[dataflow]

Thanks, that makes a lot more sense now. Then we go back to my initial question - where exactly is the loophole here? The tax is being deferred, not avoided entirely. Yet the article makes it seem like they somehow avoid it?

[MikePlacid]

They do not want to tell you: we want to close this tax planning possibility that everyone - including you - can use. So they tell you: Steve Balmer, loophole, avoidance!

The original “wash sale” prohibition is pretty unfair and damaging to every single stock owner. Since it does not hold water mathematically, it’s prone to loopholes. You need to spend more time to find loopholes - so only wealthy tend to benefit from them. You want to make stock ownership more “equitable” - repel the original “wash sales” law.