3 ms·
> If you applied capital gains tax to grandpa's modest gift to his grandchildren the grand children may very well end up with nearly nothing. That's such a fun
by jmyeet 4y ago
> If you applied capital gains tax to grandpa's modest gift to his grandchildren the grand children may very well end up with nearly nothing.
That's such a funny remark. First, this implies the tax rate is 100%. How else could you end up with nothing? Long term capital gains is what? 20%? If the "modest gift" of a $1 million house with a cost basis of $300,000 results in $140,000 in capital gains taxes, you still have $860,000.
Hell, you can even have the system defer those taxes until the sale of the property (eg capped at 10 years) if you're worried about undue hardship.
But the house has its cost basis reset to $1 million, which in insane. In some places, you even get to inherit the ridiculously low property tax rate, which was another result of homeowners voting themselves massive tax breaks.
Second, these completely made up emotional anecdotes about regular people are so often used to defend practices whereby billionaires get to pay nothing. It's an appeal to emotion and a complete distraction. I don't know if you're just an unwitting victim of this propaganda (which it is) or you're one of the many bad faith pundits who use this appeal for the real goal: protecting the wealth of rich people.
> This isn't done because the universe of ways you can move, adjust, hedge, and sell stock is too broad.
It's a remarkably easy problem to solve. Just tax 1-3% of the net value of your assets based on their value on December 31 of each year.
> It honestly sounds like your statement here is actually a thin veil over just letting anyone making under $N exploit the system at (once again) the cost of the middle class.
The idea of a middle class here itself is a myth and deliberate propaganda by the wealthy to pit the imaginary middle class against the imaginary lower class. There are only really two classes: those who trade their labor for an income and those who own capital. This idea of "defending the middle class" is 100% propaganda.
You, as a software engineer, are in the same class as a neurosurgeon, a profesional basketball player, a waiter, a nurse or a teacher. I hope you realize that someday.
- LorenPechtel 4y agoWhat I would like to see done about this case is the person who inherits the house (and I would apply this to any asset that either can't be subdivided or will be harmed by being subdivided) can choose to get that $1M house with a $300k basis and a IRS lien on it for 14% (140k tax vs 1M of value) of it's value. The lien is not triggered by inheritance or by the sale of a share of the property to someone else who also has a share that has the same lien. The lien is triggered by any other transfer. Should a property become subject to multiple such liens only the largest is active, but all apply for purposes of who you can sell to without triggering the lien. Fundamentally, this allows passing of property and family businesses without inheritance tax, but the IRS collects in the end if it ceases to be held within the family. (The sales without triggering are about one recipient buying out somebody else's share.) This should cover basically all cases where the inheritance tax is unfair, the threshold for inheritance tax on things not covered by this can be lowered.
- quickthrowman 4y ago> It's a remarkably easy problem to solve. Just tax 1-3% of the net value of your assets based on their value on December 31 of each year. Easily avoided by liquidating assets on Dec 30 and rebuying on Jan 1 (or Jan 30 to avoid wash sale if needed) It would also have a nasty side effect, there would be many sellers and few buyers on Dec 30, so the market would crash every single year at EoY.
- jmyeet 4y ago> Easily avoided by liquidating assets on Dec 30 ... This creates a taxable event. If people want to realize gains at a much higher tax rate I'm fine with that.