Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, October 27, 2021

The left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found in an analysis that capital gains taxes are essentially "effectively voluntary," because the holder of that asset can just hold onto it -- letting unrealized gains accrue -- or strategically sell it off coupled with capital losses.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

They will pay nothing, they will move their wealth to some other country.

Dems always talk about Taxing the Rich to fire up their uneducated base, but the dirty little secret is the Dems are the Party of the Rich.

#1 | Posted by Maverick at 2021-10-27 09:11 PM | Reply

"An analysis from economist Gabriel Zucman finds that the proposal could bring in $500 billion.
Elon Musk alone would owe up to $50 billion, while Jeff Bezos could pay up to $44 billion."

reading is your friend

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2021-10-27 10:42 PM | Reply

#2

That would be true if the billionaires did as they were told and paid the money. In reality, even if this did pass constitutional muster, there is still a lot that they could do to avoid the taxes. And the people who make the money are always smarter than the people who want to take the money from the people who made it.

#3 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 11:23 PM | Reply

#2

That would be true if the billionaires did as they were told and paid the money. In reality, even if this did pass constitutional muster, there is still a lot that they could do to avoid the taxes. And the people who make the money are always smarter than the people who want to take the money from the people who made it.

#4 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 11:23 PM | Reply

Golly gee whiz, kids!

MB knows more about who will actually pay than the several top experts quoted in the article he posted.

Or is that just a myth?

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2021-10-27 11:30 PM | Reply

#4

So your suggestion equates to apathy as being the most reasonable action to take.

Got it.

#6 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2021-10-27 11:38 PM | Reply

"Or is that just a myth?"

It's not a myth. It's an assumption.

When it comes to economics, progressives ALWAYS assume that those faced with higher tax rates will not alter their behavior as a result of increased taxes.

It's sort of like assuming that, if attacked, an adversary would submit to the will of the victor. In reality, adversaries rarely do this. They respond in kind to the attack.

When Bernie was running in 2016, his tax plan was based on the assumption that labor income earners would not alter their behavior, but this assumption was made in a vacuum. There was no detailed research as to what workers would actually do in response to increased taxes.

#7 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 11:39 PM | Reply

"So your suggestion equates to apathy as being the most reasonable action to take."

My suggestion, in this case, would be to pursue the growth-friendly Value Added Tax. Like everyone else has.

#8 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 11:40 PM | Reply

America will never have a European-style welfare state without a VAT...Democrats want European-style spending but without the efficient tax that makes it possible

www.economist.com

#9 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 11:42 PM | Reply

And if a Democrat ever proposed (actual) European-style spending alongside a mirror image of a European tax structure, you'd be the first person to ---- all over the idea.

So stop hiding behind the mechanics of how this is paid for. You don't want first-world social policy in he US because you're a sociopath. It really isn't any more complicated than that.

#10 | Posted by JOE at 2021-10-27 11:48 PM | Reply

Like everyone else has.

If it's so prevalently adopted and (as you're alluding to) would be such a cut and dry panacea, why do you suppose neither Republican nor Democrat party's have accomplished also adopting VAT?

Democrats want European-style spending but without the efficient tax that makes it possible
www.economist.com

#9 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Why have Republicans also avoided efficient tax codes since trickle-down economics was outed as a fraud? Thanks for the link, BTW.

#11 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2021-10-27 11:48 PM | Reply

#7

The experts in your article say you are wrong.

One assumes you also believe that costs are always just passed on to consumers... so then you are wrong again.

also, from the article you posted:

"The new proposal would change that, making unrealized gains taxable income for America's billionaires, meaning they would have to pay taxes on wealth increases from assets going up, even if they don't sell their stocks."

"Most of their wealth or economic income is in the form of their stuff they own going up in value because of the things they've done, primarily stock," Indiana University law professor David Gamage previously told Insider. "And, until they sell that stock " which they're never going to do, for the most part, because there's ways around that " it wouldn't be included in the tax space."

Right now, billionaires pay just 8.2% in income taxes annually, according to a White House estimate that takes into account unrealized gains."

But hey, you are happy with billionaires paying percent of in income tax than their secretaries do... apparently that makes you and Ayn wet.

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2021-10-27 11:51 PM | Reply

paying less percent

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2021-10-27 11:52 PM | Reply

There was no detailed research as to what workers would actually do in response to increased taxes.
#7 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Is that to suggest there is in fact research available as to what workers would actually do in response to increased taxes, but that the research just isn't detailed?

#14 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2021-10-27 11:53 PM | Reply

"And if a Democrat ever proposed (actual) European-style spending alongside a mirror image of a European tax structure, you'd be the first person to ---- all over the idea."

Actually, I wouldn't.

There's a better than average chance that I retire in Europe. Despite the higher taxes.

I'm not poor, so the programs made available though higher taxes are mostly meaningless to me. But when a society collectively decides that a program is so beneficial that both rich or poor will pay for it, then it's hard to disagree with.

When it comes to the Build Back Better, I'll point you back to here:

drudge.com

Snoofy is not interested in BBB, unless it's paid for by rich people. Which really tells me he's not interested in BBB.

#15 | Posted by madbomber at 2021-10-27 11:57 PM | Reply

"The new proposal would change that, making unrealized gains taxable income for America's billionaires, meaning they would have to pay taxes on wealth increases from assets going up, even if they don't sell their stocks."

Billionaires only? All 700 of them? Or all of us?

Regardless, a stupid idea. Someone holding Enron stock would've paid a lot of taxes over the years on non-existent assets ... before losing everything.

#16 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-28 01:59 AM | Reply

The time to tax an unrealized capital gain is when it's used as collateral.

