|
|
|
|
|
|
by bdangubic
608 days ago
|
|
|
You are very convincing and have swayed my opinion on this issue for sure. I do not agree with a lot of it but good disagreements :) > How? There is nothing different from the Amex example... In both cases I'm showing assets held elsewhere as proof that I'm rich. but you are saying to Uncle Sam that you are not rich... so you are just a big fat liar here and your punishment should be cap gains taxation!!!! > In the end, the behaviour stays the same: the rich let their stock appreciate while they borrow... This is exactly what needs to be stopped except of course it won't be cause you know... |
|
|
No I'm not. I'm reporting all of those assets as held. They've gained in value, and if and when I sell them I'll pay tax on those gains. In the meantime, they're just sitting there. Appreciating unrealized. And making me look rich to potential lenders.
> exactly what needs to be stopped except of course it won't be cause you know
No, I don't.
I see an analogy with the corporate death penalty. It's an appealing but ultimately stupid concept. Yet it serves a rhetorical purpose: it distracts us from debating massive, debilitating fines. Divide and conqueer. Similarly, we eliminated the step-up basis partly in 1976 and completely in 1980, and then repealed the estate tax in 2010. Those--restoring either the estate tax or, at the very least, the carryover basis in some form--are the real policy wins.
(Likewise appreciated the discussion.)