taxing already existing wealth seems counter-productive and difficult to enforce in that standing wealth can be moved about and hidden - I'm sure there are many tricks available. By the time a wealth tax is implemented, all those who would be affected by it would have altered their assets so what's the sense in it?
I'm not buying into this revenue panacea by some.
I kid.
I agree with all of you. Also - Imagine the implementation nightmare of having to assess value of land and closely held businesses every year.
(no message)
(no message)
He was eventually shamed into paying the Massachusetts tax, but this is a great example of how the rich will act.
Link: HuffPo: John Kerry Saves $500,000 By Docking 76-Foot Luxury Yacht Out Of State
Take an evening stroll on a summer night along the row of super yachts moored at the Nantucket Boat Basin.
Americans aboard, wining and dining.
Cayman Islands on the back of the boat.
(no message)
Ha, you own 100,000 shares of E-toys. You’re a lousy billionaire. You owe us $30mm!
And then, before the guy can write a check, he’s worth zero.
There are a lot of problems with marking wealth to market. It can be very difficult. How much is that mansion in Greenwich really worth? How much is your “brand” worth (looking at you, DJT)?
It seems the current method of taxing people when they convert these assets to actual dollars is more intelligent. But, what do I know?
"How much is your brand worth?" Nominal when talking to the tax man...a peppercorn's worth of value. Millions when talking to potential buyers.
Which candidates if any are proposing cuts to our long-term liabilities?
Before we raise taxes, can we try cutting spending first?