← Back to context

Comment by sarchertech

6 months ago

It would be much better to tax the benefits of the unrealized gain that a person realizes.

It’s much easier to do because there is no disputing the assessment since the person implicitly agrees to the valuation. And it allows people to forgo realizing any benefit from the unrealized value at all to avoid taxation.

Say take x% of the top of the money lent to someone who uses their unrealized gain to secure a loan. Make the money paid count against any tax they owe if they sell the asset later.

"uses their unrealized gain to secure a loan" sounds impossible to define with enough precision that you could base taxes off of it.

  • Have you taken out a secured loan in the last year over x amount?

    Take the value of the asset assessed by the bank and the price paid for the asset to find the total value that is unrealized gain.

    Divide that by the total value to get percent of collateral that is unrealized gain. Multiply that by the loan value. Then multiply that by the tax percentage.

    All you need is for banks to report secured loans to the IRS and it’s easy.

    • Secured loans of that form are easy, sure.

      But if those skyrocket in price from tax, they'll be more subtle about convincing banks they're good for the money and pay a slightly higher rate for unsecured loans.

      Or maybe they'll just treat the asset securing the loan as having the pre-gains price. Get the bank to agree it's worth at least what you paid, with no further analysis.

      If you try to plug those loopholes you lose the "much easier to do because there is no disputing the assessment since the person implicitly agrees to the valuation" factor.

      3 replies →