Taxes

[sheeeit 129]

Lots and lots of tax discussions and tax rates and Billionaires etc.

I am opposed to a billionaire tax scheme because history and human nature has told us that the billionaires and their tax/money support people are much, much, much smarter than congress.  Once the legislation is enacted, they will simply figure out ways to avoid it.  As is typical (see ACA- Obama and Dems said the exact same thing about the cost for the program being "paid" for and now even they admit the program cost trillions) we are going to pass legislation and then spend the money but the revenue is never going to be as much as predicted.  As a result, the super wealthy won't actually pay for it, the rest of us will.

However, I do agree that the wealthy could/should pay more in taxes but it has to be enacted in a way that they can not evade it.  You absolutely have to consider how any new taxes are actually going to be collected.  Congress does not care.  They pick an entity (in this case the super wealthy) who are a tiny fraction of the population and who the vast majority of the population don't feel sorry for at all (meaning they can pick on the super wealthy and not have any political blowback- its too fucking easy) and claim that group is going to pay for the new spending (it is "paid" for) when they absolutely know in their hearts that it won't work.

I would keep the current tax rates where they are.  For certain the corporate rate and possibly raise the top rate to 40% on income over $2M.

My solution is really simple and really easy to implement.  

1) National Sales Tax with Tax Rebates- I would enact a 2% federal sales tax with zero exemptions.  Hard to get exact figures but our GDP is around $20T so 2% would raise about $400B.  The arguments that this would be a regressive tax have some validity so you can easily set an income level of say $50K and every filer at that limit or under gets a direct tax refund on their taxes of 2% of their income.  This would affect about 75 million tax payers.  If we assume an average refund for all 75 million of $700 (I used $35,000 as the average amount spent annually and 2% of $35,000 is $700) which is about $50B so the net is about $350B.

Lots of hand wringing about the extremely rare group of people that borrow against their portfolios and the Bezos and Musks etc.  They can not avoid this.  Those people spend a lot.  

2) Import Tax of 2%- Our imports total about $2.5T annually.  This raises another $50B.  There should be a cost to importers to access our free marketplace.  If countries put a 2% import tax on us then so be it.  

3) Fuel Tax- The US uses around 170B gallons of fuel (gas, diesel, aviation etc) annually.  A $.50 fuel tax would raise $85B.  It would also have the effect of weaning the country off of gas.

4) Real Estate- The combined value of US real estate (residential and commercial) is around $50T.  A federal 1/4% tax would raise $125B.

5) Foreign Corporate Tax- I would leave the corporate rate exactly where it is right now at 21%.  Our tax rate for our businesses has to be competitive with the market in a global economy.  I would enact a plan where US multinational companies can realize and repatriate all of their profits back to the US for the exact same rate they are legally paying in whatever country they happen to be doing business in.  If Microsoft earns $100M in Ireland and Ireland's tax rate is 12% then Microsoft can bring those profits back to the US for 12%.  It is estimated US companies pay about $400B in foreign taxes annually.  

The infrastructure to collect these taxes already exists and is in use.

The total from these 5 items is a little over $1T annually.  

Lastly, the only way this makes sense in the long run is if spending is kept in check.  Currently our taxes are approximately 32% or so of our GDP.  I would freeze these taxes at current rates.  I would then mandate that total government spending can not exceed 35% of GDP.  If you want/need more money then you have to grow the economy to get it.  So there is a % deficit on existing tax revenue.  With a $20T GDP that means a shortfall of $600B.  My plan raises an extra $1T so there would be a surplus of $400B which should be used to pay down the debt.  Even a modest $400B pay down would have a massive impact on the value of the dollar globally.

If we get into a war or have a Covid issue or a bank collapse, then the govt would have to raise the percentages on the 5 items above to pay for it.  

[elfenix 34658]

 

23 minutes ago, sheeeit said:

(meaning they can pick on the super wealthy and not have any political blowback- its too fucking easy)

[landman 564]

So everyone's property taxes go up (or their rent if they lease), everyone pays more at the gas station, and everyone pays a federal sales tax.  And everyone pays more for consumer goods because prices will go up due to the import tax.

