Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked • Hacker News Board

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#111

Post by II2II » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:19 PM UTC

daenz wrote: post #72

dougmwne wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 pla…

Do you trust politicians to redistribute money fairly and with accountability?

A more meaningful questions is: do you trust governments to provide services fairly and with accountability?

Framing the question in terms of politicians redistributing money sounds like an attempt to use base emotions to reach a foregone conclusion. I would like to think that framing the question in terms of governments providing services encourages people to examine how governments work and what they actually have to offer. In other words: you are welcome to debate the mechanisms of government in providing fair and accountable services. (Of course, it could just be that I am exhibiting a bias in the other direction.)

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#112

Post by orwin » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:19 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #26

astuyvenberg wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Rolling the debt is a thing.

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#113

Post by daenz » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:21 PM UTC

brnt wrote: post #109

daenz wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your vote is as powerful as you claim, then explain to me how the wealth disparity has increased over time, and that most politicians weren't complicit in that process. Your politician allies are not your allies. Do you think it is difficult to lie to constituents and double-deal, especially when all of your peers are doing the same?

I claimed nothing. I only establish I have some control over my politicians, and zero control over billionaires.

Why do you want to control someone else?

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#114

Post by imgabe » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:23 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #94

imgabe wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a whole section of the government dedicated to figuring out whether people are evading taxes and then pursuing them for it. It could use some more funding, but that’s the appropriate way to do it. What are you going to add by having uninformed members of the public inspecting tax returns they don’t understand? Keep in mind there are people who turn down raises because they think being in a higher tax bracket…

> What are you going to add by having uninformed members of the public inspecting tax returns they don’t understand? Nobody's saying these people are illegaly evading taxes. The question is: "Should what they are doing be legal?". And that is absolutely a question for a layman. That's what representative democracy is all about. We get to collectively decide what is appropriate, and inappropriate in our society. Enfor…

Ok, the question you proposed to answer in your previous comment was “Are the rich evading taxes?” which I took to mean the public should be assessing the current legality of what individual rich people are doing.

Various tax strategies can be and are made public without needing to dox anyone. We are currently debating about them right now. So what do we gain by opening up everyone to identity theft and fraud?

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#115

Post by brnt » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:23 PM UTC

daenz wrote: post #113

brnt wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I claimed nothing. I only establish I have some control over my politicians, and zero control over billionaires.

Why do you want to control someone else?

You were asking how to make those spending your money accountable (be it by spending your taxes or saved money through deductions or lower or absent taxes). You were seeking control, and I explained to you how and where you have it.

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#116

Post by arn » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:23 PM UTC

zorak8me wrote: post #42

arn wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It conflates income with unrealized capital gains. You can make an argument that income and capital gains should be taxed at similar rates, but it feels like they are being purposely misleading in their presentation, when they use unrealized capital gains as the denominator. No one else’s taxes are viewed through that lens.

I am confused. They were clearly discussing unrealized gains as wealth throughout the article. What am I missing here?

What's your personal 'true' tax rate? Taxes paid divided by all income and all gains (unrealized capital gains, increase in real estate value, etc...).

I'm sure you don't know. No one knows or has a frame of reference. It was chosen to emphasize the narrative. It's like comparing the carbon/waste from mining, manufacturing, delivery and use of a electric car vs. the carbon from burning a tank of gas -- and saying "ah ha! the total lifetime of an EV is worse for the environment than driving around town in a gas car"

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#117

Post by arn » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:24 PM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #59

arn wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Estate taxes make a lot more sense. Heirs don’t need to get free billions of dollars for doing nothing and I have no problems with taxing dead people.

Well, estate tax already exists.

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#118

Post by zorak8me » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:25 PM UTC

idiotsecant wrote: post #90

zorak8me wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One solution- if someone is taking out personal loans that function like income, let’s tax it like income. If someone really wants to live on 80k a year, that’s fine. But if they’re reporting 80k income but spending 10M, maybe they should be paying their fair share on that. Edit- this has the benefit of completely avoiding the issue of unrealized gains and sticks to the issue of income...

I think this might upset the millions of people who take large loan to do things like purchase real estate to live in.

A mortgage is not a personal loan.

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#119

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:27 PM UTC

mxschumacher wrote: post #84

willcipriano wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A possible solution I haven't seen yet. Eliminate stock buybacks and force firms to deliver dividends again.

depending on the valuation, buying back stock is a much better use of capital than paying a dividend, even when disregarding the tax implications.

[deleted]

Re: Tax details of US super-rich allegedly leaked

#120

Post by naveen99 » Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 10:28 PM UTC

paulpauper wrote: post #63

naveen99 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s hard to value a potential large liquidation. A market sell by Jeff Bezos of 40% of his Amazon stock to pay for income tax would destabilize the markets. Also, if there was no tax advantage to holding stocks long term, the entire stock market would have been liquidated to zero in q1 of 2020. market volatility would certainly be much higher than it is now.

It does not have to be. All would have to do is transfer the shares to a separate entity and then borrow against them while hedging downside with options

Borrow and lever up to pay taxes while shorting your main (too concentrated) holding with long put options. What could go wrong ?

The IRS would more likely end up allowing you to take depreciation against your securities like they do for real property (which is subject to property tax)