[closeparen]

The argument is that dragging on corporations hurts customers and staff as well as owners. It's better to precisely target the owners.

However, I think it misses that most of the benefit to owners is in the form of unrealized gains, not subject to any of the tax rates that people talk about tweaking.

[walshemj]

Pension funds you mean ?

[throwaway8581]

It's not a gain if you don't realize it.

[closeparen]

That's certainly a perspective you can take. Then you'd really want to look at consumption inequality instead of wealth inequality. Consumption inequality is both much lower at an absolute level than either wealth or income inequality, and pretty much flat over time [0].

To the extent that we care about the distribution of net worth, though, unrealized gains are an important part of the story.

[0] https://voxeu.org/article/consumption-and-income-inequality-...

[akvadrako]

You can still borrow against it.

[throwaway8581]

You need to realize it to pay back the loan. No free lunch.

[greenburger]

Under current US tax law the original value of an asset is rebased upon death. Thus, you can borrow against an asset, such as stocks, and then your heirs can repay the loan immediately after your death and pay zero capital gains.

This only costs you the interest of the loan and exposes you to the risk of declining value in the assets securing the loan. Appreciation of the assets or dividends may fully offset the interest or more.

Additionally if you a founder, for example, you retain the influence/control of your company that you derive from the stock ownership, while still be able to enjoy their cash value.