This is insanity. Along with the CG tax raise. Absolutely insane.
Gigem_94 said:
Imagine what happens to the market when people en masse have to sell a 1/3 of their stock to pay their taxes every April.
MemphisAg1 said:
The stupidity of wanting to tax unrealized gains.
"Unrealized" from Google: "not made real or actual"
To double down on the stupidity, a lot of your unrealized gain can be due simply to inflation. Why the hell should you pay taxes on inflation?
Leave it to Dems to set new records of stupidity and thievery in their ongoing quest to take from the makers to give to the takers.
Kraft Punk said:
Do we miss mean tweets yet?
Most people who were offended by tweets don't have the IQ or intellect to comprehend what's happening.Kraft Punk said:
Do we miss mean tweets yet?
This is the first thing that came to mind for me as well. I think cheap loan money is the basis for this proposal. Classic example: you buy a commercial building for $1 million in cash and lease it out. Over the next 10 years it goes up to $5 million in value. You take out a loan for $4 million based on the new, higher value of the asset you bought, and you just let the asset cash flow to pay off the $4 million note. In that scenario, you've realized $4 million in cash, but it's not taxable because it's a loan, not income. This is obviously dumbed down, but that's the gist of it.The Banned said:
Is the basis for "needing" this policy the fact that many wealthy people use those unrealized gains as collateral to gain access to cheap money that the average Joe can't get? I don't think anything should change, but if you wanted to change anything I think I should be the loan policy, not taxing. As many others have said, these people are going to have to sell a **** load of assets every year just to pay the note. It's idiotic.
I'd oppose taxing the loan since the loan has to be paid back at some point. And yes, taxing unrealized gains is insane and evil and I think so every year when I pay all my property taxes which are based on unrealized gains.Ag_0112358132134 said:This is the first thing that came to mind for me as well. I think cheap loan money is the basis for this proposal. Classic example: you buy a commercial building for $1 million in cash and lease it out. Over the next 10 years it goes up to $5 million in value. You take out a loan for $4 million based on the new, higher value of the asset you bought, and you just let the asset cash flow to pay off the $4 million note. In that scenario, you've realized $4 million in cash, but it's not taxable because it's a loan, not income. This is obviously dumbed down, but that's the gist of it.The Banned said:
Is the basis for "needing" this policy the fact that many wealthy people use those unrealized gains as collateral to gain access to cheap money that the average Joe can't get? I don't think anything should change, but if you wanted to change anything I think I should be the loan policy, not taxing. As many others have said, these people are going to have to sell a **** load of assets every year just to pay the note. It's idiotic.
Under this new proposal, they still can't tax your loan dollars, but they can get to it by taxing the $4 million increase in value over that 10 years. Before, they couldn't tax either one.
I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea that maybe that $4 million should be taxed somehow in that scenario, but I agree with you it needs to be addressed on the loan side, not on the equity side. In that same example, if the owner of the building doesn't take out a loan, then he has to pay taxes on $4 million he literally does not have, so he has to sell the asset.
A blanket proposal to tax all unrealized gains is just flat out insane and evil.
Yukon Cornelius said:
This is insanity. Along with the CG tax raise. Absolutely insane.
Biden Treasury Department says we need higher taxes on capital gains because it would hurt white people more and take away their wealth.
— Richard Hanania (@RichardHanania) April 25, 2024
Whites own too many stocks and businesses, so they need to pay. pic.twitter.com/JVv9T4zL2q
. That was the line I think when the federal income tax was added as a constitutional amendment.Cromagnum said:
"It only affects the rich" is the biggest lie they can tell, but voters are too dumb to realize it will affect everyone.
rgag12 said:
It's a trial balloon.
Maybe their plot includes the idea that money has to flee the rest of the world like Peter Z. predicts.MouthBQ98 said:
It affects everyone when the "rich" start to rapidly divest from American investments to overseas investments.
Ag_0112358132134 said:This is the first thing that came to mind for me as well. I think cheap loan money is the basis for this proposal. Classic example: you buy a commercial building for $1 million in cash and lease it out. Over the next 10 years it goes up to $5 million in value. You take out a loan for $4 million based on the new, higher value of the asset you bought, and you just let the asset cash flow to pay off the $4 million note. In that scenario, you've realized $4 million in cash, but it's not taxable because it's a loan, not income. This is obviously dumbed down, but that's the gist of it.The Banned said:
Is the basis for "needing" this policy the fact that many wealthy people use those unrealized gains as collateral to gain access to cheap money that the average Joe can't get? I don't think anything should change, but if you wanted to change anything I think I should be the loan policy, not taxing. As many others have said, these people are going to have to sell a **** load of assets every year just to pay the note. It's idiotic.
Under this new proposal, they still can't tax your loan dollars, but they can get to it by taxing the $4 million increase in value over that 10 years. Before, they couldn't tax either one.
I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea that maybe that $4 million should be taxed somehow in that scenario, but I agree with you it needs to be addressed on the loan side, not on the equity side. In that same example, if the owner of the building doesn't take out a loan, then he has to pay taxes on $4 million he literally does not have, so he has to sell the asset.
A blanket proposal to tax all unrealized gains is just flat out insane and evil.