Billionaire true tax rate

[SuperMatt]

I do agree on this. But not on appreciation of unrealized gains that can be gone tomorrow. Unless the government is prepared to give tax refunds when those assets lose value.

Why? Because billionaires deserve it? Nobody has even put forward any inkling that these taxes would apply to anybody except the ultra-rich who know how to avoid the capital gains taxes altogether. Why are you defending the billionaires? You’re never gonna be one. I find most people that defend billionaires have some childish fantasy that they’ll be a billionaire someday and when they reach that goal, they don’t want to pay taxes either.

 

[Cmaier]

I do agree on this. But not on appreciation of unrealized gains that can be gone tomorrow. Unless the government is prepared to give tax refunds when those assets lose value.

My proposal matches what many are proposing.

 

[Herdfan]

Why? Because billionaires deserve it? Nobody has even put forward any inkling that these taxes would apply to anybody except the ultra-rich who know how to avoid the capital gains taxes altogether. Why are you defending the billionaires? You’re never gonna be one. I find most people that defend billionaires have some childish fantasy that they’ll be a billionaire someday and when they reach that goal, they don’t want to pay taxes either.

I don't think I will ever be a billionaire, although the Mega got to 1.4 once and I had a ticket.

The problem is it starts with billionaires and before you know it, it has trickled down to everyone. Go back to the origins of the Income Tax. It was only for rich people. How has that evolved.

 

[SuperMatt]

I don't think I will ever be a billionaire, although the Mega got to 1.4 once and I had a ticket.

The problem is it starts with billionaires and before you know it, it has trickled down to everyone. Go back to the origins of the Income Tax. It was only for rich people. How has that evolved.

Complete and utter bullshit. Look at the reality instead of your imagination. Many billionaires paid ZERO DOLLARS IN TAXES..

 

[Herdfan]

Complete and utter bullshit. Look at the reality instead of your imagination. Many billionaires paid ZERO DOLLARS IN TAXES..

Both things can be true.

But is this about raising revenue or punishing billionaires. Because if you tax every billionaire 50% of their net worth, you will have enough to pay the budget deficit (not the budget, just the amount we spend over what we bring in) for about 3 years. Or the entire federal budget for a little over a year.

 

[Cmaier]

Both things can be true.

But is this about raising revenue or punishing billionaires. Because if you tax every billionaire 50% of their net worth, you will have enough to pay the budget deficit (not the budget, just the amount we spend over what we bring in) for about 3 years. Or the entire federal budget for a little over a year.

Right now, people who are not billionaires pay a lot more taxes than people who are. If we change the tax code to make sure that billionaires actually pay taxes, the worst that “trickle down” could do is bring us back to where we are right now.

 

[SuperMatt]

Both things can be true.

But is this about raising revenue or punishing billionaires. Because if you tax every billionaire 50% of their net worth, you will have enough to pay the budget deficit (not the budget, just the amount we spend over what we bring in) for about 3 years. Or the entire federal budget for a little over a year.

You are talking about an imaginary future. I am talking about reality. Time to stop dreaming and wake up.

Punishing billionaires by asking them to pay similar tax rates compared to delivery drivers, warehouse workers, etc,?????? You’re completely out of touch with reality my friend.

 

[ronntaylor]

It was only for rich people. How has that evolved.

Rich motherfuckers bought pols that created the only trickle down that ever truly existed.

 

[Herdfan]

Right now, people who are not billionaires pay a lot more taxes than people who are. If we change the tax code to make sure that billionaires actually pay taxes, the worst that “trickle down” could do is bring us back to where we are right now.

The only one I saw that was off based on actual income was Bloomberg. He only paid 2.9% of his income. The rest paid in the 20-25% range.

No one seems to want to answer the question of what happens if their fortunes drop? Tesla's could start having battery fires or Fox Business and CNBC could take viewers away from Bloomberg and their stocks could drop. Hell, the market bubble we are in could bust hitting all of them. So if Bezos would have to pay say 20% of his $99M in asset appreciation and next year instead of +$99M, he is -$50M. Does he get a refund? A 20% credit for what he lost this year? How would that work?

