Coming from someone who thinks we should tax the shit out of the 1%, this seems a bit misleading, to me. We are taxed on our income, not our net worth. Or am I wrong ? Is it different when you have more money than god?
The problem is the tax loopholes that are available for the wealthy. For example, Trump allowed a full tax deduction on purchasing a private jet. Like if you can afford to purchase a private jet, you don’t need that kind of tax deduction. There’s also a reason why many, if not all, wealthy people have a non-profit foundation. Many wealthy people also have a corporation, even though they don’t actually have a business. There are many of these tax loopholes that mostly the wealthy can take advantage of.
This is just not true. A corporation that's not an actual business - that loophole was closed in 1986. Be specific about your 'loopholes' and let's see if you're right.
Anybody can create an LLC. Ordinary income from a different source can then be funneled through the LLC to take advantage of tax deductions that a non-business entity do not have.
Creating non-profit organizations just to “donate” money to it and use that foundation to pay for personal luxury expenses with tax free money.
Having a $20 million tax liability credited when buying a private jet.
These sound like “loopholes” to me.
You don't need an LLC for that, you can do it on a Schedule C as a sole proprietor. You just broke your own argument on that one, since you said they are 'available for the wealthy' then you said 'anyone can do it', which is true. Nonprofits do not work that way. A private jet for 20 million does not create a 'tax liability' I'm not even sure what you mean by that. A tax liability is money you owe the government in taxes.
The fact that you think a sole proprietorship is similar to an LLC tells me you don’t know much about this topic. There are many reasons to have an LLC vs a SP. the biggest one is the ability to file as an SCorp to minimize self employment tax. Another reason is the anonymity. Sure anybody can create an LLC, but how many people making $50k or $100k per year is going to go through all that trouble and expense to save maybe $1k? Licensing fees, CPA, lawyers, registered agents, payroll, workers comp insurance, etc are costly. But I’m guessing you don’t know much about that.
Creating a non-profit organization is also very costly and not worth doing if you’re making $100k. However, a CEO making $20 million per year would absolutely benefit from it. They can “donate” millions to their foundation, by doing so not pay taxes on that, then use the foundation to pay for vacation homes, luxury cars, expensive art, etc that they’re going to spend on regardless but now they’re not paying taxes on that money.
And I said tax liability is credited by purchasing a jet. Reading is not hard.
These are just a few. There are hundreds of ways wealthy people evade paying taxes using tax codes that mostly the rich can benefit from. If you don’t know how Trump, Elon, Bezos, etc manages to pay less effective taxes than you, you’re defending the wrong people
Yeah, at 4.5% a year the government would take everything from everyone in a couple of decades. Makes no sense to think paying 4.5% of net worth in one year is somehow too little.
Mostly they need to get rid of the inheritance loopholes with trusts and whatnot. Everybody dies and if you force them to pay up then you don't end up with these ridiculous dynasties.
The wealthy often dodge taxes by not taking income directly. If a company pays you in stock that increases your net worth, but doesn't constitute income (it's an unrealized gain until you sell the stock, at which point you pay taxes on the proceeds). Additionally, rather than sell the stock, you can borrow against its value, thereby gaining cash without paying income tax.
Net worth isn't income. The only way net worth is really taxed is by property taxes. The real issue with these rich CEOs not paying taxes is that they can say their multibillion dollar businesses aren't profitable by just making a bunch of deductions. What Washington State does is pretty smart. They don't have a business income tax. Instead they have a gross receipts tax called a business & occupation tax. It's a much lower rate than the typical business tax in other states, but it can't really be deducted from besides a very small number of tax credits.
Yes. Billionaire bad coz they literally have an option of not earning salary so that they don't have to pay taxes.
They take low interest rate loan on the basis of their net worth for almost every expense.
I don't think networth SHOULD be taxed but there should be better way to tax everyone fairly
Even Buffet has spoken about it. https://youtu.be/zB1FXvYvcaI
Because no one would invest in the fucking stock market because you would be taxing people based upon money they haven't made, or you content to stick people who got fucking swindled by people like Bernie Madoff, Enron, and worldcom with a fucking tax bill for what their stock was worth before they realized they were being scammed
LOL. There's no difference between that and property taxes. People would still invest in the stock market, but they would be more cautious about it. This produces a healthier, more stable economy.
A promising idea is a value that can surpass the value of the rest of the company, so a small listed restaurant chain with an exceptional concept would have to close after the first year due to taxation.
The constitution allows the government to levy taxes on income, not assets. So any change in taxation classification would likely lead to a constitutional fight, which really couldn’t be won in today’s bipartisan politics
Do Not, Under Any Circumstances, try to use logic in any discussion of Elon Musk on Reddit. There is clearly no place for that. I mean this idiot in the Tweet basically writes the best possible counter to her own argument; “That’s 4.5% of your net worth. You paid 3.27% between 2014 and 2018” “most US ppl pay 10 to 37% in fed taxes.”
Do most US ppl pay 10 to 37% of their net worth in fed taxes (?), here’s a hint, they do not.
That would be a new definition of net worth to me, to you, to literally everyone. And no, that absolutely would not apply to “most US ppl” even if it might apply to some imaginary completely arbitrarily defined minority of “most poor folks’”
Most poor folks don't own assets that count towards net worth. Their car (**if** they have one) is (at best) a 5000$ liability of maintenance costs they have to pay to get back and forth to their multiple jobs that barely put food on the table, let alone cash in savings. Their furniture couldn't be sold for 2000$ and they rent. What else would you add to their net worth to break 20k (assuming they even make that much)?
Your ignorance of poverty is showing, not your knowledge of 'net worth'.
Your ignorance of numbers is showing. The situation you just described is a Reddit fantasy and is in no way representative of anywhere near a significant portion of the American working public but please do keep doubling down on stupid it looks great on you.
People like you think you’re standing up for a noble cause when in reality you’re distracting from the people who do fit those criteria. Face it, the average Middle Class American does not have a negative net worth nor do they pay 10-37% of their net worth in taxes, that’s an outright and egregious LIE, nothing more - nothing less.
Net worth of [families in poverty](https://www.verywellfamily.com/one-third-us-families-net-worth-poor-5097260): <= 6500$
Number of [families¹ in poverty](https://www.statista.com/statistics/204743/number-of-poor-families-in-the-us/), usa 2021: 7.4 million
Schooling a privileged brat having a tantrum on reddit: priceless
[1] **Families**, not even just single people, but entire families.
