This would DETROY this Country faster than what The Dems have already tried!!! The Kamala Harris campaign has made one of its first concrete policy proposals this week with a tax plan. The centerpiece of the plan is a series of high-end tax increases on corporations and wealthy households worth approximately $5 trillion over 10 years. Specifically, Harris has proposed enacting the tax increases detailed in President Biden's budget released earlier this spring.

One issue in this plan has captured specific attention: a new tax on unrealized capital gains. Biden, and now Harris, have proposed levying an annual tax on the static wealth of households worth more than $100 million. Specifically, households worth more than $100 million would pay an annual minimum tax worth 25% of their combined income and unrealized capital gains.

I strongly do as well.

About time we start closing some of the loop holes that allow the wealthy to avoid being taxed on their income.

Do we then allow them to deduct unrealized capital losses?

The 13th only allows for tax on income, and that's defined

Literally "unrealized" has the hidden word of "unreal" .. doesn't exist.

These kind of games need to stop.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/...scott-114400643.html

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
The 13th only allows for tax on income, and that's defined

Literally "unrealized" has the hidden word of "unreal" .. doesn't exist.

Congress defines what income is. Congress per Chief Justice Marshall gets to tax as Congress through its sovereign people can pass.

That is why the NFA is a tax and not an outright ban.

No one in 1936 thought Congress could just ban a type of firearm, but they could tax to make it unattainable. That is what they did. The S. Ct., said that was a correct use of the Lowe to tax.

We tax property not sold at an accessed value all the time. We can do the same w stocks.

I would put a tax on everything valued on March 25 of the year over 1.5 million at 25 percent. I would compromise and not exempt the tax when the stock is sold since we have taxed it x times already.

I would love to see a tax break against the employee tax scaled that the more people hired, the higher the tax break to incentives hiring.

Stalin Kamala !

NO You would not be able to Deduct UNRELIZED Gains!!! It starts with the Wealthy to get it through and them BAMM it is Everyone!!!

I hope a version of this gets passed.

The Supreme Court has made it clear, Congress has this power. Maybe we will chance another over 200 years of consistent caselaw. I doubt it.

The question. Is, can you deduct loses. I

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
I hope a version of this gets passed.

The Supreme Court has made it clear, Congress has this power. Maybe we will chance another over 200 years of consistent caselaw. I doubt it.

I agree the bill should pass. Something has to be done about our increasing debt. New taxes--starting with the wealthy, the biggest beneficiaries of recent tax cuts--must be on the table.

The Republican mantra, "Cut! Cut! Cut!" hasn't helped cut spending. Congress can't agree on cuts, and the Republicans turn to "Spend! Spend! Spend!" whenever they hold the White House.

We don't have a revenue problem

Here, Tony made this 12 years ago
Laying it out in pretty plain terms

https://youtu.be/jboTeS9Okak?si=YjGwc_JGQILq0et2

It's 20 minutes, but a darn fine way to spend 1/2 an hour

It's a bit eye opening

It's interesting how many people just miss the "over the next 10 years " part

5 trillion/10 is 500 billion per year.

And our deficit has been higher than that for decades.

When you spend more than you take in, and cannot curtail the spending, you have a revenue shortage.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
When you spend more than you take in, and cannot curtail the spending, you have a revenue shortage.

Wow.. that precious. That's how it works on your house? In mine, we budget, plan, and spend less than we take in.. most of the time that works for us

When you talk about sarcasm, you should look in the mirror.

It's my milk tongue roland

And you should keep up on the discussion.

Congress and past and current presidents haven't been able to reign in spending.

If my income couldn't keep up with my necessary spending, I'd have to work harder, wouldn't I? Me, I'd have to come out of retirement and get a job.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
And you should keep up on the discussion.

Congress and past and current presidents haven't been able to reign in spending.

If my income couldn't keep up with my necessary spending, I'd have to work harder, wouldn't I? Me, I'd have to come out of retirement and get a job.

1 we haven't had an approved budget since 2009. Are you aware of that? Just CRs. That contining resolutions
2 congress controls the purse and can set spending levels at their discretion
3 there is a reason there is a perennial call for a balanced budget amendment


Did you watch Tony's video? Please do, you should, it will fill you in on things.

To quote Jackie Gleason
It take one Dumb Sum Bitch to want 4 more years of this shit show .

It definitely takes “one Dumb Sum Bitch” to support tax on unrealized capital gains.

That’s about the most communistic tactic I have seen proposed in the USA.

Honestly, I'm on the fence about the proposed tax and need to study it more.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
It definitely takes “one Dumb Sum Bitch” to support tax on unrealized capital gains.

That’s about the most communistic tactic I have seen proposed in the USA.