 

[SuperMatt]

The only one I saw that was off based on actual income was Bloomberg. He only paid 2.9% of his income. The rest paid in the 20-25% range.

No one seems to want to answer the question of what happens if their fortunes drop? Tesla's could start having battery fires or Fox Business and CNBC could take viewers away from Bloomberg and their stocks could drop. Hell, the market bubble we are in could bust hitting all of them. So if Bezos would have to pay say 20% of his $99M in asset appreciation and next year instead of +$99M, he is -$50M. Does he get a refund? A 20% credit for what he lost this year? How would that work?

Who gives a if their fortunes drop? WTF is wrong with you worrying about billionaires’ fortunes? No credit, no mercy. Time for these vampires to pay up.

Bezos has enough money to joy-ride through space and it doesn’t even make the slightest dent in his net worth. The system is beyond broken, and only a complete rube would worry about the fortunes of somebody who even if Amazon stock went to $0, definitely has millions, if not billions in other assets to protect against such a possibility.

Sad and pathetic. Do you think Jeffy will let you ride on his rocket-penis to space if you publicly defend him?

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

The only one I saw that was off based on actual income was Bloomberg. He only paid 2.9% of his income. The rest paid in the 20-25% range.

No one seems to want to answer the question of what happens if their fortunes drop? Tesla's could start having battery fires or Fox Business and CNBC could take viewers away from Bloomberg and their stocks could drop. Hell, the market bubble we are in could bust hitting all of them. So if Bezos would have to pay say 20% of his $99M in asset appreciation and next year instead of +$99M, he is -$50M. Does he get a refund? A 20% credit for what he lost this year? How would that work?

Nobody is forcing them to keep their wealth in stocks. Sell some and they don’t have to worry about losing it all. So they’ll actually have to pay tax when they do that and lose some of the wealth growth they get for literally doing nothing. Boo hoo.

 

[Cmaier]

The only one I saw that was off based on actual income was Bloomberg. He only paid 2.9% of his income. The rest paid in the 20-25% range.

No one seems to want to answer the question of what happens if their fortunes drop? Tesla's could start having battery fires or Fox Business and CNBC could take viewers away from Bloomberg and their stocks could drop. Hell, the market bubble we are in could bust hitting all of them. So if Bezos would have to pay say 20% of his $99M in asset appreciation and next year instead of +$99M, he is -$50M. Does he get a refund? A 20% credit for what he lost this year? How would that work?

I did answer. My proposal is not based on the value of “the fortune” but to tax disbursements in the form of loans against the fortune. Problem solved.

Bezos spends $50M this year despite not having any “income,” because he takes loans against his stock and spends the loan money? Then tax the loan (and allow deductions for interest paid.)

 

[thekev]

I do agree on this. But not on appreciation of unrealized gains that can be gone tomorrow. Unless the government is prepared to give tax refunds when those assets lose value.

This concept already exists. It's known as phantom income. It just means you have a taxable event but may be unable to liquidate the corresponding asset via normal means. It is possible to carry forward such losses in some cases, but it's more complicated than it should be for most people.

Still, taking out loans to live on isn't something that should be a thing, particularly for billionaires. If Musk were to fall on hard times, his lawyers would negotiate the debt down, even though this is really just a way to postpone taxable events on what is effectively income.

The only one I saw that was off based on actual income was Bloomberg. He only paid 2.9% of his income. The rest paid in the 20-25% range.

No one seems to want to answer the question of what happens if their fortunes drop? Tesla's could start having battery fires or Fox Business and CNBC could take viewers away from Bloomberg and their stocks could drop. Hell, the market bubble we are in could bust hitting all of them. So if Bezos would have to pay say 20% of his $99M in asset appreciation and next year instead of +$99M, he is -$50M. Does he get a refund? A 20% credit for what he lost this year? How would that work?

