Wealth taxes do not need to have someone guess a value of someone’s wealth. The wealthy can tell the government what they think it is at each point.
The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
141–150 of 348 posts
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#142By borrowing against their holdings. The framing is deceptive. You can do this too: there is no requirement to have billions in collateral. If you own stocks, your brokerage will lend you money at a very low rate, secured by the equity - typically up to about half of your stocks' worth. The gotcha is market risk. If there's another crash akin to the housing crisis - and there will be - the bank will liquidate your ho…
1) buy a painting for X
2) have it evaluated, sometimes the price is higher than X
3) put it in storage or a tax loophole between countries
4) use said painting as collateral for low interest loans
Now you have money to invest, as long as you make more than the low interest loan, you're making profit.Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#143By borrowing against their holdings. The framing is deceptive. You can do this too: there is no requirement to have billions in collateral. If you own stocks, your brokerage will lend you money at a very low rate, secured by the equity - typically up to about half of your stocks' worth. The gotcha is market risk. If there's another crash akin to the housing crisis - and there will be - the bank will liquidate your ho…
> your brokerage will lend you money at a very low rate, secured by the equity I have not found one that will offer a very low rate, have you? For example here are Schwab's rates for a loan against equity: https://www.schwab.com/pledged-asset-line/rates For 500K-1M rate is SOFR + 3.4%, so about 8.2% For multimillionaires it gets better at SOFT + 2.4%, or about 7.2% Not bad in this market but not one I'd call " very l…
https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/trading/margin-rates.p...
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#144By borrowing against their holdings. The framing is deceptive. You can do this too: there is no requirement to have billions in collateral. If you own stocks, your brokerage will lend you money at a very low rate, secured by the equity - typically up to about half of your stocks' worth. The gotcha is market risk. If there's another crash akin to the housing crisis - and there will be - the bank will liquidate your ho…
> If you own stocks, your brokerage will lend you money at a very low rate, secured by the equity - typically up to about half of your stocks' worth. This should be illegal of course... You cannot for the purposes of paying taxes say "hey, I don't actually have this money, this is unrealized gains" and then turn around (to brokerage house or anyone else) and say "hey, look I actually do have this 'money' - lemme borr…
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#145By borrowing against their holdings. The framing is deceptive. You can do this too: there is no requirement to have billions in collateral. If you own stocks, your brokerage will lend you money at a very low rate, secured by the equity - typically up to about half of your stocks' worth. The gotcha is market risk. If there's another crash akin to the housing crisis - and there will be - the bank will liquidate your ho…
You can also buy art. 1) buy a painting for X 2) have it evaluated, sometimes the price is higher than X 3) put it in storage or a tax loophole between countries 4) use said painting as collateral for low interest loans Now you have money to invest, as long as you make more than the low interest loan, you're making profit.
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
> as soon as you try to use it as realized in ANY way you should be taxed immediately You're trying to define a rule based on intent. That's doable. We do it all the time. But it tends to get messy, fast. How do you differentiate investment leverage from realizing gains through borrowing? If you track distributions, does a commensurate reduction in contributions count? What if the borrowing is done against the portfo…
It is not messy at all if you use KISS. You do not differentiate ever - ANY usage of unrealized gains makes them realized. Very simple to implement but of course won't ever happen :)
Significantly increasing the cost of borrowing for most non large companies is certainly a great idea.. it obviously won’t lead to less competition and more concentration.
> It is not messy at all
If you ignore the consequences and implications (or can’t grasp them at all) then sure..
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
No offense, but I don't believe you understand the nuance of the thing you're talking about. It is very easy to say 'any attempt by a murderer to flee the state, and he should be thrown back into the jail' for someone with limited education about western law and order. This is exactly how you sound.
This is exactly what the billionaires have been able to convince the masses :) It would be "very hard, impossible" to implement a system in which you cannot for the purposes of paying taxes claim you do not have some sh t while turning around and heading over to the bank to get a boatload of money borrowing against that same sh t - need a genius to figure that out...
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#148By borrowing against their holdings. The framing is deceptive. You can do this too: there is no requirement to have billions in collateral. If you own stocks, your brokerage will lend you money at a very low rate, secured by the equity - typically up to about half of your stocks' worth. The gotcha is market risk. If there's another crash akin to the housing crisis - and there will be - the bank will liquidate your ho…
Yes, margin can be dangerous at times and is not that cheap. About 6% over fed rates, or 11-13% right now. Over $500k you'll probably get a better deal.
IBKR is +0.5% at >$200k (It starts at +1.5%)
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
The issue is the step-up in basis, not borrowing against assets. The step-up in basis really is a giveaway. I think that it would make a ton of sense to transfer the basis rather than step it up.
transfer the basis to whom? better not inherit anything
It'sutterly insane to me that the step-up basis exists in the US, it's such an obvious loophole that can fairly easily be closed without many adverse effects.
In my country (Sweden) if you don't know the purchase price, you can use an approximate purchasing price (e.g. for equities you are allowed to assume that it was acquired for 20% of the current value, so you'd be taxed on 80%).
Re: The richest people borrow against their stock (2021)
#150Of course, the interest rates are pegged to SOFR plus a spread, so they're not great right now, though a little better since the Fed lowered rates. IIRC Interactive Brokers offers lower rates.