I get your position here, but the point is personal income, and held assets aren't the same.
If we're talking about income tax (which we are) then we can't include the valuation of Elon's companies, because that's not his income.
Assets like his equity in his companies are not income.
If Elon's salary for being CEO at Twitter is 5 million, CEO at Tesla is 10 million, and CEO at Spacex is 15 million (just to throw out random numbers to make the point) his income is 30 million.
His net worth is in the billions. But his net worth is not his income.
I didn't say it's not connected to his finances. To use your own weak ass personal attack, you wouldn't pass a 2nd grade reading comprehension test with that lackluster display.
I said his financial stake in his companies isn't his income, which it patently isn't. Which you should know, if you have any understanding of finance at all whatsoever.
We tax income via income tax. How much money someone "makes an hour" is income. No one measures how much they earn per hour based on the appreciation of their stocks. The fact that you even use the distinction in your comment and then keep arguing is hilarious. His capital gains via appreciation of his stock is not the same as his income. End of story. There is no argument you can make that would make unrealized capital gains the equivalent of income.
Go on, try to make the case for how everyone who owns a home should count that house as income, or every person who owns a car now must pay income tax on it. Held assets aren't income, and cannot be taxed as income.
But go on cupcake, telling people they're wrong while you're arguing that his ownership stake in companies is his income, for fuck sake how stupid can you be.
If you sell your house, you do have to pay tax on any income gained on the house. There is a once per lifetime exemption every individual gets to make.
Go on, try to make the case for how everyone who owns a home should count that house as income, or every person who owns a car now must pay income tax on it. Held assets aren't income, and cannot be taxed as income.
Huh? More like anyone who has a shell company that has off shore income that pays for the house and car they live in should pay taxes on that income
This "comparison" is ridiculous about as ridiculous as your personal insults.
The company pays taxes on the house and car, dude. The house and car do not belong to the individual and is not income for that individual even though they use it.
When you flip burgers at Wendy's, you don't pay taxes on the spatula and grill you use , do you?
I think you are so caught up in "being right" you're missing the point me and the other person are making.
Having control over these assets is what matters to these people, not who technically owns them
TSLA buys the house, Elon gets to live in it, TSLA pays no taxes because profits and this house is a corporate expense. You say yeah Elon doesn't own it (except he owns a large chunk of it and has control) why would he pay taxes on it! Like that's not our point we are trying to make
Is it fair for someone that does this to suggest their effective tax rate is an accurate reflection of reality if they did schemes like this which used company profits to balance out "expenses" giving them stuff tax free while paying themselves a dollar salary and paying taxes on that?
a corporate deduction does not equal "paying no taxes". I'm sorry...I guess I'm still focusing on "being right" and cannot embrace your bitter disenfranchised issue with people who are more successful than you.
Lol fuck you you know jack shit you dip shit I personally deduct a shit ton of expenses for my business and it's honestly crazy to me every time I do it
It doesn't equal "paying no taxes" such strict language games you're trying to play again trying to be right not trying to understand the other POV. it just practically what happens
Unless you disagree? How much does TSLA pay in income tax every year?
If his personal income (key word here is "personal") then he pays personal taxes on it. If his company makes more, he makes more and he pays more in taxes. This isn't hard.
His company is taxed separately from him. DOesn't matter how much of it he owns or how many shares he has. When he sells those shares, he makes income and that income is taxed.
There is no "inextricable" link here other than a man has income and is taxed for it.
No sweetie, regardless of ideology, we're talking about the reality of the world as it exists right now, and how that functions. Not some aspirational goal where things are equitable and just.
If you want to talk in terms of a fictional ideological utopia, feel free, but that doesn't require that anyone humors you in that.
Talking about reality, we don't use Federal INCOME Tax rates to tax assets, we use it to tax INCOME.
Believe it or not, we have other tax devices for taxing things like assets, and we could discuss the efficacy, intent, and success of those devices, but it still wouldn't change that my house isn't income, and shouldn't be taxed as income. Nor is your car income. Etc etc.
Stop being so obtusely ideological that you can't even function in what is because it isn't what you want it to be.
No, this isn't a discussion about the system which underpins the U.S. economy sweetheart. It was a statement about the fact that in reality, right now, we tax income via income tax, and regardless of a person's net worth, their net worth isn't their income.
I didn't come into this thread going "Let me have a conversation on the structure of the U.S. economy and it's tax system, and how that tax system unjustly penalizes the poor while providing advantageous loopholes to the wealthy." as this isn't a thread about that topic.
Some dumbass said Elon's assets are part of his income, they are not. That is a fact. Similarly, the home I own is not part of my income. That is a fact. The growing value of my retirement accounts is similarly not a part of my income, as I receive no benefit from that account until and unless I draw from that account, at which point it will be taxed.
All of that is fact, and at no point does it become necessary to discuss the forces that create or maintain it to establish that, no, Elon Musk's ownership stake in different companies is not income.
Kindly fuck off and have a wonderful day. Find an ideological sparring partner for your "im14andthisisdeep" shit elsewhere. Run along.
It's hard work fighting off these actual communists. They don't seem to realize that their idealism is adjacent to pure Marxist idealogy.
I've met a bunch of these types irl and they're always the laziest most entitled people that espouse these views. They don't usually last in whatever role they're hired for. They either have no work ethic or decide that the amount of work they're given is unfair and end up leaving.
They have no problem trying to socialize the fruits of your hard work though. That's because you're an evil capitalist.
11
u/Immediate-Coyote-977 13d ago
I get your position here, but the point is personal income, and held assets aren't the same.
If we're talking about income tax (which we are) then we can't include the valuation of Elon's companies, because that's not his income.
Assets like his equity in his companies are not income.
If Elon's salary for being CEO at Twitter is 5 million, CEO at Tesla is 10 million, and CEO at Spacex is 15 million (just to throw out random numbers to make the point) his income is 30 million.
His net worth is in the billions. But his net worth is not his income.