zlacker

>>southe+(OP)
I wonder if this is coming up just before the election because of the Harris campaign’s suggested policy of capital gains tax on unrealised gains for people who have over $100m in assets? I think this is a great idea personally given what these people are doing to avoid paying tax including taking out loans against their own share portfolios. Worth thinking about what people are willing to do to not pay billions of dollars worth of taxes.

>>andy_p+ex
> I think this is a great idea personally given what these people are doing to avoid paying tax

I very strongly believe you to be wrong:

1. Unrealized gains is unworkable. Billionaires will spend tens or hundreds of millions yearly to avoid paying literally billions in taxes because the expected value is net positive. The IRS won't win chasing down money scattered across the globe. This is not a productive use of capital.

2. Taxing unrealized gains causes extreme capital flight. This is _bad_ for the US.

3. Taxing unrealized gains will lead to corporations and startups incorporating outside the US and keeping their assets outside of the US. This is _bad_ for the US.

4. Founders would very quickly loose control of the companies they started, including before they exit. That is really bad for startups and the ecosystem.

5. This is almost certainly illegal in the US at the federal level.

6. Every tax for the wealthy eventually targets the middle class.

>>kansfa+l31
Why does no one read the actual proposal before commenting?

It specifically states that this only applies to individuals with 80% of their wealth in tradeable assets. No founder is going to lose control because this doesn’t apply to them!

>>skepti+Cd1
I'd love to. I'm genuinely interested in how this policy could be implemented and would love to read their suggestions. I think it's very hard to pull off successfully. Can you provide a link?

I thought Harris was adopting the President's 2025 budget proposal [1], which doesn't specifically state this is specific to tradable assets, but according to the downvoters I'm wrong about that. As far as I can tell it provides no comment on how "wealth" is determined.

[1] https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/tax-policy/revenue-p...

I suppose the whole argument is moot anyway as the President doesn't pass a budget, Congress does. And this document is really about communicating priorities, not actual policy.

And if one wants to get really persnickety, Harris didn't actually say anything. Some people working for her campaign did.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/22/us/politics/kamala-harris...