• pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 months ago

    An income tax would be pointless for the wealthy. Most of their wealth is in unrealized capital gains or other investment vehicles, not from salaries.

    There would need to be a mechanism to tax unrealized capital gains, or just networth in general.

    • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yes because there’s no chance that this would end up having to be paid by every homeowner whose house has gone up in value since they bought it while rich people would just find another loophole to avoid it, while the government would piss all that extra money away on wasteful spending without addressing any actual problems.

        • pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          They’re not wrong. The people who would write these laws are paid for by the people who would be negatively impacted by them, so I guarantee they’d be full of loopholes.

      • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yes because there’s no chance that this would end up having to be paid by every homeowner whose house has gone up in value since they bought it

        A chance? Sure. But it would require willful malicious writing of the bill. Many (most?) states have homestead protections for homeowners up to a certain conservative value. That protection could pivot to capital gains trivially. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to tax valuation skyrockets in excess of (say) $500,000. The government can depreciate those value skyrockets, and we’d still honestly be paying less than our due since property value skyrockets cause property tax decreases (in most (all) municipalities, property taxes are just the town’s expenses divided by property value).

        while rich people would just find another loophole to avoid it,

        In real state, that “loophole” is a law that exists in most states specifically saying you don’t have to pay tax on property gain if you follow a specified process to reinvest into property in the same calendar year. But it’s not a loophole if it’s the damn law. The only way people are dodging real estate taxes now is because they wrote laws to. A law that says “fuck off, you still have to pay” would absolutely work.

        while the government would piss all that extra money away on wasteful spending without addressing any actual problems

        Across the world, tax rates are largely proportional to health, happiness, and quality of life of the citizens. I prefer to trust the numbers over someone’s distrust of the country they live in.

        • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          A chance? Sure. But it would require willful malicious writing of the bill.

          Have you been keeping track of politics AT ALL? You’re if fool if you don’t EXPECT precisely that to happen. The vast majority of politicians will foam at the mouth at the prospect of passing another tax and then happily add a few provisions to make sure their top donors aren’t hurt too much by it. Or do you think it’s just a tragic accident that the majority of taxes keeps getting paid by the poor and middle classes?

          Across the world, tax rates are largely proportional to health, happiness, and quality of life of the citizens

          I don’t have any data to prove or disprove that claim, but assuming it’s true, then there’s certainly better ways to achieve that, like increasing income tax rates on the wealthy. Yes sure, they’ll try to avoid it by deferring or offsetting gains where they can, but in the end, whatever they own, they’ll still have to convert a certain amount of it to cash in order to spend it, and that can be taxed. No need for such harebrained schemes as taxing unrealized gains.

          • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Have you been keeping track of politics AT ALL? You’re if fool if you don’t EXPECT precisely that to happen.

            I largely disagree. I don’t wear a tinfoil hat, sorry. I have seen successful execution of homestead related profit protections, and there are very few “gotchas” in it, if any, for non-millionaires.

            I’m an American, so blame my patriotism. But I like to think if EVERY other country can do it, we’re not so pathetic as a country that we cannot.

            like increasing income tax rates on the wealthy

            There’s a ceiling on the revenue potential in that. The wealthier you get, the less your income is “income”. The wealthy don’t even try to “avoid” it, it’s just not relevant to them. Bezos wasn’t lying that year he only made $80k in income. His unrealized capital gains simply were not taxable unless he chose to sell off lots of Amazon stock (which has non-tax-related repurcussions for him).

    • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 months ago

      tax unrealized capital gains

      This actually happened with bitcoin a while back due to its under-regulated nature. A few people lost their pants when the value of bitcoin skyrocketed on one day in december and then plummetted in early January, and the IRS came knocking for those unrealized gains.

      Largely, We don’t tax unrealized gains because unrealized gains is value that hypothetically can disappear as quickly as it shows up. It’s like taxing someone after every hand of blackjack - you can end up broke AND owing 10x your starting money in capital gains taxes. In theory, a stock portfolio can go from way-up to way-down in 24 hours. Ditto with real-estate if there manifests an uncovered loss event or the title gets fucked, or environmental regulation changes in a way that affects the property, etc.

      …I’m not saying there’s not a way to do it right. It just needs to be done very VERY carefully so as not to bankrupt people. It would likely have to be more complicated than most tax law is now.