Seems like a convoluted way to make sure billionaires are paying their fair share, but I can't say my heart is exactly bleeding for households with 100 million net worth.
I totally support the idea of trying to make sure households that use these loopholes to avoid tax are still paying a fair share of tax. But I do see his point that trying to value everything (especially when stock values change by the second!) would be a nightmare. And I'm sure the uber-rich would just find a new way to cheat the valuation system.
A more straightforward way of taxing the crap out of excess income would be better I think. But I don't know what that would be....good thing I'm not running for president.
Posts: 4422 | Location: Suburban Philly, PA | Registered: 30 April 2005
If I read this right, it should just be a matter of timing, because whatever taxes paid on unrealized capital gains will be credited back to the taxpayer when the capital gains are realized. Will make taxes more complicated for those impacted, but not a "fairness" issue.
Originally posted by Axtremus: If I read this right, it should just be a matter of timing, because whatever taxes paid on unrealized capital gains will be credited back to the taxpayer when the capital gains are realized. Will make taxes more complicated for those impacted, but not a "fairness" issue.
What, then, about unrealized capital losses?
J
-------------------------------- Be calm, be brave, it'll be okay.
Posts: 17733 | Location: Maine | Registered: 20 April 2005
The unrealized losses is one factor. Another, and I think more important, is that once it is established as a source of revenue the threshold will get ever lower. At some point it will become detrimental to the market.
-------------------------------- "A mob is a place where people go to get away from their conscience" Atticus Finch