[*] But to be fair, they don't think the 7 million poor families (out of the 123 million total) are significant.
The US doesn't have a wealth tax so comparing his taxes to his net worth is apples to oranges. This isn't quite the "Murdered" By Words you were looking for, sorry.
Other than the 36 billion he made in one day. If I did that at the casino. I would pay 40+%.
I pay taxes weekly. That week he should have had to pay the same, if not more, than my taxes
*man a lot of hopeful billionaires in here
You guys file taxes annually surely? Yes of course you get deducted income tax weekly/monthly from your salary, but you "true up" the total at the end of the tax year. I somehow doubt he collected 36bn of income in one day, most likely that's just share prices going up (which typically come back down again) and I know that you have capital gains tax which is different from income tax.
The original tweet reply is supposed to be a "Murder". I guess what I'm saying is it's more of an attempted murder but doesn't land for me cos it's factually off. And by the way, 4.5% of net worth as annual tax is a STAGGERING amount. That would wipe out half your entire life savings in 14 years, no one could retire with that level of taxation.
Nah what you do is a 4.5% worth tax for 10 years. Then institute a 85% tax on anything over 5 million. That’s it. They can even have the same standard deductible.
I wrote a longer reply then scrapped it. This answer doesn't make any sense. 5m is a medium-sized business in the US, not even some mega-corporate firm. A single owner, family-run chain of hardware stores is easily a 5m business that you want to tax into oblivion.
It’s not hard. Make them pay each week like us. If I work overtime I’m taxed at a higher tax bracket. Should work the same for them. If at the end of the year they don’t make their OT money all year then they will get a refund. Not saying the current system makes sense but make it the same for everyone. It would stabilize the market and less likely to have insane rally’s of 75% and then recessions.
For all the people pointing out the "flawed logic" of comparing net worth to income, or that it's shares vs. income, blah blah blah... You're entirely missing the point. Let me recontextualize:
>Elon: I am a generous God, though some may insinuate that I am not.
>Response: This is a farce, as this amount of tax is literally immaterial to you, while poorer people pay sums that clearly impact their day to day. This is not even remotely fair, stop playing the victim.
The rules make no sense when your net worth is higher than many countries. Yes, in this situation you are that dumb meme adjusting your glasses and saying "technically..." You're missing the point. The rules are dumb, and the billionaires know it. Stop playing into their hand.
I would argue that YOU are playing into their hand by defending any criticism of them regardless of its actual validity.
Your summary of the Tweet is a completely valid point, but it does not line up with the actual tone or message of the Tweet. The Tweet draws a direct parallel between average Americans paying a percentage of their annual income and Elon paying a percentage of his net worth. That IS flawed logic.
If the author of the Tweet only meant to say 'this amount is immaterial to you, try paying a percentage that actually impacts your life', they should have said that. Instead of saying that, they made a bad comparison.
You want us to ignore their actual nessage and focus on 'the point', but that is pretty dangerous. Because if we collectively double down on flawed logic, it makes it a lot easier to laugh at criticism in general.
Stand behind valid points. Call out invalid ones. Otherwise, we compromise our own ability to be taken seriously. If we just say 'yeah fuck billionaires' every time anyone criticizes one, regardless of whether the criticism is coherent, we look like ignorant children rather than righteously frustrated citizens.
Don't get me wrong, Elon's Tweet was ridiculous, and deserved to be murdered by words. This particular response missed the mark, though.
Fair point. I'll take it.
My concern is only that our squabbles with people that might not fully understand finance detracts from a very very serious oligarch problem. But yes, I think it is important when considering solutions to this problem that we get the math right. (See other thread)
The reply is just dumb and your defence of it is bizarre. Paying 4.5% of total wealth EVERY YEAR is hardly “immaterial” to anyone.
You can hate billionaires and not defend dumb points from your side, you know.
Many people can lose a huge amount of money money and be “absolutely fine”, doesn’t mean the loss is immaterial. Do you think a family home drops 90% in market value is immaterial to the family too?
Besides, billionaires have most of their assets locked in stock market so 11bn is probably a significant portion of Elon’s liquid assets.
You can slap a whole bunch of bullshit together, ignore all the facts of the situation and insult everyone who disagrees with you but that doesn’t make you correct it makes you look like a 15 year old.
So if we’re supposed to start taxing unrealised gains on stock with a fluctuating value that has not had its value locked in via being sold, how do we do that? At what tax rate are we doing that? What is the appropriate level of taxes to pay on your net worth, which is neither falls under income or capital gains because it hasn’t been sold? Where is the money to pay for these taxes actually coming from? Are going to force stakeholders in large companies to sell their stakes in order to force them to pay taxes? If we are going to do then at what level of net worth? And then how tf are you going to be able to guarantee that the shares sold will be sold at a price that would reflect this theoretical net worth cut off, given that an executive selling huge proportions of a company all at once is basically guaranteed to tank the price?
Do you have answers to any of these relevant questions or do you just prefer to stand around screaming in your little bubble ignoring all of the other factors at play?
Great, so now we agree on the premise (that we need ways of taxing the ultra wealthy), and now are discussing just the details of the optimal ways of doing so. Am I wrong?
Glad we've got the silly parts out of the way.
If you think my argument is that this is easy, I can put that to rest: I 100% concede that taxing the ultra wealthy is difficult from a political and technical perspective, but that's not the argument I'm making.
The argument that I'm making is simply that the current system is broken, and the billionaires are being obnoxious in acting like victims when they do pay... Anything.
I don't think I (or anyone) could give you satisfactory answers to those questions in *checks notes* a reddit comment, since much of this requires detailed understanding of the law and financial instruments. But again, saying "this is hard, you can't give me an answer right here and now" has a quality of being... How did you put it... "standing around screaming in your little bubble" energy.
Idk man all of those questions are a pretty simple follow on. “Tax the Rich”, ok how? Tax what? Their networth? Well considering that the only reason you care or have even heard of Elon Musk is because of the value of his net worth and not his physical assets I’m going to guess that you probably want to tax him such that his net worth is no longer at a level you deem to be unacceptable but how tf can that be done. It’s not unreasonable to ask for even the slightest bit of information and even if you do understand that income and networth are not the same thing a good half or more of the people saying shit like this do not and do not want to understand anything they would rather make a bunch of empty platitudes that do not make sense or work in the real world.
