Comment on How would you actually tax the ultra wealthy?
jpreston2005@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Listen the IRS has routinely made clear that every time it’s forensic accountants get to sink their teeth into a billionaires financials, the return on that effort is enormous. Don’t ask “how are going to tax billionaires,” first demand that they actually BE taxed.
We’ll figure it out later, man. Realistically, just have a team of specialists that focuses solely on the ultra-wealthy, and then let “unrealized gains” be taxed if they were ever used as collateral for a loan.
damnedfurry@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This simply makes no sense as a concept. Collateral is something that you tell the one you’re borrowing from “you can have this if I fail to pay my loan back”. If the loan is repaid, literally nothing happens to the collateral, and it plays zero part in the actual transaction. There is zero non-arbitrary reason to tax an asset just because it was used as collateral.
Also, all home equity loans would fall under this definition, as well.
jpreston2005@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
The problem lies in the top 1% using their shares of a company as their personal bank account. They can use these shares as collateral for a loan, bypassing all income tax. If accountant can figure out how a billionaire can avoid paying taxes on the entirety of their massive yearly income, then others can figure out how to tax it properly. If you’re income is more than 70% this weird untaxable thing, then congrats, we gon’ tax it now.
damnedfurry@lemmy.world 1 week ago
There is no problem in someone using their own assets for their own benefit.
There’s no income tax to “bypass”, because a loan isn’t income. You have to pay it back. Do you consider it “bypassing all income tax” when a homeowner takes out a Home Equity Loan too?
jpreston2005@lemmy.world 1 week ago
you just really love the taste of boots, huh?