The tax applies only to individuals with at least $100 million in wealth and mostly affects hedge fund managers.

t_d thread: https://archive.is/5pFXr

here's fox news trying to convince people that the tax will mean that if your home goes up in value, the government will take your house: https://archive.is/Ay89M

"This would be the most crazy tax structure we have ever seen. It makes Venezuela look normal. It makes Russia look normal," Gingrich stressed. "That speech last week in Raleigh, where [Harris] outlined her economic plan, that was crazy. That was so far to the left of Bernie Sanders that Gorbachev in Russia would have thought it was a radical speech."

  • PKMKII [none/use name]
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yeah I’m like 175% sure that they’d be able write off drops in the value of the stock.

    My concern with this idea is, how exactly are they calculating the value each year? Average value over the calendar year, value at end of CY, value at YTD from the original purchase? If done wrong it could lead to gaming of the market such that when it’s time to calculate the value, the market always happens to be in a dip then, very odd.

    • Beaver [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Yeah I’m like 175% sure that they’d be able write off drops in the value of the stock.

      Yeah, the "taxes on gains that no longer exist" argument, betrays their basic lack of understanding about how taxes on assets work. Do they just not understand that capital losses offset the tax burden of the gains?

      I wonder if some of this confusion happens because most people don't have exposure to anything beyond income and property taxes?

      • invalidusernamelol [he/him]
        ·
        3 months ago

        That's exactly what it is. Everyone that complains about this has only ever had to deal with a W2 or 1099 form. They don't understand that as you get richer, you have so many different avenues to avoid paying taxes.

        • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yep, it's also why the politicians and their idiotic "balance the government spending like a household budget" talk has traction. Most people don't understand how this stuff works at the higher echelons. This stuff goes way beyond what "kitchen table economics" can parse.

          • Belly_Beanis [he/him]
            ·
            3 months ago

            balance the government spending

            God I fucking hate this. Both parties harp on about it, too. They'll both talk about their plans to "balance the budget." That's not how government spending works. Most of the money is money the government owes to itself. It's one of the benefits of fiat currency. Unfortunately, anything the government does is a gommunism and we can't have that or else the terrorists will win.

    • Hexboare [they/them]
      ·
      3 months ago

      The other question would be which stocks would be included in a scheme, because stocks with low liquidity would be even simpler to game to rack up unrealised tax losses

    • RNAi [he/him]
      ·
      3 months ago

      If I were president it would be calculated second by second but without correctiing by the fraction that second represents of the year (1/60x60x24x365) in order to tax them an astronomic sum