Have roughly $200K of AAPL appreciation sitting in my personal trading account. I don't want to sell but I also would rather pay 15% on the gains (now) vs. 45% which is what Kamala is spewing (in case she somehow wins the election). What are you all thinking about this? I'm sure there are a lot of us in the same boat.

there is literally an entire thread below about how to trade with President Harris in charge

I've thought about pulling money out and putting it into wells for IDCs, but they're going after that too so basically there's no win anymore, might just see how it falls out and deal with the rules as they come. Or, as mentioned, go chat with a professional. Which I will!

Move to Belize or Cayman Islands and LLC it there.

23.8 percent tax on long term cap gains is the current max. Tbe 3.8 percent is a Medicare tax if agi is above $200,000 for single filers; $250,000 for married. The 3.8 applies to all investment income, incl dividends, distributions from funds and interest. Outrageous!

The Harris & Biden "tax the rich" proposals are - like most GOP spending cut proposals - gimmicky, unserious, and unworkable. They are designed for lazy talking points rather than enactment.

There are so many straightforward, standard, proven ways to tax the rich. But Harris…

— Brian Riedl 🧀 🇺🇦 (@Brian_Riedl) August 22, 2024

Quote:

---

The Harris & Biden "tax the rich" proposals are - like most GOP spending cut proposals - gimmicky, unserious, and unworkable. They are designed for lazy talking points rather than enactment.

There are so many straightforward, standard, proven ways to tax the rich. But Harris went with the flashy, gimmicky tax ideas that even liberal Europe dismissed (sometimes after disastrously attempting), and that economists consider totally unworkable, even unconstitutional.

The reason Democrats never bring their "tax the rich" agenda to a Congressional vote is because its not designed to be enacted.

Want to actually tax the rich in a plausible way?
- Raise top income tax bracket from 37% to 39.6%
- Cap value of itemized tax deductions at 15% of amount deducted
- Impose a modest carbon tax with the cost rebated to all but top-earning 25% of households
- Repeal TCJA's 20% pass-through business deduction
- Repeal step-up basis on inherited capital gains
- Repeal IRA energy credits
- Extend IRA's funding for IRS tax enforcement beyond 2031
- Cap tax exclusion for employer-provided health care
- Repeal the corporate SALT deduction
- Repeal LIFO and LCM accounting.

These policies aren't exciting or revolutionary, but they can raise a lot of revenue from rich people plausibly and with minimum economic damage. (But we also need to cut spending!) See https://manhattan.institute/article/a-comprehensive-federal-budget-plan-to-avert-a-debt-crisis-2024

---

it's still boggles my mind that some of you call her and her ilk stupid...it's not stupidity when you are intentionally doing these things to burn the country to the ground...

carl spacklers hat said:

---

You basically just described Harris with the highlighted part.

As to the OP, one of the dumbest of ideas out of a basket full of idiocy from Harris. So I wouldn't put it past her trying to push it through in some form. She is dangerously stupid.

---

Yes, the highlighted part was intended to describe her tax plan (and matches basically every other policy she's proposed).

I have zero doubt she would rubber stamp any proposed tax hike but her plan is left-wing populist red meat (or maybe tofu?) with zero chance of making it through even a D controlled Congress. If she wins, I wouldn't start tax planning on her campaign proposals.

Still some horse**** in this person's proposals. Most notably the one in bold would absolutely punish the producers.

The top earning 25% of households account for about 90% of taxes paid in this country so effectively everyone that already covers the tax burden for the USA would pay this "modest" tax based on mythological bull***** It would not just impact the rich.

Quote:

---

Want to actually tax the rich in a plausible way?
- Raise top income tax bracket from 37% to 39.6%
- Cap value of itemized tax deductions at 15% of amount deducted
- Impose a modest carbon tax with the cost rebated to all but top-earning 25% of households
- Repeal TCJA's 20% pass-through business deduction
- Repeal step-up basis on inherited capital gains
- Repeal IRA energy credits
- Extend IRA's funding for IRS tax enforcement beyond 2031
- Cap tax exclusion for employer-provided health care
- Repeal the corporate SALT deduction
- Repeal LIFO and LCM accounting.

---

strbrst777 said:

---

23.8 percent tax on long term cap gains is the current max. Tbe 3.8 percent is a Medicare tax if agi is above $200,000 for single filers; $250,000 for married. The 3.8 applies to all investment income, incl dividends, distributions from funds and interest. Outrageous!

---

The additional 3.8 is not applicable to the sale of business assets. An example would be the sale of farm/ ranch land by someone in that business. In that case the max rate is 20 percent.

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

Have roughly $200K of AAPL appreciation sitting in my personal trading account. I don't want to sell but I also would rather pay 15% on the gains (now) vs. 45% which is what Kamala is spewing (in case she somehow wins the election). What are you all thinking about this? I'm sure there are a lot of us in the same boat.

---

Most of winning elections these days is making populist appeals with no intention of actually doing anything. Also, I very much doubt congress - even if it's controlled by the Democrats - would be on board. Even Democrats have unrealuzed capital gains... including members of Congress. They know what it means to actually enact this tax. For example (re: populist appeals), Joe Biden said a few times there would be "no more frac'ing" when he ran and now American oil production is at all time highs.

