- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Biden proposed 44.6% Capital Gains tax, 25% tax on Unrealized Gains
Posted on 4/25/24 at 9:44 am to RebelExpress38
Posted on 4/25/24 at 9:44 am to RebelExpress38
I have not commented for or against the proposal. Only that posting about it without the context of the limits is not good communication. Pay attention. Maybe this thread should be on the OT?
0
Posted on 4/25/24 at 9:45 am to RebelExpress38
Moore vs United States will eventually settle this, but if we go off of Eisner v Macomber (which has already been used in previous Moore arguments), then gains aren't considered taxable under the 16th until they become realized. In other words, any talks of or attempts to tax unrealized gains are legally DOA.
Taking Eisner as the precedent, if the federal government actually passed a law taxing unrealized gains, once the case was decided by SCOTUS then the federal government would be on the hook for returning all of that money to the infringed tax payers.
Taking Eisner as the precedent, if the federal government actually passed a law taxing unrealized gains, once the case was decided by SCOTUS then the federal government would be on the hook for returning all of that money to the infringed tax payers.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 9:50 am to RebelExpress38
Cmon, man. The proposal with and without the limits are 2 different animals. How can you argue differently? The limits are pertinent.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 9:54 am to UltimaParadox
quote:
Considering the president's "budget" is just a proposal for congress to talk about. It is generally used as a political talking point. The president does not set the budget, despite some people who think the president is responsible for everything.
All of that is true, but that did not answer my question. Who is going to stop it? Congress? Really?
Posted on 4/25/24 at 10:03 am to RebelExpress38
So, we will tax you at a rate of 25% on your unrealized gains, then when you take out the funds you get to pay us 44.6%?
Posted on 4/25/24 at 10:08 am to KennytheTiger
Are they? Unrealized gains have never been taxed in the history of this country, so acting like it’s no big deal as long as the limits are higher than your income is short sighted. Every other tax has worked its way down.
If you don’t think whale shareholders of stocks or private companies or real estate being forced to sell to cover new taxes won’t affect the price of your shares/job security/real estate, I’m not sure we are living in the same world.
The point of this post was to bring attention to the idea even being proposed by a US president. This isn’t Sanders or AOC, this is the leader of a major political party. It has major implications for our money if a mainstream figure like Biden feels comfortable introducing a completely new tax category on gains that don’t even exist anywhere but on paper.
If you don’t think whale shareholders of stocks or private companies or real estate being forced to sell to cover new taxes won’t affect the price of your shares/job security/real estate, I’m not sure we are living in the same world.
The point of this post was to bring attention to the idea even being proposed by a US president. This isn’t Sanders or AOC, this is the leader of a major political party. It has major implications for our money if a mainstream figure like Biden feels comfortable introducing a completely new tax category on gains that don’t even exist anywhere but on paper.
This post was edited on 4/25/24 at 10:11 am
Posted on 4/25/24 at 10:31 am to BCreed1
quote:
All of that is true, but that did not answer my question. Who is going to stop it?
Stop what? This is not even a law that is up to be passed
Posted on 4/25/24 at 10:46 am to BCreed1
quote:
Who is going to stop it? Congress? Really?
Yes. You expect this to become law?
Posted on 4/25/24 at 10:49 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
So, we will tax you at a rate of 25% on your unrealized gains, then when you take out the funds you get to pay us 44.6%?
Imagine someone like Elon when TSLA had a massive run. He'd have to tank his own stock to pay taxes.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:09 am to fallguy_1978
quote:
Imagine someone like Elon when TSLA had a massive run. He'd have to tank his own stock to pay taxes.
Considering Elon has not taken a salary since like 2018, he basically has zero taxable income. He would not meet the minimum income to be subject to these taxes as proposed.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:10 am to RebelExpress38
quote:
tax on Unrealized Gains
I'm not super financially literate but I just can't wrap my head around this. Someone ELI5 and help me out here.
If I buy a stock for $100 at the beginning of the year and at the end of the year it's $200, that $100 gain will be taxed even though I haven't actually seen a penny of it while it's just sitting in my brokerage account? And then what happens when I sell it?
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:18 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
Someone ELI5 and help me out here.
