. You pay taxes when you sell. Do you mean tax unrealized capital gains? There is a reason you don’t owe taxes on a stock you haven’t sold yet. For one thing, what if you have to pay tax at one valuation, and then it goes down later.
The issue is when the ultra-wealthy take out loans against their investment assets (and thus, those unrealized capital gains). By doing that, ultra-wealthy _are_ realizing the value of their investments without being taxed. That's how this wealth is being accessed, and that's a large component of what drives these ultra-low tax rates for the ultra-wealthy.
Then HELOC would be taxed which many middle class people rely on. Also its a loan so it need to be paid back. Will payments on private loans be deducted from income then?
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do tax capital gains. You pay taxes when you sell. Do you mean tax unrealized capital gains? There is a reason you don’t owe taxes on a stock you haven’t sold yet. For one thing, what if you have to pay tax at one valuation, and then it goes down later.
The issue is when the ultra-wealthy take out loans against their investment assets (and thus, those unrealized capital gains). By doing that, ultra-wealthy _are_ realizing the value of their investments without being taxed. That's how this wealth is being accessed, and that's a large component of what drives these ultra-low tax rates for the ultra-wealthy.
Seems the solution to that (if u think it’s a problem) is eliminating step up basis.
The reason that works is that basis is reset at death.
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#24I've seen people complaining that the article is disingenuous because it conflates income taxes with capital gains taxes. My response is 'so what'. When you make above a certain income level, you don't need anymore income and can play around with reinvesting capital gains to push taxes into the future while amassing wealth. Sure, you're not realizing the income, but what you're doing, I think, is gaining power and in…
Once you have a certain amount of assets, there's no need to realize any personal income. It becomes completely voluntary. If you have a billion in stock, you could leverage that to pay personal expenses. You could use an unrealized loss over there to balance out the cash you're taking in from a gain over there. You can use companies and foundations to execute any vision you have outside of your household. If you play that game long enough, your descendants will get a cost basis step up. Tax is essentially voluntary when you are that wealthy, where as it is completely mandatory for me. I see absolutely nothing disingenuous about questioning the biggest loophole of them all.
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#25"Don't hate the player hate the game," is what comes to my mind. I would guess it's all legal. It is still good to have transparency, which might potentially change things. I am not so sure though. After all, politicans are usually rich as well. But: All of these super-rich have probably created many, many jobs. I guess all-in-all it is a positive game for society.
> I would guess it's all legal. When it's all secret, we can't make an informed decision on whether or not it should be legal.
What's secret? Income and capital gains brackets are public knowledge. Is who has the money really that important? If you think income over 100,000 should be taxed higher, you can already use the current brackets as reference(and compare to what other countries use, for example).
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do tax capital gains. You pay taxes when you sell. Do you mean tax unrealized capital gains? There is a reason you don’t owe taxes on a stock you haven’t sold yet. For one thing, what if you have to pay tax at one valuation, and then it goes down later.
The issue is when the ultra-wealthy take out loans against their investment assets (and thus, those unrealized capital gains). By doing that, ultra-wealthy _are_ realizing the value of their investments without being taxed. That's how this wealth is being accessed, and that's a large component of what drives these ultra-low tax rates for the ultra-wealthy.
Loans have to be repaid at some point. That does not avoid the tax, it just delays it.
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#27If anyone understands the reasoning behind the US capping your deductible net capital loss in any tax year at $3,000 vs allowing your full capital losses to be offset I'd be interested.
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#28"Don't hate the player hate the game," is what comes to my mind. I would guess it's all legal. It is still good to have transparency, which might potentially change things. I am not so sure though. After all, politicans are usually rich as well. But: All of these super-rich have probably created many, many jobs. I guess all-in-all it is a positive game for society.
At a certain level of wealth, you are the game. Amazon’s famous HQ2 contest was literally about which city would bend its own tax laws to benefit them most.
If only they got something in return for providing those incentives...
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#29I've seen people complaining that the article is disingenuous because it conflates income taxes with capital gains taxes. My response is 'so what'. When you make above a certain income level, you don't need anymore income and can play around with reinvesting capital gains to push taxes into the future while amassing wealth. Sure, you're not realizing the income, but what you're doing, I think, is gaining power and in…
We do tax capital gains. You pay taxes when you sell. Do you mean tax unrealized capital gains? There is a reason you don’t owe taxes on a stock you haven’t sold yet. For one thing, what if you have to pay tax at one valuation, and then it goes down later.
What if? Most jurisdictions assess property taxes annually, and many of them regularly reassess the property value on which the tax is calculated, rather than waiting until a sale to reassess.
One question is whether we want to encourage pure ownership/holding of assets (the current stock ownership situation) or whether we want to encourage productive use of an asset (the current land ownership situation).
Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked
#30"Don't hate the player hate the game," is what comes to my mind. I would guess it's all legal. It is still good to have transparency, which might potentially change things. I am not so sure though. After all, politicans are usually rich as well. But: All of these super-rich have probably created many, many jobs. I guess all-in-all it is a positive game for society.
yeah but that assumes the game is fair. the evidence suggests it is not as fair as it shoudl be