More Grifting from Trump

[Sactowndog]

On 8/29/2024 at 11:47 AM, Joe from Wyo said:

Yeah but it’s like that for all assets. I could see a homestead carve out for houses but I think removing it for other asset classes would be helpful in terms of raising revenue. 

I mean for your personal residence I don’t love it but could live with it.  But for all houses nah it is just another means to avoid taxes on people with wealth who don’t need income.  

My Aunt and Uncle have a lot in Laguna Beach they have had for decades which they will just let my cousins sell to avoid taxes.  Not to mention rental property and a vacation home in the Sierras held by my mom.  

I mean I will personally benefit from it but the utter ridiculousness of it where we tax those who actually need income and don’t tax those who don’t is the essence of our tax system. 

[bornontheblue]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:07 PM, East Village Poltergeist said:

That statute and its operation make zero sense. I get what they were going for, but the execution of it via 199A is very poor.

A lot of people like the 199A deduction and there will be an effort to keep it. It also benefits a lot of middle class business owners. 

I think the SALT CAP will be gone though. 

[Akkula]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:03 PM, bornontheblue said:

Reason 5,002 that taxing unrealized gains would be impossible to implement. 

What if you have a closely held investment tracked at income tax basis, but the FMV of the investment is probably much , much higher and very difficult to determine because there is not a market where the investment is regularly traded.  If this ever gets implemented I am going to get my business valuation certification and make tons of money in billable hours disputing the FMVs of closely held investments with the government every year. The courts would get overloaded with FMV disputes. 

Just stick to taxing income , It's much easier to implement, 

 

You certainty it is unconstitutional seems to be a a lot if bluster.  Congress has a lot of leeway to define income.   Furthermore the IRS routinely reclassifies loans as income when it is obvious calling something a loan instead of taxable income is just to evade income taxes. 

[gordonsolie]

On 8/29/2024 at 3:13 PM, bornontheblue said:

A lot of people like the 199A deduction and there will be an effort to keep it. It also benefits a lot of middle class business owners. 

I think the SALT CAP will be gone though. 

They need to lift the SALT cap. 

[bornontheblue]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:14 PM, Akkula said:

You certainty is unconstitutional seems to be a a lot if bluster.  Congress has a lot of leeway to define income.   Furthermore the IRS routinely reclassifies loans as income when it is obvious calling something a loan instead of taxable income is just to evade income taxes. 

What about a closely held investment with no easily determined FMV that is highly subject to differing opinions. 

Respond to that please. 

[Sactowndog]

You want a wealth tax it is simple.  
 

* Raise capital gains taxes to the level of income taxes 

* eliminate the stepped up basis (exempt personal residence if you want) 

* provide people a 1 year time from to do a wash sale of their asset at the current tax rate.

* designate all proceeds from the wash sale must be used to reduce the current debt.

Net result is a giant wealth tax and a significant reduction in national debt which opens up funding for other items the debt as crowded out.  And no complaining from Blue Rules clients as they are free to wait until death and sell it as part of the estate.  

[bornontheblue]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:14 PM, Akkula said:

You certainty it is unconstitutional seems to be a a lot if bluster. 

The 16th amendment gives the federal government the power to tax income, and not wealth

There are numerous court cases in the last 100 years where the SCOTUS very clearly defines income, so no congress cannot define however they want to. 

[mugtang]

On 8/29/2024 at 12:18 PM, bornontheblue said:

What about a closely held investment with no easily determined FMV that is highly subject to differing opinions. 

Respond to that please. 

I don’t think a wealth tax is the way to go.  It’ll open up a can of worms.  If they do go that route become a business appraiser as it will quickly become an in demand field. 

[Akkula]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:18 PM, bornontheblue said:

What about a closely held investment with no easily determined FMV that is highly subject to differing opinions. 

Respond to that please. 

How does anyone do such things?  Get expert opinions...ask an actuary....go to court.  We are talking about proposals to only value the assets of a few billionaire oligarchs.  The government can throw out a number and then the Billionaire can as well.  What if the asset is over valued for tax purposes?  When the sale happens the person would get a loss and a tax refund.  Not that hard.  

[mugtang]

On 8/29/2024 at 12:23 PM, Sactowndog said:

You want a wealth tax it is simple.  
 

* Raise capital gains taxes to the level of income taxes 

* eliminate the stepped up basis (exempt personal residence if you want) 

* provide people a 1 year time from to do a wash sale of their asset at the current tax rate.

* designate all proceeds from the wash sale must be used to reduce the current debt.

Net result is a giant wealth tax and a significant reduction in national debt which opens up funding for other items the debt as crowded out.  

And destroy everybody’s 401k & pension plans in the process.   Sounds like a spectacular idea…

[Akkula]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:23 PM, bornontheblue said:

The 16th amendment gives the federal government the power to tax income, and not wealth

There are numerous court cases in the last 100 years where the SCOTUS very clearly defines income, so no congress cannot define however they want to. 

