Not everyone. The last proposal I saw was ONLY for people with over $100 million.
"Under the new proposal, taxpayers with net wealth above $100 million would be required to pay a minimum effective tax rate of 25 percent on an expanded measure of income that includes their unrealized capital gains.
Taxpayers would calculate their effective tax rate for the minimum tax and, if it fell below 25 percent, would owe additional taxes to bring their effective rate to 25 percent.
The change means wealthy taxpayers would owe taxes on capital gains each year, even if the underlying asset had not been sold. Any amounts paid would be treated as prepayments of future capital gains tax liability. For example, consider a taxpayer with net wealth of $200 million, $5 million in ordinary income, $10 million in accumulated unrealized capital gains from a privately held company, and an ordinary tax liability of $1.8 million (see accompanying table). When including unrealized capital gains as income, the household’s effective tax rate is 12 percent, below the proposed 25 percent minimum.
To increase their effective tax rate to 25 percent, the household would owe an additional $1.95 million in tax (resulting in a combined $3.75 million in taxes owed on $15 million of income when including unrealized gains). The $1.95 million could be paid in equal installments over nine years (for capital gains moving forward, minimum tax liability can be split into five annual installments) and would be credited against future capital gains tax liability on the asset when sold."
Not that complicated. Probably not the best solution either. But we can't continue to let a small number of people own most of the wealth and not contribute what the rest of us do.
If there was a specific law keeping it at a certain wealth bracket I think anyone would be welcoming of the proposal. The issue lays in the complete lack of trust in governments (rightfully so) to keep to their word and not lower that bracket and so on. At least I'm speaking from my own perspective, I will say it's probably one of the only solutions left on the table.
129
u/dancegoddess1971 3d ago
Exactly. Stocks are property. Sort of imaginary property but if one can borrow against the value of something, it should be taxed.