Comment by andrepd
18 days ago
Have you considered taking a measly 20 seconds out of your day—surely a fraction of the time you took to type this comment—to google this information?
Another point: have you considered that the authorities and people of the Netherlands, a very rich country with several valuable companies, may have possibly thought of this absolutely trivial argument when designing their tax code? Do you really think nobody thought of it?
Jesus
---
To your point: stakes in your _own_ company are not taxed as assets, but as income, precisely to avoid the ridiculous situation you point out.
Simply put: your retirement savings, your brokerage account = assets, your startup, your company, your farm = income.
> To your point: stakes in your _own_ company are not taxed as assets, but as income, precisely to avoid the ridiculous situation you point out.
Enlightening, so you mean this policy isn't for the so called "1%"? Only for middle class folks and their stock portfolios? That's not what the GP was proposing.
> Another point: have you considered that the authorities and people of the Netherlands, a very rich country with several valuable companies, may have possibly thought of this absolutely trivial argument when designing their tax code? Do you really think nobody thought of it?
Yes, because I can point to an even richer country, with even more valuable companies where the left proposed same destructive policy only a few months ago and almost came close to winning.
Lastly, you did make me look it up and it seems Netherlands and other European countries really didn't think it through.
https://www.leideninternationalcentre.nl/get-advice/blogs/su...
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jasoncalacanis_norways-wealth...
> so you mean this policy isn't for the so called "1%"? Only for middle class folks and their stock portfolios?
What do you mean? This is a proportional tax (slightly progressive actually due to the 0% rate on the first bracket). It's for everyone with such assets.
> where the left proposed same destructive policy only a few months ago and almost came close to winning.
If you think either of the major parties in the USA can be in any way described as "left" then this is not a serious conversation.
> the wealth tax was based on assumed returns rather than actual returns
That does sound poorly thought thru. Why not just calculate it instead of "assumed returns"? Seems unfair on its face and bound to go wrong.