Sounds like a plan.

 

 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5165]

sheitttttttttttttttttt

[Captainant 28392]

whenever a wealthy person takes out a loan against assets with unrealized gains to extract value without paying taxes... they should pay taxes on that. This buy-borrow-die loop is only possible when you have enough capital to buy a huge asset like a business. They they borrow against the value of that company and get great rates because the underlying company is valuable - so rather than drawing a salary from the business, they "work for free" but still pull down huge liquidity. And then eventually they die, and use all the punch-outs in the estate tax code that trump made to pass those assets onto the next generation with no strings attached.

Nice 2 minute explainer video in the spoiler if you'd care to watch it

Spoiler

 

Since you took the time to write something up, it'd be rude not to reply to each point

1) a sales tax is an inherently regressive tax, and should NOT be used as a primary revenue generating source. It will adversely impact the poor and consume an even larger percentage of their wealth comparative to the ultra-wealthy.

2) More tariffs always work out great. They worked out great the last time we tried them right? Since trade wars are so easy to win and all.

3) Agree on the fuel tax increase, it hasn't changed in decades

4) We should increase taxes on investment real estate, not homesteads. If you're the owner and it's your primary residence, such a tax would again only serve to benefit the large non-residential entities that are already fucking the real estate market for individual owners.

5) Agree on a global corporate taxation structure. It's asinine to let corporations HQ'd in the US run roughshod over our government just because they can open an office in ireland or another tax haven nation.

 

Spending is different for nation states that it is for individuals. The government's role in spending is to stimulate the economy and to increase monetary supply. It's necessary for a healthy economy, and helps to keep the balance of power in favor of we the people, rather than they the shareholders. 

You should really consider the macro effects of the policies you prefer, since they'll only contribute to keeping the poor poor, and the wealthy wealthy.

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1312]

I could be wrong here, but I believe one of the primary ways the billionaire class avoids paying taxes is by spending a lot of money buying votes and persuading poor voters with propaganda to not support policies that increase taxes on them. You can't beat a simple tax code by being smart. You either cheat the code or pay the people writing the code to loophole yourself out of it.

[tantric superman 4668]

The planet is burning and puppies are being eaten and you bitches are focused on taxes?

[Incredulity 11861]

2 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

The planet is burning and puppies are being eaten and you bitches are focused on taxes?

I’m sure I have been told “fair share” solves all problem.  No?

[formermav43 4607]

22 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

The planet is burning and puppies are being eaten and you bitches are focused on taxes?

A dog is a fine meal.

[sheeeit 129]

6 minutes ago, landman said:

So everyone's property taxes go up (or their rent if they lease), everyone pays more at the gas station, and everyone pays a federal sales tax.  And everyone pays more for consumer goods because prices will go up due to the import tax.

Sounds like a plan.

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Captainant said:

whenever a wealthy person takes out a loan against assets with unrealized gains to extract value without paying taxes... they should pay taxes on that. This buy-borrow-die loop is only possible when you have enough capital to buy a huge asset like a business. They they borrow against the value of that company and get great rates because the underlying company is valuable - so rather than drawing a salary from the business, they "work for free" but still pull down huge liquidity. And then eventually they die, and use all the punch-outs in the estate tax code that trump made to pass those assets onto the next generation with no strings attached.

Nice 2 minute explainer video in the spoiler if you'd care to watch it

  Hide contents

 

Since you took the time to write something up, it'd be rude not to reply to each point

1) a sales tax is an inherently regressive tax, and should NOT be used as a primary revenue generating source. It will adversely impact the poor and consume an even larger percentage of their wealth comparative to the ultra-wealthy.

2) More tariffs always work out great. They worked out great the last time we tried them right? Since trade wars are so easy to win and all.

3) Agree on the fuel tax increase, it hasn't changed in decades

4) We should increase taxes on investment real estate, not homesteads. If you're the owner and it's your primary residence, such a tax would again only serve to benefit the large non-residential entities that are already fucking the real estate market for individual owners.

5) Agree on a global corporate taxation structure. It's asinine to let corporations HQ'd in the US run roughshod over our government just because they can open an office in ireland or another tax haven nation.

 

Spending is different for nation states that it is for individuals. The government's role in spending is to stimulate the economy and to increase monetary supply. It's necessary for a healthy economy, and helps to keep the balance of power in favor of we the people, rather than they the shareholders. 

You should really consider the macro effects of the policies you prefer, since they'll only contribute to keeping the poor poor, and the wealthy wealthy.

On the buy, borrow, die stuff you are talking about a tiny group of people but it really is just a tax delay and not an avoidance.  Eventually those loans are going to come due.  The loans don't magically disappear when they die.  At some point assets will have to be sold and, as a result, income generated to pay back the loans and that income will be fully taxed.  But this is just an example of how the super rich are always going to be smarter than the tax laws designed to target them.  

1) Sales Tax- I think you missed the big picture and missed/ignored the part of the proposal where the lower income folks get a tax refund equal to or greater than the amount they paid.  Define poor wherever you want.  $50K?  $75K?  People under that threshold pay ZERO under this plan.  

But the bigger picture is the trillions of dollars spent currently by corporate entities.  If XYZ Corp racks up $5M in legal fees a year, those fees are currently deducted from XYZ's earnings which lowers their tax burden.  However, under this plan that $5M in fees actually generates $100K in tax revenue.  That is not, at all, making the rich richer and the poor poorer.  Magnify this on every financial transaction.

2) Imports- This is not a "trade war".  This is a cost to do business in the US and it applies equally to every single country that does business here.  Like I said, if other countries do the same thing to us then so be it.  We currently have big trade deficits so this is a win for the country.  It's only 2%.  Perhaps it will bring some businesses back to the US.  

3)OK

4) Real Estate- I'm actually not sure what you mean by "such a tax would again only serve to benefit the large non-residential entities that are already fucking the real estate market for individual owners."  If you could explain I will respond.  But homesteads have to be included.  Maybe exempt the first $150K.  In that scenario a home worth $300K would pay a whopping $375/year.  

5) OK

I really disagree with your last statement.  It is a much more complex issue and will never be adequately debated on here.  The Fed has many ways to stimulate the economy other than buying treasuries.  Many economists agree that in the long term, the effect of those purchases are negative. 

[TwiceHorn 31989]

51 minutes ago, Captainant said:

whenever a wealthy person takes out a loan against assets with unrealized gains to extract value without paying taxes... they should pay taxes on that. This buy-borrow-die loop is only possible when you have enough capital to buy a huge asset like a business. They they borrow against the value of that company and get great rates because the underlying company is valuable - so rather than drawing a salary from the business, they "work for free" but still pull down huge liquidity. And then eventually they die, and use all the punch-outs in the estate tax code that trump made to pass those assets onto the next generation with no strings attached.

Nice 2 minute explainer video in the spoiler if you'd care to watch it

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Since you took the time to write something up, it'd be rude not to reply to each point

1) a sales tax is an inherently regressive tax, and should NOT be used as a primary revenue generating source. It will adversely impact the poor and consume an even larger percentage of their wealth comparative to the ultra-wealthy.

2) More tariffs always work out great. They worked out great the last time we tried them right? Since trade wars are so easy to win and all.

3) Agree on the fuel tax increase, it hasn't changed in decades

4) We should increase taxes on investment real estate, not homesteads. If you're the owner and it's your primary residence, such a tax would again only serve to benefit the large non-residential entities that are already fucking the real estate market for individual owners.

5) Agree on a global corporate taxation structure. It's asinine to let corporations HQ'd in the US run roughshod over our government just because they can open an office in ireland or another tax haven nation.

 

Spending is different for nation states that it is for individuals. The government's role in spending is to stimulate the economy and to increase monetary supply. It's necessary for a healthy economy, and helps to keep the balance of power in favor of we the people, rather than they the shareholders. 

You should really consider the macro effects of the policies you prefer, since they'll only contribute to keeping the poor poor, and the wealthy wealthy.

Actually, all of those proposed taxes are regressive as hell.

[Incredulity 11861]

I find it telling that there is zero discussion for higher rates for  brackets higher than normal max rates.

