I didn’t send anything.
1 Like
That’s good thinking. Even our own ‘officials’ are politically motivated and often present facts that support their agenda or political leanings.
Can you describe how taxing unrealized gains will benefit any of us? Does it screw the rich enough? Does it fatten our bloated government?
I pay unrealized gains on my home and will pay them again when I sell. These layers of taxation are theft, they increase costs to everyone, and diminishes wealth. Wealth is a large part of the American dream.
For me, these types of taxations are just another way for the government to hand out short ladders to everyone. Many tire of living in quiet desperation with the governments hands in our pockets distributing our money to everyone but us.
2 Likes
I’d rather see low interest rates for primary residence, it should not cost tax payers and is worth more the 25k… Ban corporate single family home buying, black rock is a huge problem in this country and we are just now starting to see everything they do…
Disagree. It needs to be controlled, not banned.
There are many larger corporations that offer Housing Services and Properties to their employees as perks. This is how many Corps. compete for quality employees, especially Upper-Management, in low-density, small town, populated areas.
Kinda difficult for smaller companies in small town America to compete with companies in major cities for ‘choice’ personnel!
Maybe policies similar to zoning could help a community ensure home buyers are prioritized over large corporate interests.
Also, why do we wait 30 days for mortgage approval? There must be a way for a buyer to compete with cash offers. Perhaps the government could insure or back cash for pre-qualified buyers. That is better than a give-away. In my opinion, if you give everyone $25k to buy a home, the cost of homes just went up $25K
1 Like
My HOA passed new rules a couple years ago, big corporations can still by homes in my neighborhood, they just can’t rent them out. 
1 Like
If you are in the .05% of households this new policy would effect, you would think of it more as “pre-paying” the capital gains. As far as I understand it, you wouldn’t be taxed on the same capital gains twice, but of course, it gets complicated. The complexity is probably why the scheme will be very hard to put into place.
As an example, if you purchase an asset (house, stock, etc.) for $100,000 and after the first year of ownership, it has a value of $110,000, you would pay tax on $10,000. Let’s say you sell the asset at the end of the 2nd year for $120,000. You would again pay taxes on $10,000. You have now paid capital gains tax on $20,000 total, just the same as if you paid all of it when you sold it.
Where it gets tricky is when the asset declines in value, especially after you have already paid some tax on the gains. For these reasons, I am not sure this will be a feasible approach to closing a tax loophole that the ultra-wealthy enjoy.
That said, if they are able to implement it, I would be in favor of an exemption for your primary home and retirement funds (IRA, 401K, etc.).
1 Like
Thanks for that info. Consider this scenario which I believe envelopes many many small to medium businesses.
I start a business and grind it from a couple million to twenty million by reinvesting profits, expanding, hiring, research and development etc.
Now my company has a higher value but where is the cash going to come from to pay the gains?
You don’t get revolving credit with the IRS.
What if the company begins to depreciate after some success due to market forces?
At $20 million, you would still only be 20% of the way to reaching the point where it would apply to you (assuming no other assets for simplicity here). Once you get to the minimum ($100 million), if you are still the sole owner (privately held), then yes, it would be treated as a taxable asset, I believe.
From your profits I guess.
That’s where the plan goes off the rails, in my opinion. There are ways to handle it, but it will be a nightmare.
1 Like
Expanding companies don’t really have profits. But it’s a great way to stop expansion and reinvestment.
It’s been tried before in other countries. I’ve not had the time to research but I bet it fails miserably.
My guess, it never even gets the chance to fail. Other than failing in Congress. It’s just too complicated. But I know what the issue is that they are trying to address. This just might not be the way to go after it.
Remove wealth and redistribute it through the government.
This will not close the gap between the middle class and the rich.
I don’t think you can tax your way to a booming economy.
In a way, yes. But to also distribute it amongst the 99.5% of the rest of us. Part of the reason assets are targeted is because the ultra-wealthy don’t sell them. They hold onto them and pass them tax-free to heirs, and therefore never pay any taxes on them.
All of these assets allow the holder to borrow money (tax free) to live off of and also purchase more and more assets. It is a self-feeding loop that will eventually result in a few holding almost all assets. It is inevitable, if we keep on the same path as we are now.
So you’re saying we need to get off of the 0biden/Harris “Build Back Better” plan? Got it.
Millions of Americans agree.
I have so many points to make.
The rich pay more taxes than all of us combined. Now we want to tax money they have not made yet. Because we are somehow entitled to it?
But even then, the plan is severely flawed and will stifle the engine of our country.
Imagine paying taxes on the stocks that did well one year but then declined the next. Then they go back up and more tax is due. Soon you’ll be selling your assets to pay the tax. The law of diminishing returns is now in full effect.
Finally, who is going to benefit? We kill our job makers to feed the government pig. Brilliant.
In a nutshell, that is what they are encouraging. The idea being to not have so many assets controlled by so few people.
You see nothing wrong with taxing our wealth out of existence?
Marxism is alive and well. We may just arrive there from a different angle.
Where would it go that is out of existence?
From the people to the government. It will never enrich you.
The government does not hold wealth. At least not anywhere near the extent that the .05% do. In reality, the collected revenue is put back into the economy very quickly.