And yes I agree with taxing the ultra wealthy but here’s another question. If we’re assuming that Elon is paying the correct non-gerrymandered capital gains tax on any and all stock which he cashes out (don’t know what that is in the US, in Aus it would just be classed under regular income tax margins, 45% above 180k), is that still a problem?
Remember that the ~ 100bn networth he has is almost entirely comprised of the current price of his shares multiplied by the amount of shares he has, and is not actually physical money that he has until it has a value locked in via sale. If it is not, what would be a more fitting rate? How much higher should it be?
Ok now we're talking.
Again, I'm not going to lay out a detailed tax plan here, because, to your point, it would be complex, with exceptions and caveats all around.
But to even get there, we have to agree that there is value in taxing this wealth (to society), and that those "unrealized gains" have real value - just ask any bank where he uses it as collateral (like when Bezos got a $100M [yacht](https://www.dmarge.com/jeff-bezos-is-so-rich-he-has-a-100m-support-yacht-for-his-700m-superyacht)).
The point is, if banks think there's real value there, and we kinda all do (cuz I can't buy Twitter for 2x what is worth with my stocks just for the lolz), then there's got to be a way to tax it. I mean if nothing else, tax whatever had been used as collateral for a loan - that sure as hell feels like it's "realized gains" even if not sold.
But again, I'm not here to argue specifics. What I just said would still be tiny depending on how you even interpret a loose concept like that. That's not the point. We would need to study all of the implications of various strategies, how billionaires would fight back with new loopholes, how they might leave the country, and how they'd shield assets from sight.
But that's kinda the point. It will always be a cat and mouse game. But right now, the cat is sleeping while the mouse just amasses his cheese.
Let's pay the army of tax experts 10% (or higher) commission on holding billionaires accountable for fair taxes, and I'm sure some really smart people would come up with ideas. My point is that even if it costs the government $1 billion in paying IRS agents to extract $1 billion in taxes from the ultra rich, it's still money well spent, because it's not about the revenue, it's about removing oligarchs and their undue influence from our society.
I know I'm bringing in a second topic (actually chasing down the taxes) in addition to laws about the taxes, and they are two very different things, but it's late, I'm tired, and I'm just trying to make the point that we have not spent nearly enough resources into this problem given what's at stake.
Me I’m more in favour of things like inheritance taxes on account of them both taxing the ultra wealthy in about the least incentive distorting-y and most actually feasible way possible but you want to reduce Elons net worth to your arbitrarily chosen level of acceptability within his lifetime clearly we need another idea
No love for Musk but whoever Anya is, one of the things she shouldn't be down is writing about finances on Twitter because she is woefully out of her element. Even if someone suggesting taxing people based on their networth, absolutely nobody would vote for it once they'd realized how much they'd have to pay each year if they owned a house.
You do not pay taxes on things you own and hold onto unless it property.
He made x amount in a year and was taxed on it.
I don't even like him but y'all are just mad that he's rich and your poor. It's childish.
- The primary revenue stream for the ultra-rich are stocks/shares and changes in the value of what they already own
- Stock/shares aren't taxable till they become 'realized gains' when sold
- Even when they're 'unrealized gains', they add to the net worth of the individual
- These don't sell the stock to get liquidity, they borrow from banks against their networth
- They don't pay taxes on the money they borrowed
- Tax-free profit
Even if I were catapulted into paying an overall 25% tax, that amount I pay this year would only be 4.7% of my net worth, so oh no, I'm as bad as Musk.
Musk is awful, but Anya doesn't know how income taxes work. No murder here; only suicide.
Yeh I was about to say, this idiot is confusing net worth and taxable revenue...
Billionaires are not people to be cherished, merely the symptoms of a failing system, but attacking those symptoms using a poor analogy, in order to get voter's sympathy, is itself ANOTHER symptom of that same system...
It's like watching brain cancer fight skin cancer... You don't know who to root for...but you also know you shouldn't root at all.
Not that I disagree with you, but there are some states that will tax C-Corps on their net worth. I'd like to see that expanded to individuals above a certain net worth for federal purposes, but it's likely not going to happen
Yes, but usually, it maxes out pretty quickly. [Ie in GA, the max is $5k fee](https://dor.georgia.gov/taxes/business-taxes/corporate-income-and-net-worth-tax)
And in DE it's $200k ($250k for large corps), OK was $20k, and I can't remember any other states off the top of my head. But that's the same issue as SS withholdings maxing out for individual taxation. You can arbitrarily set caps, or you could not. Up to the lawmakers to decide
It's not. It's less accessible than if it was sitting in the bank. He'd have to sell his stock and dilute his share in the company to cash out. A large sell off can easily reduce the stock price, which reduces his net worth.
and you lose value every time you buy hamburgers at a restaurant instead of making them yourself.
if he can't figure out his taxes he needs to do more work.
Most people have a negative net worth, and property capital, what used to be how a person's net worth was measured, is absolutely taxed at local levels.
Neither, and you're definitely an asshole and not connected to reality, so obviously you're the one trolling here.
https://www.businessinsider.com/bottom-half-of-americans-negative-net-worth-2019-5
https://localhistories.org/a-brief-history-of-rich-people/#:~:text=Rich%20people%20in%20the%2019th%20Century&text=Furthermore%20in%20the%2018th%20century,who%20owned%20mines%20or%20factories.
Anyone who thinks this "murders Elon's facts" is a moron. 😂 You couldn't make this shit up lmao capital gains that aren't realized aren't taxable. If you're companies net worth goes up and you own that stock, YOU DON'T PAY TAXES ON MARKET GAINS OR LOSSES THAT AREN'T CASHED OUT. In layman's terms. Elon Musk has paid more in taxes in a single year than you and EVERY SINGLE PERSON YOU'LL EVER KNOW OR HAVE KNOWN has paid in taxes. He literally paid more in one year than anyone has in the history of the country. This is just PURE ignorance.
Taxes are not calculated based on your net worth, if it were, almost all homeowners would pay a minimum of $50,000 in taxes each year, it's calculated on how much liquid income you generate through the year, but if you make $36 million in a day and lose $50 million over the following 3 months, that $36 million means nothing, the reason musk pays so little in taxes compared to his net worth is because less than 10% of it is liquidated at any given time, it's almost entirely property and stock. Less of a murder and more of incompetence.
