Bribed Joe Thinks He Can Tax Home Appreciation Even If You Don't Sell Your House

It is very easy to craft tax laws to favor any income group, which is one of the reasons why I am not a fan of broad based tax cut proposals. Did not like all of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts that Bush wanted and did not like the Trump broad based tax cuts. I learned my lesson from the TRA 86 which did some positive things, but not everything.

 

What part of "I have no interest in the court case and was only responding because another person was discussing unrealized capital gains taxation and that captured my interest" did you find confusing? There are lots of tangents that come from these threads, and I responded to one of those tangents. Sorry if that offends you.

If you want to argue the court case, I am sure you can find someone else that is interested in the topic you are itching to argue. There is no need to hound me.

If there was an OP where someone said that they love Biden because he lowered taxes which increased revenues, and then I respond because I was interested in discussing government revenues, whether or not the OP was incorrect in stating that Biden lowered taxes has not one thing to do with the discussion about government revenues. This is called a tangent and is perfectly acceptable.

Get over it. Welcome to political chat.

I will reiterate, I HAVE NO INTEREST IN DISCUSSING THE COURT CASE MENTIONED IN THE OP. The link clearly asserts that the court case is relevant to unrealized capital gains taxation, so I would imagine that there is an argument to be made that it does apply. For me? I dont carer one way or the other. .That is not of interest to me one way or the other. I replied to someone referring to capital gains taxation, and that is the topic that is of interest to me, and since Biden has pushed for unrealized gain taxation, the subject is fertile and relevant.

 

Tax cuts are always essentially a good thing whenever governments are Big and Bad. IMO, it would be better to transfer current tax revenue to vested accounts controlled by individual workers than to count on a corrupt political class to tinker/cut taxes -- at least in the short run.

 

Yes and no. Broad-based tax cuts never pay for themselves and lead to large fiscal deficits that we cannot pay for. That is how we got into this mess to begin with, assuming all other things equal.

But targeted tax cuts is a different matter where we can influence consumer behavior more succinctly. For instance, the hybrid deduction from the GWB tax cuts programs helped the auto industry move from traditional vehicles to hybrids. Toyota and Honda were the leaders in that field in the mid-2000s. We still have them as well as electric vehiclse which should be continued to help the auto industry here in the States. This is the direction the world is moving to, especially Japan, China, and Europe.

 

Doing that (taxing retirement accounts and appreciation of home values) sounds like political suicide to me.

Any R’s or D’s want to adopt that position? Helluva winner there/sarcasm.

 

This whole thread is about the court case since the article AND the OP cited said case, Tben they went off on a tangent abour unrealized capital gains being taxed, based on same said court case, which shows that either the OP or the author of the article never understood what the court case was about or lied outright for political purposes. Pretty much everyone else has followed what the OP said or argued, which is not something Biden is talking about or even proposing, not even in the legislature.

Now if you want to talk about unrealized capital gains, that can be done through IRC 421, 422, and/or 423. But it is an option by the person holding the stock options of a company. But that is a whole different ballgame and it has been on the books since 1954 or so. TRA 86 expanded them and this is how bonuses are paid, especially with ISO stock options.

 

Its not about the court case.

The linked article refers to Bidens desire to pass legislation to tax unrealized gains, and the only mention of the court case is that the Biden appointed Justice said in her opinion on that case that "all questions concerning the Tax Clause of Article I, Section 8 or the scope of the 16th Amendment are political questions that are not reviewable by the federal courts." That statement is literally the extent that this discussion has any relevance to said court case.

The link then goes on to discuss how this jibes with Bidens stated desire to tax unrealized gains. It says not one other thing about this court case. The only person that I see discussing the court case is you, and you keep acting as if any other subject is therefore wrong.

Stop whining. You are stammering your feet and making a federal case out of nothing. This is a thread about Bidens desire to tax unrealized gains. Yeesh. Why does this bother you so much?

Stop trying in vain to control what other people talk about. It is none of your business.

