4 ms·
> The holders would pay less in taxes when the valuation drops, why would they get a credit? Perhaps you're not familiar with some of the proposals to tax unre
by logicalmonster 4y ago
> The holders would pay less in taxes when the valuation drops, why would they get a credit?
Perhaps you're not familiar with some of the proposals to tax unrealized gains or what this means. This means there have been serious proposals from so-called serious people to tax individuals when a stock they're holding goes up, even if they don't sell that. So somebody is making a point that nobody has made a serious proposal to give a similar credit for unrealized losses. It's just the government wanting to tax and take and take.
> Also, the only people who would be subject to those taxes are already extraordinarily wealthy, so who cares?
You've got it backwards.
The already wealthy aren't the ones bothered by paying a bit more taxes on unrealized gains too much. If Warren Buffet had to pay an extra few million because a stock he held went up, he probably wouldn't really notice. It wouldn't even be a buzzkill on his day.
In the event of a tax on unrealized gains, it's the middle class dude who made a great investment on the next Apple who is screwed over from holding for a few years because he has to sell the second the price went up just a bit to pay that tax.
- arrosenberg 4y agoNo one is proposing those taxes on middle class people. For example, Elizabeth Warren’s proposals would only affect those with more than $50M in assets. Second, the proposal isn’t to tax on price changes, its taxing the value of the asset at a given point in time. If the value goes down, the tax collected goes down. This is also how property taxes work - it’s a percentage of the assessed value. If the assessed value drops, you pay less in taxes.
- jen20 4y agoIt’s just a matter of time before this hits everyone once the principle is established.
- seoaeu 4y agoYour “so-called serious people” swipe doesn’t exactly convey that you are making a good faith effort to understand these proposals… Also, there no reason a middle class investor would have to sell all their stock to pay taxes. If the value of your portfolio doubled, you’d only have to sell between 7.5% and 10% of your holdings to cover the taxes (at the current capital gains tax rates).
- AdrianB1 4y agoAnd dilute your percentage in the process. That sounds incredibly stupid for any founder.
- seoaeu 4y agoObviously startup founders would prefer to get rich without paying taxes. That doesn’t mean the rest of society should let them.
- AdrianB1 4y agoIf all you own is shares in a company, you are not rich, you can be homeless. If you sell your shares and make money out of that, then is the moment to pay your taxes, not a nanosecond before that.