Not an Elon Musk dick rider, I really can't stand the guy, but the vast majority of the money he makes from selling stocks is also reinvested in other companies, which is, in part, tax deductible.
Wow. I didn't realize Elon still had this many blind worshipers. While the reply is wrong because of the net worth statement, anyone who thinks he doesn't use the same tax playbook as Trump is as stupid as both those guys. And we all know Elon openly manipulates stock prices for his benefit.
How on earth is net value relevant at all? Total non sequitur.
Income, not stock valuations, incurred during the particular year being taxed is the only thing that's relevant in determining if someone is paying their fair share.
It’s more of a partial non-sequitur imo.
It is relevant that the $11b in taxes only makes up 4.5% of his worth. It helps contextualise the (in)significance of that payment for him.
As an argument for how much income tax he should pay, it doesn’t make sense. As an argument for “stop acting as though you’re paying through the nose”, it’s fair enough.
It's absolutely a full non-sequitur. Do you know what a non-sequitur even is? It's bringing up information in support of your argument that has no relevance to the point you're arguing. In a discussion about income tax and what a fair amount is, total net worth is a non-sequitur, full stop.
It is not relevant context and no one who actually cares about the point being made would even consider entertaining it because it's total nonsense.
That makes Musk actually look good, that a decent chunk of this wealth to be paying.
The only thing being murdered is my brain by how stupid that reply is.
Wealth tax would be pretty alright, especially with more and more of the middle class living paycheck to paycheck. When you can't save, wealth tax and income tax are the same.
Okay, if you’ve ever discussed your “net worth” (or anyone else has), you may sit down now please. Those words will never be used to describe most people in this world.
If you discuss any money worded that start with “b”, get out. And most of us won’t discuss money words that start with “m” unless it’s “minus”.
Shares went up that much in one day, that doesn't mean he made that much money in one day. I know it may seem nitpicky, but it's a huge difference. He also lost billions of dollars other days, that's how shares work when you have many of them.
I think Elon is a doughnut, but people who don't understand finance should learn about that first.
Elon is lying, anyone who believes that is pretty uneducated. He has been asked and refuses to give the breakout, and he never will. That’s called bullshit.
I bet he thought that sounded like a lot before he remembered his peons worship every cent he reports and a few of them are capable of grade school mathematics.
Oh, he definitely could cough up more to his employees and treat them better. $44.38 million he makes a day, I think. Idk how much of it goes into his pockets, but it is more than I will make in a lifetime.
I'm not sure why people get mad at the "1%". When it would be very easy to deconstruct the IRS and the laws around taxing of income. A flat tax of any source of income generation would fix 90% of the issue while also allowing the government to get rid of majority of the IRS workforce.
Another law would be to prevent loans on shares of a stock. Basiclly stating that shares are a company can not be used as collateral as they are intangible until sell.
Why do people think that a flat tax/getting rid of the IRS would do anything but shit on the people who have the least. It's literally nonsense. It's not like there aren't *literally dozens* of countries around the world we can look to as examples of what a better taxation model looks like.
Coming from someone who thinks we should tax the shit out of the 1%, this seems a bit misleading, to me. We are taxed on our income, not our net worth. Or am I wrong ? Is it different when you have more money than god?
Income vs net worth. Apples vs oranges. Not a cogent argument.
Right? I get so sick of people talking about his taxes as a percentage of net worth. It doesn't work that way.
The problem is the tax loopholes that are available for the wealthy. For example, Trump allowed a full tax deduction on purchasing a private jet. Like if you can afford to purchase a private jet, you don’t need that kind of tax deduction. There’s also a reason why many, if not all, wealthy people have a non-profit foundation. Many wealthy people also have a corporation, even though they don’t actually have a business. There are many of these tax loopholes that mostly the wealthy can take advantage of.
This is just not true. A corporation that's not an actual business - that loophole was closed in 1986. Be specific about your 'loopholes' and let's see if you're right.
Anybody can create an LLC. Ordinary income from a different source can then be funneled through the LLC to take advantage of tax deductions that a non-business entity do not have. Creating non-profit organizations just to “donate” money to it and use that foundation to pay for personal luxury expenses with tax free money. Having a $20 million tax liability credited when buying a private jet. These sound like “loopholes” to me.
You don't need an LLC for that, you can do it on a Schedule C as a sole proprietor. You just broke your own argument on that one, since you said they are 'available for the wealthy' then you said 'anyone can do it', which is true. Nonprofits do not work that way. A private jet for 20 million does not create a 'tax liability' I'm not even sure what you mean by that. A tax liability is money you owe the government in taxes.
It seems you’re happy defending the wealthy. Feel free to stay ignorant.
you're the one that said anyone can do it, haha
The fact that you think a sole proprietorship is similar to an LLC tells me you don’t know much about this topic. There are many reasons to have an LLC vs a SP. the biggest one is the ability to file as an SCorp to minimize self employment tax. Another reason is the anonymity. Sure anybody can create an LLC, but how many people making $50k or $100k per year is going to go through all that trouble and expense to save maybe $1k? Licensing fees, CPA, lawyers, registered agents, payroll, workers comp insurance, etc are costly. But I’m guessing you don’t know much about that. Creating a non-profit organization is also very costly and not worth doing if you’re making $100k. However, a CEO making $20 million per year would absolutely benefit from it. They can “donate” millions to their foundation, by doing so not pay taxes on that, then use the foundation to pay for vacation homes, luxury cars, expensive art, etc that they’re going to spend on regardless but now they’re not paying taxes on that money. And I said tax liability is credited by purchasing a jet. Reading is not hard. These are just a few. There are hundreds of ways wealthy people evade paying taxes using tax codes that mostly the rich can benefit from. If you don’t know how Trump, Elon, Bezos, etc manages to pay less effective taxes than you, you’re defending the wrong people
In my state it costs $100 to form an LLC. You can make anyone with an address a registered agent. No need for a CPA. You have no clue.
Yeah, at 4.5% a year the government would take everything from everyone in a couple of decades. Makes no sense to think paying 4.5% of net worth in one year is somehow too little. Mostly they need to get rid of the inheritance loopholes with trusts and whatnot. Everybody dies and if you force them to pay up then you don't end up with these ridiculous dynasties.