For the record, optional taxing of unrealized gains for holders of stock options has nothing to do with Bidens stated desire to tax unrealized gains. They are entirely different things. It seems that it is you that wants to talk about everything other than the actual topic which doesn't bother me but is definitely ironic given your incessant whining about sticking to the topic.

 

When supporting slicing the breasts off young confused girls hasn't proven to be political suicide, or supporting housing male felon sex offenders with incarcerated women, in the same cage, hasn't proven to be political suicide, when supporting open borders that allow millions of unvetted illegals to settle into cities, bringing with them, the rape and murder of young women and girls, and sex trafficking and fentanyl deaths to levels we can't even imagine hasn't proven to be political suicide, it's hard for me to be certain that confiscatory taxation will be the straw that breaks the camel's back, but, confiscatory inflation that results from the unbridled debt spending by Bribed Joe and the Dems has certainly damaged him politically, so one may hope.

Bribed Joe only barely won the election by 'carrying' the swing states where counting was extended long enough for the late night vote dumps of mail in ballots to ensure the narrow victories in 5 swing states, and Bribed Joe is polling 10 points behind where he was at this point in the last election.

Actually Bribed Joe is 12.2 points behind last cycle.



10 points of this, polling has shown was lost because these voters never would have voted for Bribed Joe had they known that Hunter's laptop wasn't Russian Disinformation, as was claimed by the Lying FBI and the Corrupt FBI in order to rig our presidential election for Bribed Joe.

The remaining 2.2% could be their crazed confiscatory tax plans,
the loss of Afghanistan and the complete bungling of the war in Afghanistan, Gaza, and against the Houthis.
It could be the Open Borders, the rapes and murders committed by Bribed Joe's illegals.

It could be the stagnant real wages and failing living standards.
It could be the constant lying about and failure to pay taxes on his $34M in bribes from corrupt foreign Oligarchs.
It could be his espionage and his attempts to fix the election by jailing Trump who has been leading him the polls for 6 months.

It's hard to tell, but his confiscatory tax plans certainly do not help.

 

Glad to see you back and posting "context" and "timeline". You are preaching to the "choir" however, no one has addressed your point and they won't. RW Fake News is the intent of the OP.

 

And if you had bothered to read the majority decision, you would have learned that the court ruled that "unrealized" earnings can't be taxed.

 

Would it be possible for you to provide the exact definition of "earnings" as you are applying it here in the context of the majority decision you are referencing?

Thanks in advance!

 

"Targeted tax cuts" are usually paid for with bribes to politicians.

“Politics in modern America has become a lucrative business, an industry that has less to do with policy and a lot more to do with accessing money and favors. … bills and regulations are often introduced not to affect policy change, but as vehicles for shaking down people for … money and favors. Indeed, the motive on both sides often has nothing to do with creating a “correct” policy but instead is often about maximizing profits.”
EXTORTION, How Politicians Extract Your money, Buy Votes, And Line Their Own Pockets, Peter Schweizer, HMO, NY, NY, 2013, p. 4.

That is why "tax cuts" will ultimately fail to reduce the size, power or corrupt nature of government.

OTOH, a Double Your Money Back Party could reduce the size and power of government while empowering the productive working class at warp speed.

Might even reduce corruption -- at least a smidge.

 

RP/DP pols tend to do exactly what they are paid enough to do.

“Media reports on government actions, whether debates, legislation, or regulation, almost always present them in terms of pure policy. New laws are for a specific purpose, perhaps even a noble one. But what if that isn't the real purpose of the exercise? What if politics is largely about fund-raising and moneymaking? The commercial motives of the Permanent Political Class in acting or not acting are rarely questioned and virtually never fully understood.” EXTORTION, How Politicians Extract Your money, BuyVotes, And Line Their Own Pockets, Peter Schweizer, HMO, NY, NY, 2013. p. 2, 3.

 

Zorro is using the court case and thinking that the court case would allow to tax unrealized gains on private homes. That is a total misrepresentation of what the court case was about, not to mention, not understanding at all what the tax code is and is not. Gains and income are not the same damn thing and yet, the OP and the author of the article think it is.

