[simondotau]

I agree and would support changing the tax code so that using an asset as collateral triggers a tax event. Until then I don’t begrudge Musk’s accountants for doing what the system permits. Borrowing against unrealised gains is common accounting practice; almost certainly done by many wealthy politicians and nearly all super-wealthy people.

[fundad]

Agreed but let’s not think small. The financial burden of paying or avoiding tax can be completely eliminated for people rich enough.

Paying interest instead of tax is only necessary because the anti-tax movement isn’t done. The lender’s income tax is included in the interest.

Tycoons expect to be worth Trillions. The $20-30B in Tesla that he rolled into Twitter was crumbs.

[simondotau]

Hang on, you lost me when you implied that tax would be forever avoided. Either the asset’s value is never realised, in which case they never really did have the wealth, or it is eventually realised and they pay a large tax bill.

[fundad]

Simply put there will never be enough for the anti-tax movement. Funders of the movement through cash or in-kind propaganda activity want lower taxes and would gladly support a zero taxes.

[LynxInLA]

I completely agree. I also don't think it is hypocritical to take advantage of tax "loopholes" at the same time as arguing they should be closed. That is just good financial practice.