How could they take everything? They are taking 4.5 percent, its impossible
[удалено]
The wealthy often dodge taxes by not taking income directly. If a company pays you in stock that increases your net worth, but doesn't constitute income (it's an unrealized gain until you sell the stock, at which point you pay taxes on the proceeds). Additionally, rather than sell the stock, you can borrow against its value, thereby gaining cash without paying income tax.
Net worth isn't income. The only way net worth is really taxed is by property taxes. The real issue with these rich CEOs not paying taxes is that they can say their multibillion dollar businesses aren't profitable by just making a bunch of deductions. What Washington State does is pretty smart. They don't have a business income tax. Instead they have a gross receipts tax called a business & occupation tax. It's a much lower rate than the typical business tax in other states, but it can't really be deducted from besides a very small number of tax credits.
You left of capital gains tax which would likely be triggered by him selling Tesla shares to buy Twitter.
Capital gains isn't the same as net worth. It's income.
Either is property taxes.
You don’t pay taxes on your net worth so that’s a stupid comment. Really stupid
Was thinking the same thing… I wonder what % 11 billion is for his annual income
According to this https://wageindicator.co.uk/pay/vip-celebrity-salary/elon-musk It's approximately 1/7th.
[удалено]
Yes. Billionaire bad coz they literally have an option of not earning salary so that they don't have to pay taxes. They take low interest rate loan on the basis of their net worth for almost every expense. I don't think networth SHOULD be taxed but there should be better way to tax everyone fairly Even Buffet has spoken about it. https://youtu.be/zB1FXvYvcaI
Not net worth, but a capital tax completely makes sense. It's just applying the concept of property (a form of capital) taxes to stock market capital.
No it doesn't, you don't tax people on unrealized gains, that's fucking retarded
> you don't tax people on unrealized gains Why? And no, it's not. I pay taxes on my property's current value.
Because no one would invest in the fucking stock market because you would be taxing people based upon money they haven't made, or you content to stick people who got fucking swindled by people like Bernie Madoff, Enron, and worldcom with a fucking tax bill for what their stock was worth before they realized they were being scammed
LOL. There's no difference between that and property taxes. People would still invest in the stock market, but they would be more cautious about it. This produces a healthier, more stable economy.
A promising idea is a value that can surpass the value of the rest of the company, so a small listed restaurant chain with an exceptional concept would have to close after the first year due to taxation.
Mmmmmm NO.
Also it is blatantly false that most americans pay 10% to 37% in federal income tax or anywhere near 13% in state tax.
Really?
The constitution allows the government to levy taxes on income, not assets. So any change in taxation classification would likely lead to a constitutional fight, which really couldn’t be won in today’s bipartisan politics
Net worth and annual income are very different, but Elon is a grifter regardless
He didn’t make that much money in one day his shares went up that much in one day.
Yeah, it's a stupid point. He also probably lost billions in shares other days, but you never see people complaining about that.
Anya doesn’t understand how income tax works 🤦♂️
I hate Musk dearly and billionaires as a concept disgust me, but you do not pay taxes on your net worth, it's ridiculous to bring up in the argument.
Do Not, Under Any Circumstances, try to use logic in any discussion of Elon Musk on Reddit. There is clearly no place for that. I mean this idiot in the Tweet basically writes the best possible counter to her own argument; “That’s 4.5% of your net worth. You paid 3.27% between 2014 and 2018” “most US ppl pay 10 to 37% in fed taxes.” Do most US ppl pay 10 to 37% of their net worth in fed taxes (?), here’s a hint, they do not.
If you consider most poor folks' net worth is _less_ than their annual income, they pay far **more** than 10-37% of their net worth.
That would be a new definition of net worth to me, to you, to literally everyone. And no, that absolutely would not apply to “most US ppl” even if it might apply to some imaginary completely arbitrarily defined minority of “most poor folks’”
Most poor folks don't own assets that count towards net worth. Their car (**if** they have one) is (at best) a 5000$ liability of maintenance costs they have to pay to get back and forth to their multiple jobs that barely put food on the table, let alone cash in savings. Their furniture couldn't be sold for 2000$ and they rent. What else would you add to their net worth to break 20k (assuming they even make that much)? Your ignorance of poverty is showing, not your knowledge of 'net worth'.
Your ignorance of numbers is showing. The situation you just described is a Reddit fantasy and is in no way representative of anywhere near a significant portion of the American working public but please do keep doubling down on stupid it looks great on you. People like you think you’re standing up for a noble cause when in reality you’re distracting from the people who do fit those criteria. Face it, the average Middle Class American does not have a negative net worth nor do they pay 10-37% of their net worth in taxes, that’s an outright and egregious LIE, nothing more - nothing less.
Net worth of [families in poverty](https://www.verywellfamily.com/one-third-us-families-net-worth-poor-5097260): <= 6500$ Number of [families¹ in poverty](https://www.statista.com/statistics/204743/number-of-poor-families-in-the-us/), usa 2021: 7.4 million Schooling a privileged brat having a tantrum on reddit: priceless [1] **Families**, not even just single people, but entire families. [*] But to be fair, they don't think the 7 million poor families (out of the 123 million total) are significant.
This is more r/InconveniencedByStupidity than r/MurderedByWords 🙄
The daily “don’t forgot about me and my stock”
Twitter trying to understand networth challenge, impossible.
Not just Twitter an entire generation of people. And it seems to be an intentional talking point by media outlets to be deceptive.
Elon is a tool but you don't pay taxes on your net worth
I wish I had that problem.
The US doesn't have a wealth tax so comparing his taxes to his net worth is apples to oranges. This isn't quite the "Murdered" By Words you were looking for, sorry.
Other than the 36 billion he made in one day. If I did that at the casino. I would pay 40+%. I pay taxes weekly. That week he should have had to pay the same, if not more, than my taxes *man a lot of hopeful billionaires in here
You guys file taxes annually surely? Yes of course you get deducted income tax weekly/monthly from your salary, but you "true up" the total at the end of the tax year. I somehow doubt he collected 36bn of income in one day, most likely that's just share prices going up (which typically come back down again) and I know that you have capital gains tax which is different from income tax. The original tweet reply is supposed to be a "Murder". I guess what I'm saying is it's more of an attempted murder but doesn't land for me cos it's factually off. And by the way, 4.5% of net worth as annual tax is a STAGGERING amount. That would wipe out half your entire life savings in 14 years, no one could retire with that level of taxation.
