2 ms·

I don't think that's true. Would you call the EITC or child tax credits loopholes?

ceejayoz 3y ago
Intentional provisions with intentional results aren't really loopholes. (Some will argue they're bad policy.) The fact that Jeff Bezos can manage to quality for a child tax credit is a bit of a loophole, though. https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trov... > In 2011, a year in which his wealth held roughly steady at $18 billion, Bezos filed a tax return reporting he lost money — his income that year was more than offset by investment losses. What’s more, because, according to the tax law, he made so little, he even claimed and received a $4,000 tax credit for his children.
- SpicyLemonZest 3y ago
  Almost all tax loopholes people talk about are intentional policies with intentional results. The thing you're quoting is very much an example - it's very much by design that capital gains are offset by capital losses and you're taxed only on the net. (I should note that the article is being imprecise, and ordinary income is much harder to offset this way.)
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    The people who wrote in the $200/400k income limits almost certainly did not plan for that to be used by Jeff Bezos. You might argue that they considered the possibility and decided closing the loophole would do more harm than good (means testing frequently does this), but it certainly wasn't the intention of the credit to give $4k to the world's second wealthiest person.
    - ryandrake 3y ago
      I think we can all agree legislators need to better "red team" their laws, and try to predict how people will get around the spirit of the law by using technicalities in the wording of the law, so that better words can be enacted. If they did not intend for Bezos to take advantage of income limits, they should have written the law better so that he couldn't.
Retric 3y ago
Yes. Again agreeing or disagreeing with policy doesn’t change if something is a loophole or not. Handouts because someone is installing rooftop solar are still handouts even if they get baked into tax policy.

Intentional provisions with intentional results aren't really loopholes. (Some will argue they're bad policy.) The fact that Jeff Bezos can manage to quality for a child tax credit is a bit of a loophole, though. https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trove-of-never-before-seen-records-reveal-how-the-wealthiest-avoid-income-tax https://www.propublica.org/article/the-secret-irs-files-trov... > In 2011, a year in which his wealth held roughly steady at $18 billion, Bezos filed a tax return reporting he lost money — his income that year was more than offset by investment losses. What’s more, because, according to the tax law, he made so little, he even claimed and received a $4,000 tax credit for his children.

SpicyLemonZest 3y ago
Almost all tax loopholes people talk about are intentional policies with intentional results. The thing you're quoting is very much an example - it's very much by design that capital gains are offset by capital losses and you're taxed only on the net. (I should note that the article is being imprecise, and ordinary income is much harder to offset this way.)
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  The people who wrote in the $200/400k income limits almost certainly did not plan for that to be used by Jeff Bezos. You might argue that they considered the possibility and decided closing the loophole would do more harm than good (means testing frequently does this), but it certainly wasn't the intention of the credit to give $4k to the world's second wealthiest person.
  - ryandrake 3y ago
    I think we can all agree legislators need to better "red team" their laws, and try to predict how people will get around the spirit of the law by using technicalities in the wording of the law, so that better words can be enacted. If they did not intend for Bezos to take advantage of income limits, they should have written the law better so that he couldn't.

Retric 3y ago

Yes. Again agreeing or disagreeing with policy doesn’t change if something is a loophole or not. Handouts because someone is installing rooftop solar are still handouts even if they get baked into tax policy.