401–410 of 589 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the idea of leaving something to your kids (and a legacy beyond oneself) is a fundamental motivator for most people?
Boo. That's not what's at stake here; people don't wanna pay taxes that are fairly owed to the government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is something people love to rage about, yet it's not one with an obvious fix. The counterpoint is that this leaves money invested, which means others invest in other things, and still entails interest payments. It exists in part because you don't want someone who inherited his parents' house and wants to move in to go broke trying to pay taxes, or have to re-mortgage it, with an even stronger case with family fa…
>This is something people love to rage about ... Yes, people get angry about this, but no one has provided any statistics showing this is actually a common loophole. The basic idea in the reddit post is that there were lenders giving multi-decade loans at a tiny interest rate (only payable upon death with also sharing a % share of the gains). Maybe there are lenders who have lots of capital and also don't understand…
It's a loan in name only.
Regarding Bezos's selling of stocks - perhaps he has offsetting capital gains. See https://old.reddit.com/r/BuyBorrowDieExplained/comments/1f26...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Singapore and a few other places. However in the US housing is not a government monopoly (sometimes low income housing is). You can always find a landlord in a different town. No need for a new job as you still live in the same metropolitan area.
Ok but what if the landlord raises rent by $200, while commuting would cost me an extra $250. Or what if I move from a town with good public transit to one where I have to drive by your own admission, several towns over. What if moving costs $1000, which is another $83 per month over a year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course it’s relevant to the business models, specific prices charged, marketing, and general economics. In a way that means the details matter and you’ll get different end prices, even for the same nominal tax rate, depending on how it is applied. For instance, when sales taxes are not shown at point of choice (on the shelves) they tend to not impact consumer behavior (US), where when they are (most of Europe), th…
My question was about whether an itemized receipt changes who pays
That is my point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given that most billionaires have their billions as imaginary ownership of gigantic corporations, how exactly would someone steal their shares from them such that government needs to enforce their property rights? Can I just walk up to the bank and say "hey, I have $100 billion worth of Facebook stock, gibs me da money"? You know, but for the feds swooping in (or possibly the Delaware state troopers) and shutting tha…
> Can I just walk up to the bank and say "hey, I have $100 billion worth of Facebook stock, gibs me da money"? No, but assuming you are on Facebook's board / in upper management you can conspire with the rest of the board to get rid of Zuckerberg (possibly permanently) and share the company amongst yourself. ARM China seems like somewhat close example of what can happen when there is no government willing to protect…
Yes, if you want to oust him and take over as CEO, then boards of directors have that power. But that's more about his job security. When he leaves, he leaves with just as much stock as he ever had, and in the case of some termination clauses in contracts for that stuff, he walks away with more than he walked in with.
With the government out of the picture, this doesn't much change. If the board of directors tries to confiscate shares or some equivalent (I dunno, withholding dividends? Does Facebook even pay dividends?), then their stock price tanks immediately. Somewhere down near $0. Their financing falls apart shortly after that, and pretty soon the company goes under. The punishment for some group stealing Facebook isn't government goons stepping in and bashing skulls, it's in the complicated structures that make it worthless just about as soon as it's stolen.
I think your Chinese example is quite the opposite of this. The government of China basically has to step in and allow ARM China to pull such a stunt, or it's impossible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>When the SOFR rate is It is very common to make loans based on using stocks, etc. as collateral. But that isn't what people claim happens with the "buy, borrow, die" loophole. The claim is that these loans have incredibly low interest rates (much lower somehow than the IRS Applicable Federal Rate) and the interest is only payable upon death - which might be decades away. That is how the borrower can supposedly avoid…
I don't know that I've seen a lot of details, but I didn't realize the rates were supposed to be less than benchmark rates. Either way, the expectation is that the appreciation of the capital exceeds the interest. (Not that anyone should rely on that expectation, but clearly, people do) And that the lender is offering the loan to capture an ultra high net worth investor; so even if you lose money on the interest, you…
I know someone who got a mortgage rate way, WAY below prevailing rates (like around 1%, gotten back when normies like us got rates around ~3%), because 1. he is a very high net worth individual and 2. he owns a business that does a lot of business with the bank. So, he gets extra special treatment because he's rich and the bank appreciates his business and expects the relationship to lead to even more business.
It's not a huge stretch to imagine that Jeff Bezos's bank would happily loan him money at some token 0.01% interest rate or some similar sweet deal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is something people love to rage about, yet it's not one with an obvious fix. The counterpoint is that this leaves money invested, which means others invest in other things, and still entails interest payments. It exists in part because you don't want someone who inherited his parents' house and wants to move in to go broke trying to pay taxes, or have to re-mortgage it, with an even stronger case with family fa…
Attach a lien to the property. If it’s a small business, the government’s share of the step up is put against the business. There will still be shenanigans. But it avoids forcing liquidation wile preserving the state’s interest.
A fascinating reddit post was mentioned here about a month ago - about the mildly famous (if a little macabre) 'Buy, Borrow, Die' cycle used by the obscenely-wealthy to - multi-generationally - avoid tax obligations. https://old.reddit.com/r/BuyBorrowDieExplained/comments/1f26... HN comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41408772