We tax assessed value on land all the time.

Taxes are not communist, I’m snd of themselves.

We need to reduce our debt somehow.

Any other ideas--that don't involve boneheaded insistence on spending cuts that will never happen?

quote:

I would put a tax on everything valued on March 25 of the year over 1.5 million at 25 percent.

Yikes! Do you know how many retirees these days have over $1.5 million? You would take far more annually than they could hope to earn from any legitimate investment. They're counting on their funds to meet living expenses for maybe thirty more years, including very expensive assisted living and nursing care.

Would you hit retirement accounts with your tax? IRAs? Roths? IRA holders are already paying income tax on required minimum distributions after age 70-72. Roth participants have been promised a tax-free means of acquiring a nest egg.

Good luck getting that plan through Congress.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
We need to reduce our debt somehow.

Any other ideas--that don't involve boneheaded insistence on spending cuts that will never happen?

Roland,
Think about what you just said. That is the same as an obese person suffering from obesity related illnesses saying I want to be healthy but I am unwilling to stop eating too much food.

Or the otherwise healthy smoker with early COPD that wants to continue to breathe but is unwilling to quit smoking.

NEWSFLASH: The ONLY way to get the deficit under control is to curtail spending FIRST.

The government is an insatiable beast. It will devour all it is fed and look for more. There is NO way to TAX our way out of debt without FIRST learning to live within our means.

What makes you think Congress can now suddenly enact spending cuts, when it's never been able to do that in recent memory?

I'm trying to be realistic. "Starve the beast" doesn't work. The slogan only leads to more debt.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
What makes you think Congress can now suddenly enact spending cuts, when it's never been able to do that in recent memory?

I'm trying to be realistic. "Starve the beast" doesn't work. The slogan only leads to more debt.

Just saying that “feed the beast more” is not the answer.

Taxing ‘unrealized’ capital gains IS about as communistic as one can get with declaring outright communism.

It is going to take both to get our debt in control, spend less, increase revenue(increase taxes).

The idea of increasing import tariffs is a way of increasing revenue, but the burden will be moved to those who struggle the most and is a terrible plan. Not very different from a flat tax, which is a gift to the wealthy.

Why do people villainize the well-off? Why do people always want to scheme new ways to take things from people? Money was made legally under a set of rules. Leave them alone to enjoy it.

Scheming to get is about as marxist as one can get.

PS: When I can see well planned budgeting and cutting of waste within the government…I could soften on taxation but never until.

quote:

Originally posted by ledvm:
Why do people villainize the well-off? Why do people always want to scheme new ways to take things from people? Money was made legally under a set of rules. Leave them alone to enjoy it.

Scheming to get is about as marxist as one can get.

The wealthy are not being vilified, they certainly are not the victims either.

Much of America is tired of seeing the tax breaks the wealthy enjoy and the fact that many pay a lower income tax rate than the average working stiff does.

The changes Republicans have made to the tax code the last 40 plus years has resulted in the wealth gap we see today.

Tax the wealthy at a fair rate and eliminate the tax loop holes that they exploit and work toward a more equitable(I know how you hate that word ) tax code is my view.

The only to make the tax code equitable is to eliminate it and use a graduated flat tax type system.

Capital gains at 15% are too high as it is…should be 10% max.

quote:

Much of America is tired of seeing the tax breaks the wealthy enjoy and the fact that many pay a lower income tax rate than the average working stiff does.

Here are the equity facts Steve:
Top 50% of earners pay 98% of the revenue.
Top 25% of earners pay 90%.
Top 1% pay 45%.

Thus, 50% of our population carries the country. The richest pay half of the bill already. Why villainize them? They are carrying the load now!

Also facts Lane, my Gov. paid 8.2% tax RATE on tens of millions in income, a far lower RATE than I pay.

That needs to change.

https://www.axios.com/local/de...avoided-paying-taxes

The facts remain the use of sticks by the ultra, investment class is a means of eluding tax while generating wealth.

If I can pay 40 plus percent, they can pay more than 7.

It is not about vilification. It is about designing a system that works better.

NO you can not deduct Unrealized Losses!!!

Until I see some reduction in spending…I am a hard NO on new taxes as EVERY good business financial person is. The numbers I put up show the wealthy ARE paying their fare share and revenue is pretty equitable.

Throw out the entire tax-code and replace with a graduated flat-tax…the code is so convoluted now…it is impossible to follow to the letter.

Any person not taking every legal tax reduction advantage is a fool.

quote:

Originally posted by Slider:
NO you can not deduct Unrealized Losses!!!

That's today..the question would be what if.. if they tax gains they have to credit losses...

She's this is a stupid concept... almost as stupid as taxing per mile driving