Remix clone Hacker News

>Tax wealth somehow

I don't unserstand how you can tax something that varies in value by double digit percentages every week. If Elon got taxed when TSLA was $450 per share, and six months later it's now $250 per share... How much should he be taxed? Should he be provided a tax refund?

▲

feoren 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

We have computers in our pockets that can perform trillions of calculations per second; we have social media sites capturing terabytes or petabytes of data per second; we have LLMs with trillions of parameters. So it boggles my mind to see someone say "we can't tax wealth, that'd be too complicated! We'd have to do dozens of calculations per year!"

You're imagining taxes as being one big annual chunk, but it doesn't have to be that way. It could be more like sales tax: baked directly into how these financial instruments work. You're also imagining taxes as computationally difficult, but they're absolute baby math compared to something like rendering a single 3D frame -- they're only artificially difficult for people because Intuit lobbies to keep it that way.

People get infinitely creative with financial instruments like collateralized debt obligations over mortgage-backed securities, but as soon as we suggest taxing wealth people throw up their hands and go "there's no possible way to do it!"

▲

anonfordays 4 days ago | parent [-]

>We have computers in our pockets that can perform trillions of calculations per second; we have social media sites capturing terabytes or petabytes of data per second; we have LLMs with trillions of parameters. So it boggles my mind to see someone say "we can't tax wealth, that'd be too complicated! We'd have to do dozens of calculations per year!"

No one is saying that it's "too complicated" to calculate someone's net wealth in basic securities. I did not make that claim. This is a poor strawman.

>You're imagining taxes as being one big annual chunk

No I'm not, you're talking to someone who pays taxes quarterly.

>It could be more like sales tax: baked directly into how these financial instruments work.

We already have that via capital gains and income taxes.

>You're also imagining taxes as computationally difficult, but they're absolute baby math compared to something like rendering a single 3D frame -- they're only artificially difficult for people because Intuit lobbies to keep it that way.

Again, I am not making that claim neither is anyone else. All the computation in the world doesn't solve for something that is inherently illogical.

>People get infinitely creative with financial instruments like collateralized debt obligations over mortgage-backed securities

These securities are logical to understand.

>but as soon as we suggest taxing wealth people throw up their hands and go "there's no possible way to do it!"

Again, do you get a tax refund if your tax liability went down due to depreciation? How do you levy wealth taxes on assets such as private businesses and ventures that do not have a clear appraisal value, or one at all? Most countries that levied wealth taxes has discarded them due to these difficulties, ones that compute can't solve.

▲

aceazzameen 4 days ago | parent [-]

Why don't you help brainstorm ideas instead of being dismissive? There is no right answer right now. Clearly in order for society to move forward in a healthy way, single individuals cannot amass wealth/power that is a millennia ahead of everyone else. The goal isn't to say you can't be wealthy. The goal is wealth/power cannot be obscenely beyond everyone else. These few individuals have more power than governments. This is a complex issue that requires a complex solution. There is no easy answer.

What's the threshold for obscene? That's an easy one, but still requires discussion.

Should a % of assets be frozen and redistributed after that threshold is reached?

Should we Logan's Run the top 10 richest and let the market adjust around that?

There's going to be some preposterous ideas! The answer won't be as simple as raise taxes. Regardless, these discussions need to take place so a good solution for the world can coalesce.

▲

SecretDreams 3 days ago | parent [-]

The OP just wants your hands off their money. They know it's a problem. It's not one they want solved. They probably also think they genuinely accumulated their wealth strictly from their own skillset with no external factors contributing to it.

▲

aceazzameen 3 days ago | parent [-]

Do they think they're a 100-billionaire too? Life goals I guess.

	▲	SecretDreams 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Maybe it's Elon. He's got a lot of spare time.

▲

SecretDreams 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

He can't eat with his shares. He can use them as collateral for debt. Presently, that's how he dodges taxes. You'd close that loophole.

▲

robertlagrant 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

> He can't eat with his shares. He can use them as collateral for debt. Presently, that's how he dodges taxes. You'd close that loophole.

You also don't get taxed on your debts, e.g. a mortgage. You pay interest on your debt instead.

▲

anonfordays 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

>He can't eat with his shares.

You can't eat with your brokerage account either, what is the point?

>He can use them as collateral for debt.

Yes, you can use your brokerage account, house, etc. as collateral for loans, this is not new or unique.

>Presently, that's how he dodges taxes.

What does this even mean? Loans are not taxable as you have to pay them back.

>You'd close that loophole.

That's not a tax... This is what happens when you get your financial understanding from reddit comments.

▲

vaidhy 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

The dodgy part is what happens after someone dies. The stocks get a one-time relief from capital gains as it moves to the heir. This gives opportunity for the heirs (or the estate) to sell the stocks to pay back the loan. That is the loophole.

The key here is that you need enough wealth to keep borrowing for rest of your life without touching your principle.

▲

anonfordays 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Too late to edit my comment, but one other thing:

>The stocks get a one-time relief from capital gains as it moves to the heir. This gives opportunity for the heirs (or the estate) to sell the stocks to pay back the loan. That is the loophole.

Yes, this step-up in basis happens because the estate is charged estate tax. Charging capital gains AND estate tax doesn't make sense, estate tax is typically higher than capital gains tax.

This is a key piece a lot of people don't understand.

▲

SecretDreams 4 days ago | parent [-]

> Charging capital gains AND estate tax doesn't make sense, estate tax is typically higher than capital gains tax.

They should be multiplicative. Everyone is supposed to pay capital gains. And everyone is supposed to pay the estate tax. They're both percentage taxes. It's not supposed to be "pick one".

	▲	anonfordays 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		>They should be multiplicative. That doesn't make any sense. >Everyone is supposed to pay capital gains. Not true. You don't pay if you have capital losses, nor do you pay if you have capital gains in tax sheltered accounts, etc. >They're both percentage taxes. No one claimed otherwise. >It's not supposed to be "pick one". That's exactly how it is in many cases, even income taxes have been that way for decades (though SALT deduction now limited). Read up on double taxation and why it's typically avoided.

▲

SecretDreams 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>The key here is that you need enough wealth to keep borrowing for rest of your life without touching your principle.

Correct. The OP likely knows this. Or they're totally ignorant to it. The fact that they think joe blow can execute the aforementioned strategy is vexing.

	▲	anonfordays 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		>Correct. The OP likely knows this. Of course I know this. >The fact that they think joe blow can execute the aforementioned strategy is vexing. You don't understand the aforementioned strategy, nor do you understand wealth taxes vs estate taxes.

▲

anonfordays 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

>The stocks get a one-time relief from capital gains as it moves to the heir.

Yes, that estate/inheritance taxes need reworking. This is not a wealth tax as discussed, this is an estate/inheritance tax which is different.

>This gives opportunity for the heirs (or the estate) to sell the stocks to pay back the loan. That is the loophole.

The loans are made whole by the estate, no one is taxed on proceeds from a loan, nor should they be.

▲

SecretDreams 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

anonfordays 4 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

▲

SecretDreams 4 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

	▲	anonfordays 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		[flagged]

▲

dhc02 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Tax wealth above $100 million at ~90% upon death.

In other words, make all the money you want, get as rich as you want, but it goes back to the commons when you die and can't use it any more.

	▲	anonfordays 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		That is an estate/inheritance tax, not a wealth tax as discussed.

▲

BobbyJo 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You have to ask if that kind of volatility would exist in a system that taxes wealth.