Wipe out half for BILLIONAIRES Jesus they could still retire! Omfg.
Nah what you do is a 4.5% worth tax for 10 years. Then institute a 85% tax on anything over 5 million. That’s it. They can even have the same standard deductible.
I wrote a longer reply then scrapped it. This answer doesn't make any sense. 5m is a medium-sized business in the US, not even some mega-corporate firm. A single owner, family-run chain of hardware stores is easily a 5m business that you want to tax into oblivion.
He didn't make it. It's unrealized. He didn't get the money. People are so confused.
It’s not hard. Make them pay each week like us. If I work overtime I’m taxed at a higher tax bracket. Should work the same for them. If at the end of the year they don’t make their OT money all year then they will get a refund. Not saying the current system makes sense but make it the same for everyone. It would stabilize the market and less likely to have insane rally’s of 75% and then recessions.
For all the people pointing out the "flawed logic" of comparing net worth to income, or that it's shares vs. income, blah blah blah... You're entirely missing the point. Let me recontextualize: >Elon: I am a generous God, though some may insinuate that I am not. >Response: This is a farce, as this amount of tax is literally immaterial to you, while poorer people pay sums that clearly impact their day to day. This is not even remotely fair, stop playing the victim. The rules make no sense when your net worth is higher than many countries. Yes, in this situation you are that dumb meme adjusting your glasses and saying "technically..." You're missing the point. The rules are dumb, and the billionaires know it. Stop playing into their hand.
I would argue that YOU are playing into their hand by defending any criticism of them regardless of its actual validity. Your summary of the Tweet is a completely valid point, but it does not line up with the actual tone or message of the Tweet. The Tweet draws a direct parallel between average Americans paying a percentage of their annual income and Elon paying a percentage of his net worth. That IS flawed logic. If the author of the Tweet only meant to say 'this amount is immaterial to you, try paying a percentage that actually impacts your life', they should have said that. Instead of saying that, they made a bad comparison. You want us to ignore their actual nessage and focus on 'the point', but that is pretty dangerous. Because if we collectively double down on flawed logic, it makes it a lot easier to laugh at criticism in general. Stand behind valid points. Call out invalid ones. Otherwise, we compromise our own ability to be taken seriously. If we just say 'yeah fuck billionaires' every time anyone criticizes one, regardless of whether the criticism is coherent, we look like ignorant children rather than righteously frustrated citizens. Don't get me wrong, Elon's Tweet was ridiculous, and deserved to be murdered by words. This particular response missed the mark, though.
Fair point. I'll take it. My concern is only that our squabbles with people that might not fully understand finance detracts from a very very serious oligarch problem. But yes, I think it is important when considering solutions to this problem that we get the math right. (See other thread)
The rules are dumb, but a comment that is in large part based on a completely wrong understanding of the rules doesn't help much.
[удалено]
If the bar is Trump, everything looks good. If you look at Elon's history, you can see his vibes.
The reply is just dumb and your defence of it is bizarre. Paying 4.5% of total wealth EVERY YEAR is hardly “immaterial” to anyone. You can hate billionaires and not defend dumb points from your side, you know.
[удалено]
Many people can lose a huge amount of money money and be “absolutely fine”, doesn’t mean the loss is immaterial. Do you think a family home drops 90% in market value is immaterial to the family too? Besides, billionaires have most of their assets locked in stock market so 11bn is probably a significant portion of Elon’s liquid assets.
He doesn't actually have that money, you know that right?
It's the guy from the meme I was talking about! I hope this was a troll post.
You can slap a whole bunch of bullshit together, ignore all the facts of the situation and insult everyone who disagrees with you but that doesn’t make you correct it makes you look like a 15 year old. So if we’re supposed to start taxing unrealised gains on stock with a fluctuating value that has not had its value locked in via being sold, how do we do that? At what tax rate are we doing that? What is the appropriate level of taxes to pay on your net worth, which is neither falls under income or capital gains because it hasn’t been sold? Where is the money to pay for these taxes actually coming from? Are going to force stakeholders in large companies to sell their stakes in order to force them to pay taxes? If we are going to do then at what level of net worth? And then how tf are you going to be able to guarantee that the shares sold will be sold at a price that would reflect this theoretical net worth cut off, given that an executive selling huge proportions of a company all at once is basically guaranteed to tank the price? Do you have answers to any of these relevant questions or do you just prefer to stand around screaming in your little bubble ignoring all of the other factors at play?
Great, so now we agree on the premise (that we need ways of taxing the ultra wealthy), and now are discussing just the details of the optimal ways of doing so. Am I wrong? Glad we've got the silly parts out of the way. If you think my argument is that this is easy, I can put that to rest: I 100% concede that taxing the ultra wealthy is difficult from a political and technical perspective, but that's not the argument I'm making. The argument that I'm making is simply that the current system is broken, and the billionaires are being obnoxious in acting like victims when they do pay... Anything. I don't think I (or anyone) could give you satisfactory answers to those questions in *checks notes* a reddit comment, since much of this requires detailed understanding of the law and financial instruments. But again, saying "this is hard, you can't give me an answer right here and now" has a quality of being... How did you put it... "standing around screaming in your little bubble" energy.
Idk man all of those questions are a pretty simple follow on. “Tax the Rich”, ok how? Tax what? Their networth? Well considering that the only reason you care or have even heard of Elon Musk is because of the value of his net worth and not his physical assets I’m going to guess that you probably want to tax him such that his net worth is no longer at a level you deem to be unacceptable but how tf can that be done. It’s not unreasonable to ask for even the slightest bit of information and even if you do understand that income and networth are not the same thing a good half or more of the people saying shit like this do not and do not want to understand anything they would rather make a bunch of empty platitudes that do not make sense or work in the real world. And yes I agree with taxing the ultra wealthy but here’s another question. If we’re assuming that Elon is paying the correct non-gerrymandered capital gains tax on any and all stock which he cashes out (don’t know what that is in the US, in Aus it would just be classed under regular income tax margins, 45% above 180k), is that still a problem? Remember that the ~ 100bn networth he has is almost entirely comprised of the current price of his shares multiplied by the amount of shares he has, and is not actually physical money that he has until it has a value locked in via sale. If it is not, what would be a more fitting rate? How much higher should it be?
