1007
submitted 4 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

No, count unrealized asset value as income.

You gained 2 billion in stock value, but didn't sell? You get taxed on that stock gain.

[-] breetai@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

I can’t support that. I myself once had 20 million in stock options but couldn’t sell it. By the time I could sell it, it was worth zero. Yet you in your system I would have paid taxes on it. Stock fluctuates in value to much. We just need way to force them sell the stock and then tax the stock as ordinary income.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Once it went to zero, it would have been a loss and canceled out?

[-] breetai@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Well if I had to pay unrealized gains I’d have zero but have to pay taxes on 20 million.

It’s why we don’t do it. It would be overly complicated.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

No, you would pay taxes on the unrealized gains of your assets. So if your assets are worth 0, then you pay 0. If they are worth 20mil, then you pay taxes on 20mil.

Just a quick reminder, one of the main principles of capitalism is risk vs reward.

[-] breetai@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

That’s my point. They were worth 20 million. Due to legal restrictions I couldn’t sell. As such I would have to pay taxes on 20 million. When I could sell they were worth zero.

So I would have ended up negative.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Sounds like that stock wasn't worth the risk then. That's capitalism in a nutshell brahski, people lose money betting on the market every day.

[-] breetai@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

It was part of my compensation. It didn’t cost me anything.

It’s naive to think we will ever tax unearned income. Not only is it against the law, it would destroy everyone.

[-] Pogogunner@sopuli.xyz -1 points 4 months ago

So only corporations and billionaires can afford to own a home?

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Pretty sure that is not what I said. Anyway, you are already taxed on the value of your home on a yearly basis, regardless if you sold it or not. Take your ball and go home.

[-] breetai@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

What he is saying your home is an unrealized gain which is true.

While we pay property taxes they are a small percentage and based on the tax value and not the fair market.

While not a fan of property tax they at least directly impact you by providing value to your local area. Why I don’t bitch much about property taxes. I’d rather pay those than federal taxes.

[-] Pogogunner@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 months ago

You're not taxed on the full appreciation of your home at income tax rates. If the government did, the tax on the appreciation would price people out of their homes.

[-] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

Really? We should let the people in the low income areas of my city that just saw their valuations jump up know, because that is exactly what is happening to them. Property value went up 300%, so did the taxes.

[-] Pogogunner@sopuli.xyz 0 points 4 months ago

Ah. I failed to consider you live outside of the United States of America. I'm sorry that low income earners are burdened by this kind of tax policy.

this post was submitted on 04 May 2024
1007 points (98.6% liked)

politics

18883 readers
4247 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS