Soldato
The same *percentage*.
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
The same *percentage*.
Nah.. they should probably pay a higher percentage and certainly in the US and the UK they do.
Top federal rate of income tax in the US which Musk and Bezos are subject to is 37% and for dividends and capital gains the top rate is 20% for each AFAIK.
Musk lives in Texas these days and Bezos lives in Washington AFAIK so neither of them have a local/state income tax. Musk used to live in California however which certainly did have one.
Case in point, some hack always comes to their defence "BuT tHey paY SaME rAtE aS eVeRyOne".
They spend money by borrowing against assets, therefore paying no tax in the process yet benefiting from the unrealised gains without having a taxable event. The scheme is so famous it has a name (Buy Borrow Die).
https://www.wsj.com/articles/buy-bo...icans-live-off-their-paper-wealth-11625909583
https://gould.usc.edu/about/news/?id=4887
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-59687946
But please, do go ahead and defend tax practices of billionaires.
When have you ever paid tax on a loan? Why shouldn't they be allowed to take out a loan?
Also, that's clearly not the case, Musk literally paid billions in tax just recently after exercising stock options. It's up to him if he wants to live in some modular home in Texas right now.
Commissario
IIRC back in the 70's and early 80's the top rate for tax in the US hit something like 70% once you went over something like a million a year.
And this was back before a lot a lot of the current loopholes and exclusions were in place.
Something a lot of people in the US seem to be unware of, is that higher taxes for the "super rich" used to be something that both Democrats and Republican parties tended to agree on, the same with a lot of what the current Republican party like to call "radical left" policies (it's slightly telling that a lot of what used to be considered very hardline Republicans in the 00's are now considered "Rino's" by a lot of the current Republican hardliners).
Because they're doing it to avoid paying taxes. And if a loan is benefited/enabled by capital gains, it should be a taxable event as those gains are no longer unrealised, but the tax systems would still consider them unrealised.
And both the UK and the US don't have CGT at the time of estate probate, it's all written off and assets get a new base value of the market rate at the time of death. Hence the "die" part in "buy, borrow, die".
They don't pay themselves a salary, their assets go up in value. They don't sell so they never realise the gains. They borrow against their assets to fund their lifestyle. They die. There's no CGT at the time of estate probate, they pay off the loan with sale of assets and no taxes paid. The children don't sell the rest of the assets, so no IHT tax, they borrow against it, they spend, they die, keep going. No taxes paid. Not a single penny.
Sounds like you're in favour of this.
Likely because no bank would lend that much to him, given that most of his gains came very recent.
No, they're still unrealised. Likewise, you can borrow against your house, re-mortgage etc.. if you want to. That's hardly unique to billionaires.
Erm... sorry but can you back up that bit - how is there no IHT due just because the asset (in this case a massive shareholding in some public companies) isn't sold?
If you think that is how it works in the UK then you're simply wrong and I'd be very surprised if the system in the US worked that way.
Now you're just making things up - no bank would lend to the richest man in the world? WTF are you smoking...You're telling me that he's using loans to avoid taxes and now you're claiming he can't get a loan - at least try to be consistent here.
Oh yeah because I can remortgage my house to transfer money from my business to my pocket without paying taxes. Oh wait I can't.
You're right about UK IHT. In the US you do not pay estate tax (their version of our IHT) on inherited stocks at the time of probate if they are wrapped in a GRAT.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/grat.asp
In both the UK And the US, stocks values are rebased at the time of death, i.e. no CGT on gains from purchase until death. It's called "Basis Step Up" in US tax law. If the recipient never sells and leaves it for future generations, they can go indefinitely without paying any CGT while borrowing against it to spend.
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/131/Step-Up-Basis-2014.pdf
https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/guidance/capital-gains-tax-issues-on-death
You're telling me that he's using loans to avoid taxes and now you're claiming he can't get a loan - at least try to be consistent here.
At this point you're being willingly obtuse. I said lend "that much", he needed tens of billions, not a few millions. Bill Gates sold a lot of his Microsoft shares to diversify his wealth. You yourself are claiming he can get a loan, then why sell? Either he's stupid or he couldn't get a loan of that amount. It's so simple.
Eh? Your house is the asset stop being a lunatic - what do you think happens when you remortgage your house? You get money in your pocket...
See now you've just moved the goalposts and introduced trusts...
I think you're being obtuse here tbh... why shouldn't Bill Gates sell his shares to diversify? Why should you assume a massive loan is desirable for anything and everything?
Yeah I'm the lunatic as opposed to the newest member of the proud billionaire defence league.
Oh yeah and there's trusts too, as if they have no relevance to how billionaires evade taxes. There's also moving assets to tax heavens, which I expect you're going to deny even exist, or maybe, you can claim anyone can do it! Even you! And I'm the lunatic. Lol.
No, you're just being unhinged re: your replies. No one is denying the existence of tax havens the points being discussed were capital gainst tax and income tax.
No. For pages and pages the discussion was about them not paying their fair share of taxes. You came to the defence of billionaires when you reduced the entire discussion to "billionaires pay the same income and capital gains tax" and spent multiple replies basically arguing "you can also do what they do" then when called out on it, want to take it back to your own reduction as if that's was the entire discussion.
Running apologetics tours for tax practices of billionaires is just pathetic.
And weirdly during this period of high tax the average person saw quality of life go through the roof in comparison to todays person. And billionaires still got to be insanely wealthy and lived well rewarded lives.
Some people love to lick boots. It makes them feel better about their lot in life.
More unhinged nonsense I see, you can't seem to address the points or follow a conversation. The points I addressed were about income and capital gains.
Try addressing what I've actually said instead of having a general schizo rant at "You came to the defence of billionaires" etc...
Yeah. Either worshipping their daddy Elon or just delusional about their own chances of becoming billionaires that they rush to defend them at any chance.
What you said was already addressed in my reply to your nonsensical posts, with articles from WSJ and BBC explaining the scheme that billionaires run to evade taxes. And your obsession with two specific taxes being the end-all and be-all of all discussion of taxation for billionaires shows whose boots you want to lick. Enjoy ******* to a poster of daddy Elon.
This is just more unhinged nonsense... balh blah boot licker blah blah daddy Elon etc..
You don't have anything coherent to say you just rant.
Read the WSJ article. Oh wait, daddy Elon paid his income tax. So all is good. My bad.
Which WSJ article and in relation to what point in particular? You're just going off on one and you're barely coherent here.
No friend, you're dodging like Neo from the Matrix because you know you goofed up about all of this. Time to step away from the keyboard.
Peace out.
- Status