They can take it all from the top 1% and it isn’t enough.

Leftist Simp: FaIR SHarE!!! TOap rATeS weRE 90%!’ EisENhoWer!!11!!

 

 

[Captainant 28392]

4 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

I find it telling that there is zero discussion for higher rates for  brackets higher than normal max rates.

They can take it all from the top 1% and it isn’t enough.

Leftist Simp: FaIR SHarE!!! TOap rATeS weRE 90%!’ EisENhoWer!!11!!

tell me you don't understand how the wealthy avoid taxes without telling me you don't understand how the wealthy avoid taxes

[Incredulity 11861]

3 minutes ago, Captainant said:

tell me you don't understand how the wealthy avoid taxes without telling me you don't understand how the wealthy avoid taxes

The “wealthy” don’t take loans against stock to avoid taxes.  That’s a .0001% strategy.  Of course from the teachers lounge I am sure its hard to discern 

[Brisketexan 106629]

12 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Actually, all of those proposed taxes are regressive as hell.

This.  Asking the simple question of "who, ultimately, will pay for them?" tells you that.

Import tax?  Cool.  The ultimate consumer (Joe and Jane America) pay that.  Property tax?  Everyone who resides in a property -- rent or own - ultimately pay that.   Sales tax?  Everyone pays that, and even with the "exempt the first $50k of income" approach, it falls heaviest on people who need to/typically spend most of their annual available cash on consumer spending (that is, most people who make under $500k or something like that).  Person makes $500k, spends $400k, they get "sales taxed" on $350k, so 70% of their income.  Guy with $100 million in assets uses the assets to give him $2 million in liquidity, but only spends $800k on consumption (the rest is spent on acquisitions of more assets, like real property and stock), gets taxed on $750k of his income -- 37.5% of his income.  We can keep going, but the bottom line is that pretty much everything listed is a regressive tax.

[fattyflattie 4640]

Still don’t understand why we can’t all be taxed the same. You’re rich, great, pay xx%. Middle class, awesome, pay xx%.  You’re poor, sucks, pay xx%.  

[immamac 44200]

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

whenever a wealthy person takes out a loan against assets with unrealized gains to extract value without paying taxes... they should pay taxes on that. This buy-borrow-die loop is only possible when you have enough capital to buy a huge asset like a business. They they borrow against the value of that company and get great rates because the underlying company is valuable - so rather than drawing a salary from the business, they "work for free" but still pull down huge liquidity. And then eventually they die, and use all the punch-outs in the estate tax code that trump made to pass those assets onto the next generation with no strings attached.

Nice 2 minute explainer video in the spoiler if you'd care to watch it

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Since you took the time to write something up, it'd be rude not to reply to each point

1) a sales tax is an inherently regressive tax, and should NOT be used as a primary revenue generating source. It will adversely impact the poor and consume an even larger percentage of their wealth comparative to the ultra-wealthy.

2) More tariffs always work out great. They worked out great the last time we tried them right? Since trade wars are so easy to win and all.

3) Agree on the fuel tax increase, it hasn't changed in decades

4) We should increase taxes on investment real estate, not homesteads. If you're the owner and it's your primary residence, such a tax would again only serve to benefit the large non-residential entities that are already fucking the real estate market for individual owners.

5) Agree on a global corporate taxation structure. It's asinine to let corporations HQ'd in the US run roughshod over our government just because they can open an office in ireland or another tax haven nation.

 

Spending is different for nation states that it is for individuals. The government's role in spending is to stimulate the economy and to increase monetary supply. It's necessary for a healthy economy, and helps to keep the balance of power in favor of we the people, rather than they the shareholders. 

You should really consider the macro effects of the policies you prefer, since they'll only contribute to keeping the poor poor, and the wealthy wealthy.

This is a strong post. You absolutely should pay taxes on any leverage against unrealized gains (even margin). If it just stays purely unrealized then it should not be taxed.

[Incredulity 11861]

21 minutes ago, immamac said:

This is a strong post. You absolutely should pay taxes on any leverage against unrealized gains (even margin). If it just stays purely unrealized then it should not be taxed.