Ok now we're talking. Again, I'm not going to lay out a detailed tax plan here, because, to your point, it would be complex, with exceptions and caveats all around. But to even get there, we have to agree that there is value in taxing this wealth (to society), and that those "unrealized gains" have real value - just ask any bank where he uses it as collateral (like when Bezos got a $100M [yacht](https://www.dmarge.com/jeff-bezos-is-so-rich-he-has-a-100m-support-yacht-for-his-700m-superyacht)). The point is, if banks think there's real value there, and we kinda all do (cuz I can't buy Twitter for 2x what is worth with my stocks just for the lolz), then there's got to be a way to tax it. I mean if nothing else, tax whatever had been used as collateral for a loan - that sure as hell feels like it's "realized gains" even if not sold. But again, I'm not here to argue specifics. What I just said would still be tiny depending on how you even interpret a loose concept like that. That's not the point. We would need to study all of the implications of various strategies, how billionaires would fight back with new loopholes, how they might leave the country, and how they'd shield assets from sight. But that's kinda the point. It will always be a cat and mouse game. But right now, the cat is sleeping while the mouse just amasses his cheese. Let's pay the army of tax experts 10% (or higher) commission on holding billionaires accountable for fair taxes, and I'm sure some really smart people would come up with ideas. My point is that even if it costs the government $1 billion in paying IRS agents to extract $1 billion in taxes from the ultra rich, it's still money well spent, because it's not about the revenue, it's about removing oligarchs and their undue influence from our society. I know I'm bringing in a second topic (actually chasing down the taxes) in addition to laws about the taxes, and they are two very different things, but it's late, I'm tired, and I'm just trying to make the point that we have not spent nearly enough resources into this problem given what's at stake.
Me I’m more in favour of things like inheritance taxes on account of them both taxing the ultra wealthy in about the least incentive distorting-y and most actually feasible way possible but you want to reduce Elons net worth to your arbitrarily chosen level of acceptability within his lifetime clearly we need another idea
Then make a post that makes a good clever evidenced based point. Don't make a stupid post showing you have no clue what is going on.
I hate fucking comments like this. Stop treating stock valuations the same as normal income. You sound like an idiot when you do this.
Taxes are not based on your net worth. This person just sounds dumb.
Taxes are income, not net worth
A comeback that wasn't coz that's not how tax is calculated. She just made an ass of herself
Musk is scum, but Anya doesn't seem to understand how unrealized gains or taxes work. Classic social media idiots yelling at idiots moment.
No love for Musk but whoever Anya is, one of the things she shouldn't be down is writing about finances on Twitter because she is woefully out of her element. Even if someone suggesting taxing people based on their networth, absolutely nobody would vote for it once they'd realized how much they'd have to pay each year if they owned a house.
This person doesn't understand how stocks and realized gains work.
The point is, rich motherfuckers shouldn't have a legislative cheat code to pay less than the regular folk.
But he doesn’t have one. He made 25 billion and paid 11 billion in taxes. That’s like 40% tax Rate
you seriously think he only made 25 billion in a year? because everything he owns is an active resource it is very easy to skew.
You do not pay taxes on things you own and hold onto unless it property. He made x amount in a year and was taxed on it. I don't even like him but y'all are just mad that he's rich and your poor. It's childish.
Whenever I hear someone say this, they can't be specific, at all. Can you tell me one of these 'cheats' specifically?
- The primary revenue stream for the ultra-rich are stocks/shares and changes in the value of what they already own - Stock/shares aren't taxable till they become 'realized gains' when sold - Even when they're 'unrealized gains', they add to the net worth of the individual - These don't sell the stock to get liquidity, they borrow from banks against their networth - They don't pay taxes on the money they borrowed - Tax-free profit
There is no revenue stream on unrealized gains. Bullet point one wrong. Bullet point two is true A loan is not a profit
"For those wondering, I am indeed a cunt."
Even if I were catapulted into paying an overall 25% tax, that amount I pay this year would only be 4.7% of my net worth, so oh no, I'm as bad as Musk. Musk is awful, but Anya doesn't know how income taxes work. No murder here; only suicide.
Yeh I was about to say, this idiot is confusing net worth and taxable revenue... Billionaires are not people to be cherished, merely the symptoms of a failing system, but attacking those symptoms using a poor analogy, in order to get voter's sympathy, is itself ANOTHER symptom of that same system... It's like watching brain cancer fight skin cancer... You don't know who to root for...but you also know you shouldn't root at all.
Definitely not murdered by words. Stupid posts.
I agree with the sentiment, but we don’t tax net worth we tax income & capital gains
A lot of people argue that’s part of the issue.
Yea that’s a worthwhile debate to be had, having a graduated capital gains tax would be a good start too
Not that I disagree with you, but there are some states that will tax C-Corps on their net worth. I'd like to see that expanded to individuals above a certain net worth for federal purposes, but it's likely not going to happen
Didn’t know certain states did that! Good correction
Yes, but usually, it maxes out pretty quickly. [Ie in GA, the max is $5k fee](https://dor.georgia.gov/taxes/business-taxes/corporate-income-and-net-worth-tax)
And in DE it's $200k ($250k for large corps), OK was $20k, and I can't remember any other states off the top of my head. But that's the same issue as SS withholdings maxing out for individual taxation. You can arbitrarily set caps, or you could not. Up to the lawmakers to decide
Trying to look smart but not realizing that net worth isn't income
his net worth is active resources, not sitting in some bank somewhere.
Net worth is all the shit you own. From cars to houses to stocks and businesses, as well as actual money.
It's not. It's less accessible than if it was sitting in the bank. He'd have to sell his stock and dilute his share in the company to cash out. A large sell off can easily reduce the stock price, which reduces his net worth.
and you lose value every time you buy hamburgers at a restaurant instead of making them yourself. if he can't figure out his taxes he needs to do more work.
We don't pay taxes based on net worth
Most people have a negative net worth, and property capital, what used to be how a person's net worth was measured, is absolutely taxed at local levels.
I'm gonna need a citation on that truly amazing claim
I have no idea what you're referring to.
A citation backing up your outlandish claim,
What outlandish claim?
