3 ms·

> Your house's increased value isn't treated like realized income, but its effect on your taxes isn't 0 either. Yes true. My point is articles about “tax the r

by Swizec 5y ago

> Your house's increased value isn't treated like realized income, but its effect on your taxes isn't 0 either. Yes true. My point is articles about “tax the rich” prey on people not understanding this. The narrative is that “X rich person made billions and didn’t pay the same 30% tax as you!” … no they didn’t make anything. The value of their assets went up. They might even have negative cashflow to sustain that.

triceratops 5y ago
"Tax the rich" people get the details wrong, but I understand where they're coming from. For most people with a consequential net worth, that net worth is tied up in their primary residence. If its value goes up, they pay higher taxes. Even if a rental property's assessed value goes up, rent goes up. This doesn't really apply to the ultra-rich. Unless they're real-estate billionaires, and even then I'm sure they have better tax strategies than regular people.