That's almost certainly not how it would work. Some publicly traded companies grant stocks as part of total compensation. A portion of them are typically withheld for tax. It's likely that a lot of this would be paid in a scheduled manner, based on transfer of publicly tradable assets.

Also worth noting...while the tax issues of carrying forward losses are complicated, there are methods of doing so. You need to be careful not to assume that accounting and payment methods that are available and practical for you or me are identical to what billionaires can leverage.

 

[SuperMatt]

Here is an interesting story about a law that helps the wealthy avoid taxes. The law was supposedly to help small businesses, but was really created by venture capitalists.

A Lavish Tax Dodge for the Ultrawealthy Is Easily Multiplied (Published 2021)

Once aimed at small businesses, a 1990s-era tax break has become a popular way for Silicon Valley founders and investors to avoid taxes on their investment profits.

www.nytimes.com

(paywall removed)

Say you invested $1 million in a Q.S.B.S.-eligible business called Little Company. Your basis would be $1 million, which means you’d be eligible to avoid taxes on $10 million of future profits.

But let’s say you want to save more. Here’s how you can pump up the basis. Little Company developed software patents, and you put those patents into a new company that you also own. The patents grow to be worth $5 million. Then you merge the two companies. The basis for your investment in the original Little Company has now soared to $6 million. That means you are eligible to avoid taxes on 10 times that — $60 million — even though your out-of-pocket investment remains $1 million.

One tax lawyer said he recently used such a strategy to help a pair of clients completely avoid taxes on more than $100 million in capital gains.

In a good year, partners at a large firm can collectively rack up more than $1 billion in tax-free profits, according to former partners at two major venture capital firms.

 

[SuperMatt]

Another detailed article about how the wealthy find every way possible to avoid paying their fair share.

Welcome to the tax haven of… Wyoming!

The tax dodge is called the “Cowboy Cocktail.” It’s used by Russian oligarchs and similar wonderful crooks from around the world.

https://wapo.st/32vaqly

(paywall removed)

For years, anti-money-laundering experts and law enforcement have warned federal and state lawmakers that suspect money was flowing into U.S. tax havens, eluding taxing authorities, creditors and criminal investigators. In Wyoming, with the support of state lawmakers, the industry charged ahead, promoting a suite of financial arrangements to potential customers around the world.

At the heart of those arrangements are trusts, legal agreements that allow people to stash away money and other assets so they are protected from creditors and incur few or no tax obligations for themselves or their heirs. In exchange for these benefits, trust owners appoint an independent manager — typically a relative, friend or financial adviser — to determine when and how money is invested and spent.

 

[SuperMatt]

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1473270589796274180/

 

[SuperMatt]

The IRS is part of the game too. They audit low-income people more than any other group of people. Not exactly a recipe for recouping a lot of rich tax cheats.

They audit people making less than $25,000 FIVE TIMES more than any other group. WTF? What a waste of time and money to recoup, what... a couple hundred bucks from somebody making that much? And let millionaires skate?

Column: Proof the IRS targets the poor for tax audits while leaving millionaires alone

Why does the IRS focus its enforcement capabilities on the poorest families?

www.latimes.com

 

[DT]

We got audited a few years ago, the IRS was like, "WTF, you guys should really cheat way more ..."

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

The IRS is part of the game too. They audit low-income people more than any other group of people. Not exactly a recipe for recouping a lot of rich tax cheats.

They audit people making less than $25,000 FIVE TIMES more than any other group. WTF? What a waste of time and money to recoup, what... a couple hundred bucks from somebody making that much? And let millionaires skate?

Column: Proof the IRS targets the poor for tax audits while leaving millionaires alone

Why does the IRS focus its enforcement capabilities on the poorest families?

www.latimes.com

Heard about this recently. Basically the IRS doesn't have the resources to combat the lawyers of the rich but they have to audit somebody. Might as well be the poor.

 

[SuperMatt]

Heard about this recently. Basically the IRS doesn't have the resources to combat the lawyers of the rich but they have to audit somebody. Might as well be the poor.

Where’s Robin Hood when you need him?