[hnburnsy]

>A new proposal seeks to increase the endowment tax rate to 14%

That would be great that Harvard pays %14 on investment income on its 50 billion fund, considering I pay a minimum of 20% on my 'way less than $50 billion' in taxable investments, which was funded by my already taxed earnings, where as Harvard gets much of its endowment funds gifted to it.

[deepsun]

But I don't understand why 14%? It should be the same as you, 20%.

Same goes for religious organizations, but it would be extremely hard to enforce, as they might say "government is interfering us practicing our religion", as practicing religions helps to not pay taxes and protected by the Constitution.

[johnnyanmac]

>But I don't understand why 14%? It should be the same as you, 20%.

Taxing donations is really thorny. If people realize that the government is taking money they want to give away... they stop giving away money. It's a self-terminating cliche in action. So you either leave it alone if you want to encourage people stimulating charities, or you make the tax very small.

>Same goes for religious organizations,

I don't fully know. Some attempt at separattion of church and state. The government tries to maintain that except when other boundaries are crossed.

It does sort of fall into the same umbrella though, when regarding tithes.

[WrongAssumption]

There are several proposed bills, including one that raises the tax to 21 percent.

https://nehls.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/nehls.house.gov/f...

[ookblah]

because then those churches and schools will just leave the US! /s

[yieldcrv]

if your argument is "but they're not getting screwed equally" then its a completely flawed argument benefiting the government

you should be questioning why you are getting screwed at all. it doesn't solve the government's revenue problems or even make a dent.

[glompers]

People already paid their taxes on all of the principal before they donated it to fund education. You and I are not chartered as an educational endowment; things like Roth IRAs exist for us.

[jcalvinowens]

> People already paid their taxes on all of the principal before they donated it to fund education

That's not true, the donations are tax exempt (deductible).

[johnnyanmac]

I think the point is that money for many was taxed before the paycheck ever came in. And you have no control over it. Part of your W-2 goes to fund social security, part of it to fund the federal, part of it to fund the state.

Taxing donations is just double dipping on your money. That's how you discourage donating.

[qwertygnu]

holy shit dog, you make over $533,000???

[Daneel_]

Expletive aside, I think they’re talking about their total investment rather than their income.

[Brian_K_White]

"funded by my already taxed earnings"

Why did you even try that? Blew your whole argument.

[johnnyanmac]

why do you disagree? Most people working a job do have taxes taken out. That's why you get a "return" when the IRS realizes they took too much or you provide other means to deduct your taxes.

[Brian_K_White]

The comment attempts to suggest that something is being taxed twice. It is not. The original income that funds some investment is taxed. After that, only further income is taxed. The existing principle is not.

Nothing that was taxed was "already taxed".