Unrealized gains would just be classified as income.  Very simple.  The definition of income in the IRS code has a lot of things that are and are not considered income that the layperson would be surprised about.

[Sactowndog]

On 8/29/2024 at 12:25 PM, mugtang said:

And destroy everybody’s 401k & pension plans in the process.   Sounds like a spectacular idea…

401k and pension are subject to income taxes they would not be impacted.  The wash sale is a virtual sale to yourself at the price that day to value the asset.  It is not an actual transaction in the market. 

[Akkula]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:25 PM, mugtang said:

And destroy everybody’s 401k & pension plans in the process.   Sounds like a spectacular idea…

Lebron James is not a "rich person" by my definition when it comes to changing the tax code.  He is just another working stiff.  

Any tax changes should only be applied to his bosses and above.  Those are the people who aren't paying their fair share.

[bornontheblue]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:24 PM, Akkula said:

How does anyone do such things?  Get expert opinions...ask an actuary....go to court. 

How are you going to implement this across the entire US economy. There aren't enough judges and actuaries to implement it. 

 

On 8/29/2024 at 1:24 PM, Akkula said:

We are talking about proposals to only value the assets of a few billionaire oligarchs. 

What if these investors own multiple investments in closely held investments. 

 

On 8/29/2024 at 1:24 PM, Akkula said:

What if the asset is over valued for tax purposes?

There is no such thing as valuing a business for federal income tax purposes. There is income tax basis which is a method of accounting and the rules for it are clearly defined by statute, or case law. 

 

On 8/29/2024 at 1:24 PM, Akkula said:

When the sale happens the person would get a loss and a tax refund

You are going to tax someone on a completely arbitrary number that is probably going to be in the governments favor by millions of dollars and say oh well we can settle up when you sell in 25 years. Yeah that is stupid. Just stick to taxing income. 

[bornontheblue]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:26 PM, Akkula said:

Unrealized gains would just be classified as income.  Very simple.  The definition of income in the IRS code has a lot of things that are and are not considered income that the layperson would be surprised about.

The supreme court has already rules on this  and said unrealized gains are NOT income. 

Try again. 

 

[mugtang]

On 8/29/2024 at 12:28 PM, Sactowndog said:

401k and pension are subject to income taxes they would not be impacted.  The wash sale is a virtual sale to yourself at the price that day to value the asset.  It is not an actual transaction in the market. 

You do understand your proposal to have people sell & buy back their stocks would tank the stock market...right?  Elon Musk owns 20% of Tesla.  Unloading 20% of Tesla shares, regardless of him turning around and buy it back will collapse the market. 

[Akkula]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:31 PM, bornontheblue said:

How are you going to implement this across the entire US economy. There aren't enough judges and actuaries to implement it. 

 

What if these investors own multiple investments in closely held investments. 

 

There is no such thing as valuing a business for federal income tax purposes. There is income tax basis which is a method of accounting and the rules for it are clearly defined by statute, or case law. 

 

You are going to tax someone on a completely arbitrary number that is probably going to be in the governments favor by millions of dollars and say oh well we can settle up when you sell in 25 years. Yeah that is stupid. Just stick to taxing income. 

Question, when did you become a lapdog of the billionaire oligarchy?  You are a smart guy...instead of telling us how we don't fix it....how would you start making billionaires pay more taxes so they pay the same rate as you do?  Unless you like the current system....

 

 

 

[Akkula]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:34 PM, mugtang said:

You do understand your proposal to have people sell & buy back their stocks would tank the stock market...right?  Elon Musk owns 20% of Tesla.  Unloading 20% of Tesla shares, regardless of him turning around and buy it back will collapse the market. 

Yeah, selling all at once may not be good but is it really a good policy to have people never sell and take profits off the table because they don't want to pay taxes?  Couldn't that capital potentially be better deployed to another startup with even greater returns if the owner wasn't worried about the transaction costs?

[bornontheblue]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:34 PM, Akkula said:

Question, when did you become a lapdog of the billionaire oligarchy?  You are a smart guy...instead of telling us how we don't fix it....how would you start making billionaires pay more taxes so they pay the same rate as you do?  Unless you like the current system....

 

 

 

Change AMT to make a minimum effective tax on income

Raise the limit for income subject to SE Tax

Eliminate preferred rates for realized gains. 

Just a few things that can be considered that are within the confines of the law. 

 

[bornontheblue]

On 8/29/2024 at 1:36 PM, Akkula said:

nd take profits off the table

How does this occur? 

When an investor is given their share of profits in dividends they get taxed on it 

An investor owning a pass through entity gets taxed on their share of the profits whether they receive any cash or not.