Although you're totally correct I think you're underselling the complexity of the situation. On paper, the super rich (and even just merely "very" rich) can ev

Although you're totally correct I think you're underselling the complexity of the situation. On paper, the super rich (and even just merely "very" rich) can even show negative incomes [1] because they can a take very low interest-rate loan (which is in a way kind of tax, but paid to the bank) backed by their assets to pay expenses thus they can show no income and no realized capital gains. But, if you think about it, the practice is not all that different than taking out a home equity line on a house, for example. So whomever writes that law better be really careful or else the only ones who are going to get caught in that net are the middle class. Here is a nice article on the subject. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57383869 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57383869 [1] They would never actually do that because one needs to harvest that loss. They want to show $0 so they would sell something the balance the negative income out.