So tax homeowners who refinance to remove PMI?

[SydneyCarton 49328]

How the fuck are the “poor” people going to get their refund if you’re taxing everything? They saving every receipt for every purchase o which they paid a sales tax and submitting that shit to the IRS to get their max refund? Seems super realistic. 

[SydneyCarton 49328]

4 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

So tax homeowners who refinance to remove PMI?

Why not? It happens automatically. That literally just happened to me when I refinanced during covid. It required a new appraisal of my home. Guess what it had appreciated. So my taxes will go up. Fuck, theoretically it happens every year anyway when they try to raise everyone’s Property taxes. It’s literally how the system is already designed to work. 

Edited November 2, 2021 by SydneyCarton

[Incredulity 11861]

10 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Why not? It happens automatically. That literally just happened to me when I refinanced during covid. It required a new appraisal of my home. Guess what it had appreciated. So my taxes will go up. Fuck, theoretically it happens every year anyway when they try to raise everyone’s Property taxes. It’s literally how the system is already designed to work. 

Property taxes vs. income taxes.  How do they work?

[SydneyCarton 49328]

5 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Property taxes vs. income taxes.  How do they work?

Lol. You said “Tax people who refinance.” And I pointed out that when I refinanced to get rid of PMI, I got fucking taxed. Way to move the goalposts. Reading and writing, how do they work?

the mechanism for taxing people who refinance, or have a home and have unrealized gains exists and has been working for literally decades and decades, every year. So what’s your fucking point? 

Edited November 2, 2021 by SydneyCarton

[Beau Vine 55824]

1 hour ago, sheeeit said:

2) Imports- This is not a "trade war".  This is a cost to do business in the US and it applies equally to every single country that does business here.  Like I said, if other countries do the same thing to us then so be it.  We currently have big trade deficits so this is a win for the country.  It's only 2%.  Perhaps it will bring some businesses back to the US. 

?!?!?!??!?!?

No offense, but you seem to have never taken an economics class.

[Incredulity 11861]

7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Lol. You said “Tax people who refinance.” And I pointed out that when I refinanced to get rid of PMI, I got fucking taxed. Way to move the goalposts. Reading a Snd writing, how do they work?

the mechanism for taxing people who refinance, or have a home and have unrealized gains exists and has been working for literally decades and decades, every year. So what’s your fucking point? 

You got reassessment based on a valuation and paid more property tax. 

The comment I reacted to proposed income tax on financing of any unrealized gains.  

50 minutes ago, immamac said:

You absolutely should pay taxes on any leverage against unrealized gains

 

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by Incredulity

[immamac 44200]

3 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

You got reassessment based on a valuation and paid more property tax. 

The comment I reacted to proposed income tax on financing of any unrealized gains.  

 

 

Sure if your house went up more than 250k (per person up to 2) and you waited to refi more than 5 years and got cash out, why not? you don’t have to refi to get rid of PMI, you also aren’t in need of refinancing and leveraging your asset against its unrealized gains unless you do a cash out refi, you would actually be borrowing against the exact dollar amount you owed, which would by rule not have anything to do with the gain in value. That’s just a requirement for PMI, you arent mandated to borrowing 80% LTV with cash out. If it happens to be 80% or less LTV you just don’t have a PMI requirement. 
any other stupid “gotchas”? 

[SydneyCarton 49328]

9 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

You got reassessment based on a valuation and paid more property tax. 

The comment I reacted to proposed income tax on financing of any unrealized gains.  

 

 

Yes. And your fucking response to his comment was literally to cite property taxes as an outrageous example of how people would be taxed on unrealized gains…despite the fact that that’s literally what happens and has happened for decades. You brought home refinancing into this conversation dude, not me. Admit it was a stupid mistake or own it. 

The greater point is that methods do exist for taxing unrealized gains. It isnt outrageous to suggest a model for forcing people to pay taxes on unrealized assets, particularly if they’re using the valuation to get a line of credit. We sent a man to the moon. I think we can probably make our tax code more fair. About 30 other western based countries seem to have methods every different than the US and they aren’t all Thunderdome. 
 

