• Captain Howdy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Can’t they just get around a tax like that by borrowing cash (for their lifestyle) and using their assets as collateral?

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      50 minutes ago

      I’m actually against a wealth tax, but think one of the only ways that taking their unrealized assets can work is if we do as you suggest.

      If you own stock in something, taxing unrealized gains isn’t good. it’s not like were going to pay them for unrealized losses.

      But we MUST stop them from being able to actualize those unrealized gains without taxing them like when they use their unrealized assets as collateral. It’s like a loophole for the ultra wealthy where they can just borrow against their assets for their entire life without paying taxes on it.

      And really… who cares if this way might be more expensive to do, they’re rich as fuck, and can pay for it as part of that tax. Also assets can be very nebulous and hard to know what they actually have. But when you see that new house, new yacht, donation to a SPAC or whatever, the IRS can come knocking and be like how’d you pay for that.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Wealth includes assets. If you can borrow against it, it can be taxed.

      In fact, taxing the assets makes borrowing against them even more expensive.