I would like to make it clear that I do not favor ANY tax increase to promote more social engineering.

The proposal, which would likely affect fewer than 1,000 of the wealthiest U.S. taxpayers, would help pay for Biden’s social policy and climate legislation.

WASHINGTON—A new annual tax on billionaires’ unrealized capital gains is likely to be included to help pay for the vast social policy and climate package lawmakers hope to finalize this week, senior Democrats said Sunday.

“We probably will have a wealth tax,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) said Sunday on CNN, noting that Senate Democrats were still working on their proposal, which isn’t technically a wealth tax but bears a strong resemblance to that idea.

The proposal under consideration from Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) would impose an annual tax on unrealized capital gains on liquid assets held by billionaires, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said Sunday on CNN.



“I wouldn’t call that a wealth tax, but it would help get at capital gains, which are an extraordinarily large part of the incomes of the wealthiest individuals and right now escape taxation until they’re realized,” Ms. Yellen said.

Groups such as the National Taxpayers Union have objected to the tax on billionaires’ unrealized capital gains, saying it would add more bureaucracy to the tax system and impose new burdens on business investors.

The tax is expected to affect people with $1 billion in assets or $100 million in income for three consecutive years, according to a person familiar with the discussions. The idea, for which President Biden recently expressed support after excluding it from his campaign plans and administration agenda, would affect a narrower group of people than the capital-gains changes that have already flopped among congressional Democrats.


Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) has been against increasing marginal tax rates on corporations, capital gains or individuals.


Democrats have been scrambling to find new ways to pay for the package’s roughly $2 trillion in spending after key centrist Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) signaled her opposition to increasing marginal tax rates on corporations, capital gains or individuals.

When compared with the tax-rate increases in the House bill, the emerging Wyden proposal would be significantly more progressive, in that it would raise its money from the very, very rich—likely fewer than 1,000 taxpayers—instead of the merely rich. But House Democrats have questioned whether it makes sense to add a relatively untested idea at this late stage.

A spokeswoman for Ms. Sinema said Friday that she was working with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), who has pushed for an annual tax on the wealthiest Americans’ assets. That wealth tax that Ms. Warren talked about during her presidential campaign would have applied to all assets held by the wealthy. The proposal under consideration, in contrast, would focus on unrealized capital gains and it is expected to include a one-time tax on gains to date. That means a tech-company founder with $5 billion, almost all of which is unrealized gains, would be taxed more heavily than someone who just inherited $5 billion and has no unrealized gains under the tax code.

“I think it’s likely. I’m pushing hard,” Ms. Warren said Sunday on MSNBC of raising taxes on billionaires.

LINK: https://www.wsj.com/articles/t...84?mod=hp_listb_pos3

This is an attempt (likely successful) to appeal to the less informed part of the electorate.

People that are billionaires will get together with their accounting professionals and restructure their ownership of assets for tax purposes.
Back in the 60's we had a 90% top income tax rate that nobody really paid.

They can take their tax schemes out behind the Capitol and get fucked. Stop the spending.

Low hanging fruit and a bad idea. Taxing "unrealized gains" is unfair. Will the taxed be able to write off "unrealized losses"?

quote:

That means a tech-company founder with $5 billion, almost all of which is unrealized gains, would be taxed more heavily than someone who just inherited $5 billion and has no unrealized gains under the tax code.

Makes perfect sense to me. The person whom created this fortune gets taxed up the wazoo dies and passes it to their offspring that has probably lived off the fruits of the labor, never lifted a finger or stressed over anything more difficult than which villa do I stay at this winter and gets taxed at a lower rate.

Simplistic but kind of sounds like paying people not to work, where have I heard this before?

Just more feel good B.S.

Looks like something that was not going to cost anything just morphed into “you look like you are going to make some money, so we want it.”

quote:

Originally posted by dave7378:
Low hanging fruit and a bad idea. Taxing "unrealized gains" is unfair. Will the taxed be able to write off "unrealized losses"?

I agree. It's a bad idea.

But the idea has already been breached.
It's not so different than taxing me on the "unrealized gains" in the value of my house each year.

And [thread drift] why do I have to fund socialist education in government schools? I was responsible enough to send my children to religious schools, not at the expense of the 'public' yet every year I pay an increasing amount to support the indoctrination centers I wholly disagree with.

