It will be interesting to see how many will vote for a bill like that. I'd almost guarantee you that it'll hit the middle class in some form even though they say it will only hit the top 0.1%.
Will Biden's proposed tax on unrealized gains pass?
- Thread starter NPT
- Start date
Aren't you an accountant?
Tax payments on unrealized gains would simply be a credit against capital gains taxes that would otherwise be due when the gain is actually realized (e.g., the stock is sold). In effect, ultra high net worth individuals would be prepaying capital gains taxes. It's pretty simple.
And how would it hit the middle class? The proposal would only apply to households having a net worth of over $100 million. While many middle class families are sitting on unrealized gains, I challenge you to find one having a net worth north of $100 million. They aint out there.
Could it depress stock prices/reduce stock market gains in general because it might force some to sell stocks they otherwise wouldn't? Well, people (or their estates) are going to sell their assets eventually, right? Also, the proposal would allow for initial payments to be spread over 9 years, as well as the ability to defer payment until later (but with interest). So it is highly unlikely this would suddenly result in a significant market drop because billionaires are dumping stocks.
Do I think it's a good plan? Not sure, but right now I'm not thrilled by it.
I've not read the details. Any idea if you get to take unrealized capital losses against current income? Seems to make about as much sense (little to none).Aren't you an accountant?
Tax payments on unrealized gains would simply be a credit against capital gains taxes that would otherwise be due when the gain is actually realized (e.g., the stock is sold). In effect, ultra high net worth individuals would be prepaying capital gains taxes. It's pretty simple.
And how would it hit the middle class? The proposal would only apply to households having a net worth of over $100 million. While many middle class families are sitting on unrealized gains, I challenge you to find one having a net worth north of $100 million. They aint out there.
Could it depress stock prices/reduce stock market gains in general because it might force some to sell stocks they otherwise wouldn't? Well, people (or their estates) are going to sell their assets eventually, right? Also, the proposal would allow for initial payments to be spread over 9 years, as well as the ability to defer payment until later (but with interest). So it is highly unlikely this would suddenly result in a significant market drop because billionaires are dumping stocks.
Do I think it's a good plan? Not sure, but right now I'm not thrilled by it.
Shorter Noodle: Tax the Mofos.Aren't you an accountant?
Tax payments on unrealized gains would simply be a credit against capital gains taxes that would otherwise be due when the gain is actually realized (e.g., the stock is sold). In effect, ultra high net worth individuals would be prepaying capital gains taxes. It's pretty simple.
And how would it hit the middle class? The proposal would only apply to households having a net worth of over $100 million. While many middle class families are sitting on unrealized gains, I challenge you to find one having a net worth north of $100 million. They aint out there.
Could it depress stock prices/reduce stock market gains in general because it might force some to sell stocks they otherwise wouldn't? Well, people (or their estates) are going to sell their assets eventually, right? Also, the proposal would allow for initial payments to be spread over 9 years, as well as the ability to defer payment until later (but with interest). So it is highly unlikely this would suddenly result in a significant market drop because billionaires are dumping stocks.
Do I think it's a good plan? Not sure, but right now I'm not thrilled by it.
That is pretty much the goal here. It's a blood sport these days.
Then again, the system is f'ed up if someone can amass $5 billion in a Roth IRA. Under current law, that $5 billion (minus $2,000) is tax-free gain.
Billionaire Peter Thiel could be forced to pull $5 billion from his retirement account, if House bill passes
House Democrats are taking aim at "mega" IRAs like that of billionaire Peter Thiel in tax legislation unveiled this week.
The practical problems are enormous. I don’t think the proposal has been thought out at an operational level. Then there are the constitutional due process problems of seizing private property. If this stands, I don’t know how you can stop the government from seizing any money by calling it a tax.
What kind of assets does this apply to? Listed stocks? Restricted stock in a publicly traded company? Options? Interests in hedge funds or other pooled investments? I don’t know if the revenue would ever justify the significant compliance and collection costs. In addition to the due process issues, I’m not sure the constitution even grants authority to levy a tax on asset value without some other tax event.
Absolute nonsense. Some types of unrealized gains are already taxable under Sections 175 and 1256. Taxing unrealized gains is not a violation of due process.
You going to trot out Eisner v. Macomber and claim wages are simply a barter and therefore not taxable income?
Ha. If true, net worth threshold is the funniest part of the proposal. There is no objective net worth number for anybody ever, unless it’s zero. The original proposal was income based, only slightly better.
Last edited:
None. But that's a property tax levied by state government, The federal government cannot levy property taxes without apportionment:
"No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken."
Property tax is altogether different. It’s levied by the state for one thing. It applies to all property no matter how rich or poor the owner is. It’s more like an inchoate lien on all property than a tax. In Colorado, and I believe in every state, there is no obligation to pay property tax. You can’t be sued, garnished, or go to jail for failure to pay it.
So this really doesn't gain anything? Pay me now or pay me later?
My memory (and knowledge) are are weak on this, but aren't these gazillionaires able to finance their lifestyles by borrowing against their holdings? That's the loophole that I think I've read about.
Then there's the deal about when they finally die, a huge amount of the gains are shielded from capital gains, and a new basis is set for the heirs/estate?
No I'm not an accountant and I don't think it's a good plan. I've seen several articles that said it would hit the middle class but I didn't read them in detail. I'm just going by past experience with things the government does... when they say it won't hit the middle class that is a selling point to get votes but normally not what happens.Aren't you an accountant?
Tax payments on unrealized gains would simply be a credit against capital gains taxes that would otherwise be due when the gain is actually realized (e.g., the stock is sold). In effect, ultra high net worth individuals would be prepaying capital gains taxes. It's pretty simple.
