5 ms·

And the sadder part is that richer investors know their way around those taxes better than new comers because they have access to accountant professionals who c

And the sadder part is that richer investors know their way around those taxes better than new comers because they have access to accountant professionals who can advise to pay less tax.

sa5 15y ago
I'm not a tax expert so this assumption may be wrong, but if the 2X is being taxed as ordinary income at 35% wouldn't that imply that beagle3 is making at least $379,150 + 2X this year? I would consider someone with that kind of income to be rich. Also, if the stock has gone down 40% can't you claim that as a loss when you sell and lessen your overall tax burden?
- beagle3 15y ago
  Well, it might be _just_ 33% depending on how my other projects work out this year. Not much of a difference those 2%. I've been doing well so far with actual work, and my investments seem to be going well, except that I keep getting hit on the crazy taxes (to the point that GOOD investments end up as losses!) The reason I "told HN" is that I was not aware of how bad not optimizing the taxes could be; I thought I'm wasting 5-10% of potential profits by not optimizing. Turns out to be more than 100% on a totally ordinary deal. > Also, if the stock has gone down 40% can't you claim that as a loss when you sell and lessen your overall tax burden? Not really - not with AMT.
- anamax 15y ago
  > wouldn't that imply that beagle3 is making at least $379,150 + 2X this year? I would consider someone with that kind of income to be rich. So what? Seriously - do you think that the US govt or NYC is likely to do better with that money than he would have? Based on what?
  - sa5 15y ago
    In my comment I did not state whether I agree or disagree with the current US tax laws and that was not the point. I was responding to the post above mine which I think made some incorrect assumptions concerning beagle3's income level and ability to afford professional accountants.

And the sadder part is that richer investors know their way around those taxes better than new comers because they have access to accountant professionals who can advise to pay less tax.

sa5 15y ago

I'm not a tax expert so this assumption may be wrong, but if the 2X is being taxed as ordinary income at 35% wouldn't that imply that beagle3 is making at least $379,150 + 2X this year? I would consider someone with that kind of income to be rich. Also, if the stock has gone down 40% can't you claim that as a loss when you sell and lessen your overall tax burden?

beagle3 15y ago
Well, it might be _just_ 33% depending on how my other projects work out this year. Not much of a difference those 2%. I've been doing well so far with actual work, and my investments seem to be going well, except that I keep getting hit on the crazy taxes (to the point that GOOD investments end up as losses!) The reason I "told HN" is that I was not aware of how bad not optimizing the taxes could be; I thought I'm wasting 5-10% of potential profits by not optimizing. Turns out to be more than 100% on a totally ordinary deal. > Also, if the stock has gone down 40% can't you claim that as a loss when you sell and lessen your overall tax burden? Not really - not with AMT.
anamax 15y ago
> wouldn't that imply that beagle3 is making at least $379,150 + 2X this year? I would consider someone with that kind of income to be rich. So what? Seriously - do you think that the US govt or NYC is likely to do better with that money than he would have? Based on what?
- sa5 15y ago
  In my comment I did not state whether I agree or disagree with the current US tax laws and that was not the point. I was responding to the post above mine which I think made some incorrect assumptions concerning beagle3's income level and ability to afford professional accountants.