additional commentary on the Matt Bai piece: What If The Bad Guys Win in Ukraine? The most likely outcome is not a happy one. https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/what-if-they-bad-guys-win-in-ukraine/
This deserves to be in the Ukraine thread. I largely agree with much of that piece and yes we should be preparing for the possibility that Ukraine get's defeated. That was what most people including Ukrainians were thinking woudl happen a few weeks ago and still is a very likely outcome. Then as now the idea is that if Russia takes Ukraine is that this goes into a prolonged cold war struggle with continuing sanctions. In Ukraine Ukrainians fight an insurgency using assymetric warfare tactics like what the Mujahadeen used against the USSR and the Taliban used against us. We provide aid and training to the Ukrainian insurgents.
And as we have learned, the creation and support of the kind of extremists necessary to fight this kind of war will ultimately lead to those extremists acting upon us. The cycle continues.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/03/bidens-dumbest-idea-yet.php BIDEN’S DUMBEST IDEA YET? I know, it’s a stiff competition. But the “billionaire tax” that is part of the Biden administration’s proposed budget is astonishingly dumb. This is how the Wall Street Journal describes it: So apparently, if you are wealthy you have to start by figuring out whether your household’s net worth is more or less than $100 million. If your wealth consists in large part of closely held companies, real estate, fine arts and similar investments, this will be a matter of opinion and endless grist for litigation. But let’s assume you get over the magic threshold. The essence of the proposal is to force some taxpayers to pay income taxes on any appreciation in assets they hold. The plan apparently applies to interests in family businesses and other closely held corporations, which are notoriously hard to value. Does it apply to real estate and other illiquid assets? Apparently so, although there are “special rules for illiquid taxpayers.” Apart from its unworkability, the fundamental problem with this plan is that it seeks to impose the income tax where there is no income. Asset values rise and fall, sometimes dramatically–in both directions. An investor typically holds assets for a period of time until he decides to sell. At that point, he has either a gain or a loss that is relatively easy to calculate. It is axiomatic that you haven’t made any money on a stock until you sell it, but the Biden proposal senselessly ignores this elementary principle. The Biden plan raises the obvious question, what happens when asset values fall? Next time the stock market crashes or real estate values decline, will the federal government write checks to (only) the richest Americans to cover some portion of their paper losses? I suppose not, which exposes the gross unfairness of the Biden plan. Not to worry, though: presidents’ budgets are pretty much meaningless, and there is zero chance that this farcical proposal will become law. It is merely one more indication of the desperation with which Democrats are anticipating the midterm elections. The demagogic Democrats want to align themselves with the people, in opposition to billionaires, even though in fact, most billionaires who participate significantly in public life are Democrats. Does anyone remember the last time Wall Street backed a Republican presidential candidate? It might be fun for Mitch McConnell to bring this part of Biden’s budget plan on for a vote in the Senate, and encourage all Senate Republicans to vote for it. The consternation this would cause in Democratic Party ranks would be worth the price of admission. POSTED ON MARCH 29, 2022 BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN TAXES
I think "dumb" is unnecessary to describe it, but it'd definitely not ideal. Instead of taxing unrealized gains that aren't liquid (such as stock), I think it's better to put a minimum income tax on that years realized & liquid income on those with a certain amount of liquid assets and unrealized gains.
Flat tax and reduced government spending might actually work. Do that and tighten offshore bank accounts and we'll get somewhere.
I've long been supportive of a flat tax as long as it removes nearly all deductions. Because it would need to remove almost all deductions is why it will never pass. Too many are politically invested in those deductions.
That sounds better than what is being proposed but I think this is still going to be very difficult to figure out.
Even with out a flat tax the percentage of money taken from a high income earner doesn't cause them to have to choose between essentials. Low income earners may have to do that. It is punitive to people that earn less. I think it would be better to remove some deductions but not make it a flat tax.
Sure with say a 15% flat tax high income earners will be better off than low income earners. I agree a flat tax is regressive. That said the situation we have now is also regressive where high income earners are avoiding paying any taxes in many cases because they can work so many deductions. Further our tax code is so complicated that to just legally comply with it many even middle income tax payers have to spend money on CPA's, tax lawyers and etc.. just to prepare their taxes. That ends up being regressive as the burden of preparing taxes is more to bear for lower income tax payers who may not get as many deductions or as big a return as higher income.
Taxes are difficult to figure out, but you are right. It's just untenable to tax someone for unrealized gains. If someone starts a company, and that company gets a $50 million dollar investment for example, it's value could easily exceed $100 million and make the founder very rich on paper even though they have very little cash and unable to pay any tax that would come on that unrealized gain. If they want the rich to pay more taxes, just a simple thing such as - past $250K, you can not apply these deductions to your personal income taxes. past $500k gross, you must pay a minimum of 10% tax even on 1099's, etc.
It's powerline blog, what do you expect? I think what's really fk up is our tax system is so complicated, it has a whole industry within the gov and in the private sector to game it and to defend it. There are so many freaking loopholes that benefit the wealthy first and foremost and everyone else that knows enough and has enough to play with. I'm just complaining. I have no good solution.
I have heard of it, but I haven't looked into it at all, yet. Thanks for the reminder. I will need to do look at it.
step one towards undoing the huge tax cut that Trump had gifted the top 1% earner, which eliminated the AMT some of the Trump tax policies include putting a cap on the most popular tax deduction for the middle class, SALT deduction, to offset elimination of the AMT, alternative minimum tax