[удалено]
Neither, and you're definitely an asshole and not connected to reality, so obviously you're the one trolling here. https://www.businessinsider.com/bottom-half-of-americans-negative-net-worth-2019-5 https://localhistories.org/a-brief-history-of-rich-people/#:~:text=Rich%20people%20in%20the%2019th%20Century&text=Furthermore%20in%20the%2018th%20century,who%20owned%20mines%20or%20factories.
Reddit/Twitter economic illiteracy 101.
This isn’t a murder. This is some mouthy moron who doesn’t know what she’s talking about and thinks she’s smarter than she is.
So she’s your average Redditor?
Nah, she’s one of the ones below the average.
True. Average Redditors are terrible but I think they’re smarter than the woman in the tweet.
Doubt.
Did he really pay that much in a single year.
Anyone who thinks this "murders Elon's facts" is a moron. 😂 You couldn't make this shit up lmao capital gains that aren't realized aren't taxable. If you're companies net worth goes up and you own that stock, YOU DON'T PAY TAXES ON MARKET GAINS OR LOSSES THAT AREN'T CASHED OUT. In layman's terms. Elon Musk has paid more in taxes in a single year than you and EVERY SINGLE PERSON YOU'LL EVER KNOW OR HAVE KNOWN has paid in taxes. He literally paid more in one year than anyone has in the history of the country. This is just PURE ignorance.
Taxes are not calculated based on your net worth, if it were, almost all homeowners would pay a minimum of $50,000 in taxes each year, it's calculated on how much liquid income you generate through the year, but if you make $36 million in a day and lose $50 million over the following 3 months, that $36 million means nothing, the reason musk pays so little in taxes compared to his net worth is because less than 10% of it is liquidated at any given time, it's almost entirely property and stock. Less of a murder and more of incompetence.
Not an Elon Musk dick rider, I really can't stand the guy, but the vast majority of the money he makes from selling stocks is also reinvested in other companies, which is, in part, tax deductible.
This makes anya look dumb because thats not how taxes work
Wow. I didn't realize Elon still had this many blind worshipers. While the reply is wrong because of the net worth statement, anyone who thinks he doesn't use the same tax playbook as Trump is as stupid as both those guys. And we all know Elon openly manipulates stock prices for his benefit.
It has nothing to do with that. It’s about Anya not having any clue about what she’s ranting about.
True. She's wrong. No need to acknowledge that Elon, and other ultra wealthy families, completely cheat the system. Fair point.
That’s irrelevant to this situation.
How on earth is net value relevant at all? Total non sequitur. Income, not stock valuations, incurred during the particular year being taxed is the only thing that's relevant in determining if someone is paying their fair share.
It’s more of a partial non-sequitur imo. It is relevant that the $11b in taxes only makes up 4.5% of his worth. It helps contextualise the (in)significance of that payment for him. As an argument for how much income tax he should pay, it doesn’t make sense. As an argument for “stop acting as though you’re paying through the nose”, it’s fair enough.
It's absolutely a full non-sequitur. Do you know what a non-sequitur even is? It's bringing up information in support of your argument that has no relevance to the point you're arguing. In a discussion about income tax and what a fair amount is, total net worth is a non-sequitur, full stop. It is not relevant context and no one who actually cares about the point being made would even consider entertaining it because it's total nonsense.
That makes Musk actually look good, that a decent chunk of this wealth to be paying. The only thing being murdered is my brain by how stupid that reply is.
Exactly, taxes are determined by income and not net worth. This post makes no sense.
Wealth tax would be pretty alright, especially with more and more of the middle class living paycheck to paycheck. When you can't save, wealth tax and income tax are the same.
Okay, if you’ve ever discussed your “net worth” (or anyone else has), you may sit down now please. Those words will never be used to describe most people in this world. If you discuss any money worded that start with “b”, get out. And most of us won’t discuss money words that start with “m” unless it’s “minus”.
What about "megative"
“Tax is on Income/Gains not Net Worth Bah Bah b-“ Bitch made more money in one day than most nations. Pedants. All of ya.
Shares went up that much in one day, that doesn't mean he made that much money in one day. I know it may seem nitpicky, but it's a huge difference. He also lost billions of dollars other days, that's how shares work when you have many of them. I think Elon is a doughnut, but people who don't understand finance should learn about that first.
I agree with the sentiment but that math was pulled from this persons ass
Elon is lying, anyone who believes that is pretty uneducated. He has been asked and refuses to give the breakout, and he never will. That’s called bullshit.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Warm milk with a teaspoon of sugar on red days for more effect on the "La llorona" days Karen.
I’m waiting for the murder here…
I bet he thought that sounded like a lot before he remembered his peons worship every cent he reports and a few of them are capable of grade school mathematics.
Are you talking about the dumbass that doesn’t even know taxes aren’t based off of net worth?
I wasn't talking about dumbasses at all, but thanks for sounding off with some shit nobody said and demonstrating it for all of us.
“Peons worship every cent” Well either they’re dumbasses or they’re not. Make up your mind.
We don't pay taxes based on net worth
How much of that will be in the US?
Maybe Anya "La llorona" Karen should spend more time in school for adults and less on Twitter? Also perhaps block herself from Twitter on red days.
This is bad and you should feel bad. I see no murder, just an idiot yelling at a wall.
It's the comment below Elon, she's wrong but Elon being an idiot talking to his simps (the wall) sounds more fitting
I hope the next person he tries to sexually assault in space put him out of an airlock.
I hope Anya Overmann creates a Space program and EV company
[удалено]
Musk fanboys mad
Hello Anya Karen white knight.
Ok but how much of what he made that day was given to employees etc? Making it isn’t the same as keeping it
Oh, he definitely could cough up more to his employees and treat them better. $44.38 million he makes a day, I think. Idk how much of it goes into his pockets, but it is more than I will make in a lifetime.
Excellent retort
Except it made no sense and disregards tax code.
I'm not sure why people get mad at the "1%". When it would be very easy to deconstruct the IRS and the laws around taxing of income. A flat tax of any source of income generation would fix 90% of the issue while also allowing the government to get rid of majority of the IRS workforce. Another law would be to prevent loans on shares of a stock. Basiclly stating that shares are a company can not be used as collateral as they are intangible until sell.
Why do people think that a flat tax/getting rid of the IRS would do anything but shit on the people who have the least. It's literally nonsense. It's not like there aren't *literally dozens* of countries around the world we can look to as examples of what a better taxation model looks like.
It was his fair share… 🤔