As for trying to tax Musk, an analysis of his position not long before it hit $1k/share.

"That brings us to today. Elon has been able to match nine market value milestones with nine operational milestones from the 2012 package. These milestones grant Musk the option to buy 22,862,050 shares at $6.24 each. At the time of writing, Tesla stock trades at over 808 dollars per share. Elon will be motivated to exercise these options before they expire. What does it mean for Musk's taxes?

Stock options given as an employee incentive are taxed at ordinary income on the difference between the current market value of the stock $808 and the strike price $6.24. As an illustration: For each share exercised, Elon will owe income tax on the $801.76 gain. 37% goes to the US Federal Government and 13.3% goes to the state of California. Elon cited a 53% tax rate in his recent Code Con interview with Kara Swisher.

This gives Elon an awkward decision. He wants to be the "first one in, and the last one out" with his investment in Tesla. But Musk doesn't have the $143 million cash to exercise the options and get the shares, nor does Musk have the $9.7 BILLION cash to pay the taxes to the US and California. He can potentially borrow a total of $18 billion against the 92 million shares he has already pledged to bankers."

#17 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-28 09:52 AM | Reply

And what is Elon tweeting anyways?

"According to their own estimates, this tax only covers ~10% of the $3.5 trillion spending bill.

Where will the other 90% come from?

The answer is you."

"US national debt is ~$28,900 billion or ~$229k per taxpayer.

Even taxing all "billionaires" at 100% would only make a small dent in that number, so obviously the rest must come from the general public. This is basic math.

Spending is the real problem."

"US Federal Debt/GDP was 56% in 2000, now it is 126% & climbing fast"

#18 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-28 09:55 AM | Reply

The hilarious parody account Angry Warren Buffet accurately summarizes Elon's overall position:

"1) Gov should stop spending money but give Tesla subsidies

2) Gov should not raise taxes on billionaires but keep giving Tesla subsidies

3) Fed should keep printing money to juice Tesla's stock price."

#19 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-28 09:56 AM | Reply

Well this got quiet...

#20 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-28 08:19 PM | Reply

There's a better than average chance that I retire in Europe. Despite the higher taxes.
#15 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Lol. Another "Libertarian" galavanting off to a western european social democracy. You couldn't make this up if you tried.

#21 | Posted by JOE at 2021-10-29 01:07 PM | Reply

Snoofy is not interested in BBB, unless it's paid for by rich people. Which really tells me he's not interested in BBB.
#15 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

You're just phoning it in now, dude.

All taxes should be progressive -- or at least not-regressive. But there is only one progressive tax in the entire tax code.

If we're actually rolling out a new tax to pay for this (which isn't necessary, we could just adjust existing taxes) then that new tax should be progressive too.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-29 01:12 PM | Reply

"US Federal Debt/GDP was 56% in 2000, now it is 126% & climbing fast"

How's non-Federal debt doing?

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-29 01:13 PM | Reply

"US Federal Debt/GDP was 56% in 2000, now it is 126% & climbing fast"

Well, let's see what caused that ...

TWO tax cuts under Bush/GOP and another under Trump/GOP. The same GOP that only whine about debt when they're out of power and then enact more tax cuts that only add to it when they're in power.

"Trickle down economics" has never done anything but add to the national debt.

#24 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2021-10-29 02:12 PM | Reply

but the dirty little secret is the Dems are the Party of the Rich.

#1 | POSTED BY MAVERICK

This talking point is beyond stupidity.

#25 | Posted by jpw at 2021-10-29 03:02 PM | Reply

What's the GOP the party of?

#26 | Posted by snoofy at 2021-10-29 03:08 PM | Reply

Old white dudes.

#27 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2021-10-29 03:13 PM | Reply

"US Federal Debt/GDP was 56% in 2000, now it is 126% & climbing fast"

The end of 2000 was when Dubya won.

He, Cheney, and the Republicans reset America's fiscal sights from surplus budgets as far as the eye could see, to deficit budgets as far as the eye could see, via two rounds of massive income tax cuts aimed primarily at the wealthiest, with 27% of the money going to the top 1%.

In retrospect, Dubya was a piker. Trump's code gives 83% to the top 1%. All with NEWLY BORROWED MONEY. An additional 10% of all the debt we'd rung up since 1776...just to give it away in tax cuts. During times of record deficit budgets.

#28 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-29 11:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I see no solutionsproffered. Just the blame game. Same as it ever was.

How trite.

#29 | Posted by jakester at 2021-10-29 11:51 PM | Reply

" I see no solutionsproffered."

Between the lines is the suggestion we reverse the bad choices.

"Just the blame game."

Well, Republicans we're handed true surplus budgets, and chose to reset the fiscal sights of America to massive deficits.

If you can't find blame, you're either purposely not looking, or you're a hopeless partisan hack.

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-30 11:18 AM | Reply

^ we're = were

#31 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-30 11:24 AM | Reply

#30 - "If you can't find blame, you're either purposely not looking, or you're a hopeless partisan hack."

I never said I couldn't find blamd.

Once again Danforth, who has nothing, has to put words in my mouth.

IT gets old, Danforth. *sigh*

#32 | Posted by jakester at 2021-10-30 12:20 PM | Reply

" I never said I couldn't find blamd."

You expressed dismay at what you called "the blame game", Goatman.

Why shouldn't those who deserve blame be identified, especially when it's so obvious, Goatman?

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-30 01:01 PM | Reply

" Once again Danforth, who has nothing, has to put words in my mouth."

Once again Goatman is butt-hurt at being called out for putting words in other's mouths, so he'll accuse those who called him out.

Yet ANOTHER Goatman "tell".

#34 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-30 01:04 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort