3 ms·
There is a common fallacy that going up a tax bracket can result in taking home less money. For example, sometimes you'll hear apocryphal stories about someone
by Buttons840 4y ago
There is a common fallacy that going up a tax bracket can result in taking home less money. For example, sometimes you'll hear apocryphal stories about someone turning down a small raise because they did the math and realized it would move them into the next tax bracket and result in them taking home less money. That's not how progressive taxes work, and such stories are incorrect. I just wanted to double check that you understand this, right?
- monero-xmr 4y agoYou are speaking as a non-wealthy person. If I have significant sums of equities, I can sell half on Dec 31 and half on Jan 1 to avoid a new bracket. I try to avoid speaking much about my situation, but my tax advisors and I use every trick in the book to play all the games available, of which this is but one. My issue is not that I have dedicated a lot of time and money to avoid taxes, but really that the tax rules are so arbitrary and stupid to begin with.
- Chinjut 4y agoYour advocacy for a wealth tax on unrealized capital gains is compelling. Let us adopt that.
- monero-xmr 4y agoA wealth tax! Even France tried and abandoned that! Do you have any idea the side effects that would cause? Suddenly I would be a pauper, how simple this would be.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- rnk 4y agoWe have wealth taxes. They are called property taxes in the US. I have to pay a percentage of the value of my house. And I can't sell a tiny piece of my house to cover it. I have to use my other funds to pay for it. That seems so unfair, the poor weak billionaires of the world say. When My house goes up in value, my tax will go up, and down works the other way too. Billionaires cry and moan about the impossibility of paying a wealth tax on their billions in stock. They can manage to do it, just like all the rest of us. The wealth tax is claimed to be this exotic impossible thing. Yet most every home owner in the us is paying, us 100 million plus people. Surely the rich, those who have millions or billions can do the same. The reason they don't is they have captured the legislature, their fox new advertising is very successful, no one wants to tax the very wealthy because surely they will be wealthy one day.
- monero-xmr 4y agoOut of all the possible ways you can tax me, a wealth tax is easily the dumbest and easiest to avoid. I wish the US would do it just to show the world why this is so absurd. I don’t even want to get into it, just that the folly would be enormous and my laughter very loud.
- Chinjut 4y agoOut of all the possible ways you can persuade me, refraining from even providing an argument is easily the least effective.
- jakelazaroff 4y agoIs it “suddenly I would be a pauper” or “a wealth tax is dumb and easy to avoid”? I’m really not sure what you’re trying to say here.
- monero-xmr 4y ago[flagged]
- jakelazaroff 4y agoThis doesn’t really address my question, or any of my other comments, and I haven’t really said anything about being rich or not — just that we should be able to make decisions as a society. That seems to disagree with you? So, uh, good luck with whatever weird tax scheme you have going on, I guess.
- monero-xmr 4y agoI guess if you have no position then your commenting makes no sense and probably you should not bother. If what it seems is that you want society to vote on how much to steal from me, my point is a flat income tax is the most fair and straightforwards, and eliminate as many exceptions as you can. But given my knowledge of this situation that’s impossible and it won’t happen, so good luck with your wealth taxes.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]