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by SydneyCarton

[Incredulity 11861]

7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Yes. And your fucking response to his comment was literally to cite property taxes as an outrageous example of how people would be taxed on unrealized gain

Nope. imma proposed income tax on said financing.  

[Bookman 4754]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Still don’t understand why we can’t all be taxed the same. You’re rich, great, pay xx%. Middle class, awesome, pay xx%.  You’re poor, sucks, pay xx%.  

xx% of what? Income? Good luck defining income.

[SydneyCarton 49328]

4 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Nope. imma proposed income tax on said financing.  

Wrong.  Now you’re flat out lying. You got specific. In consecutive posts:

 

1 hour ago, immamac said:

This is a strong post. You absolutely should pay taxes on any leverage against unrealized gains (even margin). If it just stays purely unrealized then it should not be taxed.

 

49 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

So tax homeowners who refinance to remove PMI?

that’s your response. And to answer that question, yes homeowners who refinance to eliminate PMI are already taxed. 

Edited November 2, 2021 by SydneyCarton

[Incredulity 11861]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Wrong.  Now you’re flat out lying. You got specific. In consecutive posts:

 

 

that’s your response. And to answer that question, yes homeowners who refinance to eliminate PMI are already taxed. 

those aren’t my consecutive posts

Lol.

you literally don’t understand the difference between income taxes and property taxes.

Edited November 2, 2021 by Incredulity

[staboner 5067]

i think we need to drive the conversation up to the core issue here - we live in a society where we reward havingmoney more than work. start there and maybe stop with just tax rates as the starting point. too much division and really its an imcomplete conversation anyway.

but whatever the money side ain't going to listen. we're fooked

[Guest]

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Still don’t understand why we can’t all be taxed the same. You’re rich, great, pay xx%. Middle class, awesome, pay xx%.  You’re poor, sucks, pay xx%.  

It's not about equality/ equity.

 It's about justice, dummy...

[fattyflattie 4640]

3 minutes ago, Bookman said:

xx% of what? Income? Good luck defining income.

Yes. Cap it at 10m salary or whatever if you have to and do something different for the 1000 people that have more you’re trying to get after.  No reason for the middle class to be the only people actually paying income tax. 

[staboner 5067]

1 minute ago, slorch said:

It's not about equality/ equity.

 It's about justice, dummy...

re: economic inequality - how do we know when its too far/uneven?

if we rewarded people for investing capital - versus penalizing them for having capital (i.e. taxes / wealth tax) - would that change the behavior of the uber wealthy today? the way i see it - no, it wouldn't. thus the society we live in is to unbalanced. my two cents. 

[Anastasis 23699]

Taxation is violence. 

[SydneyCarton 49328]

1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

those aren’t my consecutive posts

Lol.

you literally don’t understand the difference between income taxes and property taxes.

I didnt say they were your consecutive posts. I said they were consecutive posts. Specifically immamacs and then your direct response. 
 

I understand the difference. The point is that you inferred income tax, then you cited PROPERTY TAXES, and then you’re trying to pivot back to income taxes. You’re the guy who brought it all up. Accusing me of not understanding the difference between the two when you’re the guy who brought up both. For fucks sake. 

[wildcat09 29559]

Incredulitied and Slorch'd already. That might be a record for a taxes thread.

[High Plains Drifter 11162]

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Yes. Cap it at 10m salary or whatever if you have to and do something different for the 1000 people that have more you’re trying to get after.  No reason for the middle class to be the only people actually paying income tax. 

 

you are advocating a flat tax on income. If we were to do that, and keep it revenue neutral, the poors taxes go up, everybody else's go down. It doesn't get more regressive than that.

All the fees we pay (DL renewal, park entrance fees, whatever) plus sales taxes are already heavily regressive. A flat income tax would shift the tax burden even more to the poor than it already is.

 

 

[jimmyjazz 46979]

Anybody know how much total "personal wealth" exists in the US?

[elfenix 34658]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

Anybody know how much total "personal wealth" exists in the US?

U.S. household net worth jumps to record $142 trillion

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u-s-household-net-worth-jumps-to-record-142-trillion-11632417142

[Bookman 4754]

12 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Yes. Cap it at 10m salary or whatever if you have to and do something different for the 1000 people that have more you’re trying to get after.  No reason for the middle class to be the only people actually paying income tax. 

Yes, because everyone has a salary.

[Incredulity 11861]

8 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I didnt say they were your consecutive posts. I said they were consecutive posts. Specifically immamacs and then your direct response. 
 

I understand the difference. The point is that you inferred income tax, then you cited PROPERTY TAXES, and then you’re trying to pivot back to income taxes. You’re the guy who brought it all up. Accusing me of not understanding the difference between the two when you’re the guy who brought up both. For fucks sake. 

Please explain how you paid income tax on your refinancing.

[jimmyjazz 46979]

3 minutes ago, elfenix said:

U.S. household net worth jumps to record $142 trillion

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/u-s-household-net-worth-jumps-to-record-142-trillion-11632417142

OK, so if we look at current federal tax revenue ($3.86T), that says a flat net worth tax of 2.7% would suffice.

It's a horribly simplistic idea, but . . . jeez.

[Incredulity 11861]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

OK, so if we look at current federal tax revenue ($3.86T), that says a flat net worth tax of 2.7% would suffice.

It's a horribly simplistic idea, but . . . jeez.

Great, repeal all other taxes and lets party.

 

narrator:  they won’t 

Edited November 2, 2021 by Incredulity

[SydneyCarton 49328]

1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

Please explain how you paid income tax on your refinancing.

The only person who ever said income tax was you, dude. The only person who every brought up property taxes was also you. You brought up property taxes and people having to pay taxes when refinancing. I pointed out that a mechanism exists and has existed whereby people who refinance have to pay more in taxes. I never specified it was income tax. I said people who refinance have to pay more in taxes if their home has appreciated. Period. I’m sorry you’re reading comprehension on this thread is shitty. 

[jimmyjazz 46979]

4 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Great, repeal all other taxes and lets party.

The first argument against would be the fact that most Americans' "wealth" is in real estate, so a Federal tax bill likely exceeding current (county/state) property tax bills wouldn't be a net gain for a lot of Americans.  There's nothing that says a wealth tax code couldn't be progressive in nature, though.

Edited November 2, 2021 by jimmyjazz

[Incredulity 11861]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

The only person who ever said income tax was you, dude. The only person who every brought up property taxes was also you. You brought up property taxes and people having to pay taxes when refinancing. I pointed out that a mechanism exists and has existed whereby people who refinance have to pay more in taxes. I never specified it was income tax. I said people who refinance have to pay more in taxes if their home has appreciated. Period. I’m sorry you’re reading comprehension on this thread is shitty. 

Laughable.

Imma said “tax leverage on unrealized gains”

what kind of tax would that be?  Hint: it isn’t property tax.

 

 

[Incredulity 11861]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

The first argument against would be the fact that most Americans' "wealth" is in real estate, so a Federal tax bill likely exceeding current (county/state) property tax bills wouldn't be a net gain for a lot of Americans.  There's nothing that says a wealth tax code couldn't be progressive in nature, though.

Great, repeal all other taxes and let’s party.

 

narrator: they are already talking themselves out of their solution.

[SydneyCarton 49328]

3 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Laughable.

Imma said “tax leverage on unrealized gains”

what kind of tax would that be?  Hint: it isn’t property tax.

 

 

Are you trying to say that every year property taxes on homes don’t increase based upon a government appraisal, which (unless they fight it) homeowners have to then pay despite the fact that they don’t sell their homes and those gains are therefore unrealized? Is that your stance? 
 

and remember, you were the guy who after reading immamac’s post offered up as an example people refinancing their homes to remove PMI. Fucking Laughable indeed. 

Edited November 2, 2021 by SydneyCarton

[jimmyjazz 46979]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Are you trying to say that every year property taxes on homes don’t increase based upon a government appraisal, which (unless they fight it) homeowners have to then pay despite the fact that they don’t sell their homes and those gains are therefore unrealized? Is that your stance? 

I'm starting to wonder if Incredulity has ever owned a home.