So they'll tax unrealized gains when the stock market goes up and then turn around and give deductions the following year when it goes down? How about when we have a bear market and it goes down multiple years in a row? Will they tax realized gains when you sell to pay the tax on unrealized gains? What if the stock is restricted and you cant sell it? This is going to be a F'ing mess.

Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have bemoaned the fact that they don't pay enough tax. Let them foot the bill.

They could confiscate ALL if the billionaire’s money in this country and it still won’t pay for their shit.

How about STOP SPENDING.
Everyone pays a flat 5% on income and the .gov lives within its means like the rest of us do.

FFS it’s not that hard.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeinNC:
How about STOP SPENDING.
Everyone pays a flat 5% on income and the .gov lives within its means like the rest of us do.

FFS it’s not that hard.

When was the last time criminals followed any rules? That's right, they make up rules for everyone else but themselves.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have bemoaned the fact that they don't pay enough tax. Let them foot the bill.

In case anyone wants to contribute:
Bureau of the Fiscal ServiceThe General PublicGifts to the U.S. Government
Gifts to the U.S. Government
How do I make a contribution to the U.S. government?
Citizens who wish to make a general donation to the U.S. government may send contributions to a specific account called "Gifts to the United States."

This account was established in 1843 to accept gifts, such as bequests, from individuals wishing to express their patriotism to the United States. Money deposited into this account is for general use by the federal government and can be available for budget needs.

These contributions are considered an unconditional gift to the government. Citizens can make financial donations electronically through pay.gov or in paper form.

At pay.gov, you can contribute online from your bank account (ACH), PayPal, debit or credit card.
You can write a check or money order, payable to the United States Treasury, and in the memo section notate that it's a gift to the United States. Mail your check or money order to the address below.
Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Reporting and Analysis Branch 2
P.O. Box 1328
Parkersburg, WV 26106-1328
Any tax-related questions regarding these contributions should be directed to the Internal Revenue Service at 800-829-1040.

If this passes it will be no more than 2 years before the threshold is reduced incrementally until it's down to the middle class. Mark my words, been around long enough to see how this stuff works. This is their attempt to get it on the books, it's just the start.

Billionaires will take their money out of stocks and put it in tangible assets like art, precious metals, etc. The tax will be a total flop, so the mantra will be 'Now we need to include millionaires'.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
If this passes it will be no more than 2 years before the threshold is reduced incrementally until it's down to the middle class. Mark my words, been around long enough to see how this stuff works. This is their attempt to get it on the books, it's just the start.

Billionaires will take their money out of stocks and put it in tangible assets like art, precious metals, etc. The tax will be a total flop, so the mantra will be 'Now we need to include millionaires'.

Agreed.

quote:

Originally posted by BamaJeepster:
Billionaires will take their money out of stocks and put it in tangible assets like art, precious metals, etc. The tax will be a total flop, so the mantra will be 'Now we need to include millionaires'.

And then the millionaires will also put their money in other things, and the middle class will ultimately pay the tax, same as always.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have bemoaned the fact that they don't pay enough tax. Let them foot the bill.

And Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, the Google twins, and Tim Cook. Jack Dorsey and Peter Thiel too. It is true that with the current system almost all of that massive wealth will never be taxed. (passes to heirs with a stepped up basis after death) and they just borrow against equity while alive at near zero percent interest, without having to sell and pay taxes. Not sure what the solution should be, but taxing unrealized gains on an annual basis will be a freaking mess.

JFK was the last democrat to get it when he said if you tax the rich too hard you incentivize them to find ways to avoid taxes. That pulls investment capital out of the market and economy. I guess the difference is that we are dealing with Communists/Socialists and a battle between the haves and have nots. The middle class has the lowest ownership of national wealth 26.6% on record. When people with a child’s mentality set economic policy this is the result. The valley between the wealthy and middle class will widen substantially the harder they push.

A few years ago, a guy who worked for me was really on board with the "tax the rich" idea.

I asked him two questions:

1. Would you be able to pay for your rent, your groceries, and your other needs if you did not have a job?
   
   
2. When was the last time that a poor person offered you a job?

He got it, immediately.

---

Footnote: he decided to move up in the economic scale. With no notice to me, he moved to Denver, stealing a bunch of stuff from me, and went to work in a "grow house."

Thieves, traitors and tyrants.

Absolutely idiotic idea, most likely promoted by cronies to force the moderately wealthy to sell out to crony corps.