And how would it hit the middle class? The proposal would only apply to households having a net worth of over $100 million. While many middle class families are sitting on unrealized gains, I challenge you to find one having a net worth north of $100 million. They aint out there.
Could it depress stock prices/reduce stock market gains in general because it might force some to sell stocks they otherwise wouldn't? Well, people (or their estates) are going to sell their assets eventually, right? Also, the proposal would allow for initial payments to be spread over 9 years, as well as the ability to defer payment until later (but with interest). So it is highly unlikely this would suddenly result in a significant market drop because billionaires are dumping stocks.
Do I think it's a good plan? Not sure, but right now I'm not thrilled by it.
I think it would be a nightmare trying to keep track of it. I think there are probably better ways to tax it. I haven't thought about this a lot but for those large net worth people suppose they redefine "long term" to be anything over 1 year and less than 10 years. If you hold it more than 10 years or less than 1 then it's taxed as ordinary income like short term is taxed now. That would encourage them to sell some of their assets... couldn't hold on forever. Like I said I haven't thought much about this so there may be a lot of things not feasible in doing something like that.
Why is he even talking about tax increases? The government is raking in cash right now with the tax rates being the same as under Trump!
U.S. sees biggest revenue surge in 44 years despite pandemic
Revenues jumped 18 percent in the fiscal year that just ended, analysts say — the biggest one-year increase since 1977.
www.politico.com
Because the economy is running so great! Thanks Joe!Why is he even talking about tax increases? The government is raking in cash right now with the tax rates being the same as under Trump!
U.S. sees biggest revenue surge in 44 years despite pandemic
Revenues jumped 18 percent in the fiscal year that just ended, analysts say — the biggest one-year increase since 1977.
LOL You know there is a lag time from one President to another. Biden's policies aren't in effect yet.
Where is all the infrastucture spending? Are you able to go on a cross country trip in your electric car with charging stations along the way, as proposed in the bill?
But I"m glad you agree with me that Trump's tax cuts worked and are still working!
No, the price of oil/gas was immediately affected by Biden canceling the pipeline and canceling leases within an hour of taking office.
Trying to compare oil prices and government budgets is ridiculous.
Last edited:
True, but in Indiana the county can sell the property for the amount of tax due.
Original owner has the option of repurchasing from the new "owner" for the amount of tax paid plus, I believe, 10%.
what are those unrealized gains related to?
I cannot fathom the idea that someone should prepay a tax on hypothetical wealth that can swing drastically by the day, let alone year to year (see Musk).
I’ll go with the original question and say, based on last year’s outcome,
taxing unrealized gains won’t happen this year.
No one will like the cars that will be offered that meet a 50-mpg CAFE standard.
They won’t seat 4 adults comfortably, and have a trunk.
The insurance company safety test labs will pan them too.
There will be years of high energy price suffering with no fossil fuel exploration policy changes, and Granholm’s “let them eat cake attitude“ advising voters to go buy an EV to avoid high
taxing unrealized gains won’t happen this year.
No one will like the cars that will be offered that meet a 50-mpg CAFE standard.
They won’t seat 4 adults comfortably, and have a trunk.
The insurance company safety test labs will pan them too.
There will be years of high energy price suffering with no fossil fuel exploration policy changes, and Granholm’s “let them eat cake attitude“ advising voters to go buy an EV to avoid high
"Third, what about years when you lose wealth? Imagine the mess after the 2008 financial crisis, when the price of housing dropped dramatically—or the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on many businesses. Knowing government and liberal politicians who are desperate for money, this will be a one-way street. If you succeed, you pay. If you lose, you get no relief."
In the article linked below it has the above quote and I'm sure that is the way it would work. Essentially that is the way trading and selling stocks, ETFs, Mutual funds, etc work. They let you claim losses against gains but if you have no gains the you are limited to taking $3,000 (at least that is what it used to be). So if you sold a stock this year and made $50,000 then you have to pay taxes on the $50,000 but if next year you have a loser and sell it and lose $50,000 you can only claim $3,000.
In the article linked below it has the above quote and I'm sure that is the way it would work. Essentially that is the way trading and selling stocks, ETFs, Mutual funds, etc work. They let you claim losses against gains but if you have no gains the you are limited to taking $3,000 (at least that is what it used to be). So if you sold a stock this year and made $50,000 then you have to pay taxes on the $50,000 but if next year you have a loser and sell it and lose $50,000 you can only claim $3,000.
MSN
www.msn.com
Lag time. Biden's policies aren't in effect yet. You said that.
BTW, government revenues have zero to do with the budget.
No, I said that about the economy - not oil production. They aren't the same.
Government revenues have zero to do with the budget? You know a budget is comprised of income and expenses, right? Where do you think government get its revenue?
Government budgets don't affect revenue. Budgets affect spending.
The economy is the economy. The same set of economic forces that lead to increased prices also lead to increased government revenues. If you want to assign those forces to a President, then show some consistency.
A budget is derived from revenue. Spending is defined in the budget. You have it backwards.
Oil production is not the entire economy and can be affected by microeconomic factors, such as Biden's actions which took effect the day he became President.
Don't pretend to know how government works if you don't know how a budget is created.
No, I don't have it backwards. Neither do you, in this post. You had it backwards in your other post.
I've said nothing different here than I said before.
Stick to lawyering - Economics is not your thing.
That's is what a person would do but that is not what the government does. They budget billions and then look for ways to get the money to cover it even though a lot of those ways are smoke and mirrors.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Unintelligent, soft, lazy, and poorly coached.
- Latest: kurt cloverdales
-
-
-
-