The easy part is: taxing unrealized gains is well outside the scope of the 16th Amendment (per SCOTUS precedent and common sense). As such, if Congress passed such a bill and the President signed it into law, it would get stayed within 1 second of signing by the metric fricktons of lawsuits against it.
Another aspect of this is that one of the big ways members of Congress make millions is through their backdoor-legalized insider trading (meaning they are stock-wealthy), They aren't going to vote to cut their own fiscal throats.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:19 am to KennytheTiger
quote:
Lazy post. Very misleading without the limits. Only applies to income over $1M.
That doesn't matter. Also, where would it end?
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:42 am to RebelExpress38
Their are certainly some rationales out there for increasing the capital gains tax in certain situations. You really can't use the "job creation" argument when a very wealthy person is getting all their capital gains from stock trading.
That individual is, to me, very different from the guy who starts his own business, employs a bunch of people he hires, and then sells the business when it's time to retire.
Taxing unrealized capital gains has got to be one of the single dumbest ideas I have ever heard of, not to mention an absolute nightmare to administer.
You can get away with it one time (such as estate taxes) because it is a snapshot.
People will say, oh, well we have mark to market election, this is no different. Mark to market is only used by basically day traders, so the reverse out from unrealized to realized when sold is quick and easy.
Trying to do this with long-term holders would be an absolute disaster.
That individual is, to me, very different from the guy who starts his own business, employs a bunch of people he hires, and then sells the business when it's time to retire.
Taxing unrealized capital gains has got to be one of the single dumbest ideas I have ever heard of, not to mention an absolute nightmare to administer.
You can get away with it one time (such as estate taxes) because it is a snapshot.
People will say, oh, well we have mark to market election, this is no different. Mark to market is only used by basically day traders, so the reverse out from unrealized to realized when sold is quick and easy.
Trying to do this with long-term holders would be an absolute disaster.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:44 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
So, we will tax you at a rate of 25% on your unrealized gains, then when you take out the funds you get to pay us 44.6%?
No, you would basically have a basis adjustment each year.
That's the funny thing. So you would pay 25% along the way, but int he year of sale, 44.6% but only on the portion that hasn't been taxed. So again, this is stupid.
Not to mention... no one mentions how unrealized losses would be handled.
Nightmare.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:45 am to UltimaParadox
quote:
Considering Elon has not taken a salary since like 2018, he basically has zero taxable income. He would not meet the minimum income to be subject to these taxes as proposed.
Elon has been getting restricted stock and exercising nonqualified stock options, all of which hit taxable income.
He may not be paid a "cash salary" but he very much has income.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:47 am to BCreed1
quote:Yes, really.
Who is going to stop it? Congress? Really?
Money Talk is supposed to be above hysterically falling out over ridiculous red meat nonsense that has literally 0% chance of passing.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:47 am to Weekend Warrior79
quote:
So, we will tax you at a rate of 25% on your unrealized gains, then when you take out the funds you get to pay us 44.6%?
Further preventing class mobility and accumulating wealth over generations of hard-working family. You'll get your lower middle class lifestyle and like it.
Posted on 4/25/24 at 11:49 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
If I buy a stock for $100 at the beginning of the year and at the end of the year it's $200, that $100 gain will be taxed even though I haven't actually seen a penny of it while it's just sitting in my brokerage account? And then what happens when I sell it?
Buy for $100, initial basis is $100. End of year it's $200. You pay tax on $100 unrealized gain. Now, your basis is $200.
Middle next year, you sell for $225. You pay tax on $25 gain.
Now, what happens if middle next year, you sell for $190. Not too bad you have $10 loss.
Now, what happens if you don't sell, and at end of year 2, it' s now worth $180. You have a $20 unrealized loss. Do you get to claim that? Is it netted against unrealized gains? Does it get netted against realized gains and losses? Is there a $3,000 cap like realized losses?
Posted on 4/25/24 at 12:18 pm to I Love Bama
quote:
Unrealized capital gains.
Taxing unrealized capital gains doesn't make sense but I could see a world where some asset based lending transactions creates a taxable event.
If you borrow a significant amount of money using stocks or real estate as collateral, it could be argued that you've partially "realized" the gain by accessing some of the value without selling the asset. A portion (all?) of the loan proceeds could be considered taxable income.
This post was edited on 4/25/24 at 12:30 pm
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News