If they donate the wealth to their own foundation to continue to hold close and control, it doesn't get taxed. If they borrow against the wealth at low interest rates until they die and the basis is stepped up ("buy, borrow, die"), it doesn't get taxed. Certainly, deferment is a component, but there are obvious examples of the very wealthy operating in a manner to avoid taxes entirely when they're able to (realizing the benefit of the wealth without having to realize a taxable event). Trust stacking is a recent fad as well, although I don't have enough data to say whether it is a material concern from a tax revenue perspective.

Silicon Valley Is Obsessed with 'Trust Stacking,' and the IRS Doesn't Like It - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48727963 - June 2026

▲

Schiendelman 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The cases you're talking about are all delaying taxation, not eliminating it. Eventually someone has to draw that wealth - the foundation has to spend for public benefit to be eligible for 501(c)3 status, for instance.

▲

toomuchtodo 3 hours ago | parent [-]

How Elon Musk's secretive foundation hands out his billions - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/23/how-elon-... - January 23rd, 2019

"Spending for the public benefit" has a lot of latitude.

▲

saghm 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I also don't think they addressed how borrowing against the wealth doesn't require any immediate taxes (and is often low interest, given how being a billionare means you get more favorable terms). There's nothing stopping someone in that position from just deferring taxes on the money they currently have, borrowing against it, and then investing that to turn into more money with taxes deferred even further so that they can use the proceeds to pay the previous deferred taxes and keep the difference.

▲

Schiendelman 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That requires their investments to keep going up in value. That doesn't last forever, the assets that people borrow against eventually need to be sold to pay back that loan. When they sell to make payments, those are taxable events.

	▲	saghm 18 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		If investments didn't grow at a faster rate than interest, why would anyone ever invest money at all instead of putting into a savings account? I don't know why it''s hard to imagine that a large loan with a relatively low interest rate might be able to be invested for more than enough profits to pay off the taxes and the loan with some to spare
	▲	jagged-chisel an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		How does it work if the loan defaults and those assets were used as collateral?

▲

Schiendelman 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If any significant part of that article is true, I see self dealing that would already be against IRS code. It's just a matter of enforcement. We often already have the laws to solve the problems we identify.