5 ms·
> they're paid in stock? In the US RSU grants are treated as income. They literally show up on the W2 for the full value of the grant.
by donavanm 6y ago
> they're paid in stock?
In the US RSU grants are treated as income. They literally show up on the W2 for the full value of the grant.
- tripletao 6y agoTech billionaires tend to own the stock because they founded the company, and get "paid" from the appreciation of shares they already own. Increased tax on equity-based compensation would hit a lot of highly-paid hired hands, but not those truly rich. Of course an increased capital gains tax might capture the founders too, as would a wealth tax (though the latter would be very hard to administer on private companies due to uncertain valuation). The major preference in the current USA tax code is for investment income over earned income (including both W-2 income and some but not all small businesses, and including equity-based compensation except (sometimes) to the extent it appreciates), not rich over poor or poor over rich.
- donavanm 6y agoSure. And maybe Im fixating on the meaning of "paid" next to the use of "salary." But I dont think the individuals existing assets or capital gains really have anything to do with the common misunderstanding of how equity based compensation is taxed.
- tripletao 6y agoTo be clear, RSUs are indeed taxed as you said. My point is that blahblahblogger's billionaires don't tend to get paid that way, but by appreciation of founder's stock (which can be captured only by a wealth tax, or by a capital gains tax if/when they sell).
- Hydraulix989 6y agoYou gotta start somewhere. These days in these cities where starter homes are $1.3M, taxing people who make over $150k is just shifting the burden pn what is effectively the upper middle (of the working) class.