Strip out the political theater. Harris is a rational political actor (unlike say true populists such as Bernie Sanders or Trump). Besides if you're worried about your Apple investment for tax reasons, I bet you're particularly concerned about the impacts of Trump's tariffs on their hardware business model right? Trump is much more likely to blindly throw up walls of tariffs (because he clearly, actually believes in them) which also encourage retaliatory tariffs against American companies than Harris is to successfully pass a tax on unrealized gains. Also a tax on unrealized gains would easily be defeated in the Supreme Court. Just remember that both candidates have to appeal and mobilize low information voters en masse before you let it influence investment decisions.

WoMD said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

Too many conspiracy theories here about "they will go after us". Nothing of that sort will happen. Lots at stake for everyone including Democrat backers so calm down. No one wants to lose money.

---

You honestly think that if something like this were to pass (how many unlikely scenarios have actually come to pass the past handful of years...?) that there wouldn't be exclusions for certain groups involved in the decision making process?

Don't be naive. Even if unlikely, at this point in the game anything is possible. Anything.I

---

I've seen friends on FB posting that 401k accounts over 100K would be subject to unrealized capital gains taxes. Are people that hard up to post political garbage in an effort to smear the opposing campaign? Such a proposal is political suicide.

YouBet said:

---

Still some horse**** in this person's proposals. Most notably the one in bold would absolutely punish the producers.

The top earning 25% of households account for about 90% of taxes paid in this country so effectively everyone that already covers the tax burden for the USA would pay this "modest" tax based on mythological bull***** It would not just impact the rich.

Quote:

---

Want to actually tax the rich in a plausible way?
- Raise top income tax bracket from 37% to 39.6%
- Cap value of itemized tax deductions at 15% of amount deducted
- Impose a modest carbon tax with the cost rebated to all but top-earning 25% of households
- Repeal TCJA's 20% pass-through business deduction
- Repeal step-up basis on inherited capital gains
- Repeal IRA energy credits
- Extend IRA's funding for IRS tax enforcement beyond 2031
- Cap tax exclusion for employer-provided health care
- Repeal the corporate SALT deduction
- Repeal LIFO and LCM accounting.

---

---

That isn't his proposal, those are proposals he says would actually be seriously considered if the goal was to raise taxes on the "rich". He's a right-leaning budget hawk.

themissinglink said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Still some horse**** in this person's proposals. Most notably the one in bold would absolutely punish the producers.

The top earning 25% of households account for about 90% of taxes paid in this country so effectively everyone that already covers the tax burden for the USA would pay this "modest" tax based on mythological bull***** It would not just impact the rich.

Quote:

---

Want to actually tax the rich in a plausible way?
- Raise top income tax bracket from 37% to 39.6%
- Cap value of itemized tax deductions at 15% of amount deducted
- Impose a modest carbon tax with the cost rebated to all but top-earning 25% of households
- Repeal TCJA's 20% pass-through business deduction
- Repeal step-up basis on inherited capital gains
- Repeal IRA energy credits
- Extend IRA's funding for IRS tax enforcement beyond 2031
- Cap tax exclusion for employer-provided health care
- Repeal the corporate SALT deduction
- Repeal LIFO and LCM accounting.

---

---

That isn't his proposal, those are proposals he says would actually be seriously considered if the goal was to raise taxes on the "rich". He's a right-leaning budget hawk.

---

Then he doesn't understand who pays taxes unless he's bucketing almost all taxpayers as rich. That is not a reasonable policy. Increasing my taxes to fight climate change is the most asinine policy going right now especially when the US has already done its part on this front through free market principles and past policy. Our emissions already peaked around 17 years ago and have been steadily declining. Until China and India get on board this is pissing in the wind.

Gordo14 said:

---

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

Have roughly $200K of AAPL appreciation sitting in my personal trading account. I don't want to sell but I also would rather pay 15% on the gains (now) vs. 45% which is what Kamala is spewing (in case she somehow wins the election). What are you all thinking about this? I'm sure there are a lot of us in the same boat.

---

Most of winning elections these days is making populist appeals with no intention of actually doing anything. Also, I very much doubt congress - even if it's controlled by the Democrats - would be on board. Even Democrats have unrealuzed capital gains... including members of Congress. They know what it means to actually enact this tax. For example (re: populist appeals), Joe Biden said a few times there would be "no more frac'ing" when he ran and now American oil production is at all time highs.

Strip out the political theater. Harris is a rational political actor (unlike say true populists such as Bernie Sanders or Trump). Besides if you're worried about your Apple investment for tax reasons, I bet you're particularly concerned about the impacts of Trump's tariffs on their hardware business model right? Trump is much more likely to blindly throw up walls of tariffs (because he clearly, actually believes in them) which also encourage retaliatory tariffs against American companies than Harris is to successfully pass a tax on unrealized gains. Also a tax on unrealized gains would easily be defeated in the Supreme Court. Just remember that both candidates have to appeal and mobilize low information voters en masse before you let it influence investment decisions.

---

Problem here is that Congress could very well exempt themselves. They've done it with multiple other policies. They can't be trusted and this policy should be fought at all levels.