Second, Biden has not made any such suggestion or claim on this. Not at all. The only place where I see this "idea or claim": of unrealized gains on homes to be taxed is from RW media who are using fear and complete ignorance to make a point. Hypothetically, even if Biden did make the point by the OP, using the Moore case is like using baseball terms to describe a sport and the rules other than baseball. Get the analogy here. It should not have been used, which is why I raised the concern. But all you guys are acting DD&S because you are making things up out of your arses as you go along. None of you have no ****ing clue about what is and what is not the tax code.

Posters like Zorro and the websites that he uses will criticize Biden that he wants to close all sandwich shops because they thought Biden was eating the sandwich wrong. This is one of the biggest problems with American politics today and the type of divisiveness. Biden is not doing this, "you guys are" along with some on the other side of the aisle. There are times that Biden should be criticized, even with political spin, but this is not one of them and never will be.

Thus, if the Moore Case is going to be citied in an article, then it should follow what that case was about. The article attempted to blame biden on a tax that was passed by Trump, then tried to make the claim that they can use this court case on homes, which it could not because it does not deal with gains of any kind in the United States, and then you guys get all upset when called out on it. Take a long, cold shower, very cold shower on this topic each and everyone of you.

 

Yes, we should make lobbying efforts by anyone a bribe. This would now mean Trump will be charged for taking bribes because he wants the wealthy people to lobby him to get what they want, right?

 

You may want to tell Forbes, because they are under the impression that he has proposed taxing unrealized gains...


"In President Joe Biden’s proposal in the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget of the United States Government, and more specifically in the General Explanations of the Administration’s FY 2025 Revenue Proposals, the Biden administration has proposed a slate of bold shifts in tax policy that could redefine high income tax planning and investment strategies.

Among the most striking initiatives in the FY2025 Budget Proposal is a set of proposals taxing unrealized gains—a concept generally absent in tax frameworks due to valuation complexities, liquidity concerns and the overall challenge of implementation.

Unrealized gains are increases in the value of an asset that have not been realized—either through sale or a deemed realization event. They are, simply put, the increase in the valuation of an asset “on paper.”

Lending complexity to the analysis, however, is the fact that unrealized gains can be used as collateral to borrow against—thereby making an unrealized gain in the interest in a given piece of property, potentially, an accession to wealth for a given taxpayer."
Unrealized Gain Tax—A Coming Sea Change in FY2025 Budget Proposal? (forbes.com)




Who should we believe?....Forbes when they say Biden is proposing this, or you when you insist that he has not? I would swear that I remember this so vividly, yet you are so darned authoritative in your denial of such. Hmmmm...

 

Don't you mean "unrealized earnings"? Actually it's unrealized gains, my semantic error.

"An unrealized gain or loss occurs when the value of an asset has increased or decreased, but it has not yet been sold."

 

It would make every politician helped by lobbyists a criminal. Fortunately, for them, our pols get to write the laws. That is why it is legal for our politicians to take bribes -- so long as they do it -- by the book.

“[T]he running existential contradictions of D.C., a place where “authenticity and fantasy are close companions”, as the Washington Post’s Henry Allen once wrote. It misses that the city, far from being hopelessly divided, is in fact hopelessly interconnected. It misses the degree to which New Media has democratized the political conversation while accentuating Washington's insular, myopic, and self loving tendencies. It misses, most of all, a full examination of how Washington may not serve the country well but has, in fact, worked splendidly for Washington itself– A city of beautifully busy people constantly writing the story of their own lives.”
THIS TOWN, Mark Leibovich, Penguin Books, 2013, p. 10.

 

I'm confused: you guys don't pay higher property taxes on your homes when your home value goes up?

 

No, please define "earnings"in the context you say it's being used, forget the "unrealized" for now. I don't want you confused......so define "earnings". Thanks...

 

We aren't discussing just "earnings" and you know it...lol

 

Now you are running at full gallop away from the statement you made. I asked simply for the definition and you come up short AGAIN. How Trumpian....said Stormy.

 

And you're taking my comments out of context. Flamebaiting much?

 

Are you confused again and grasping for a straw........man. still waiting on you to define "earnings" as you used it in your claim. Put up or......

 

If it is so rigged in their favor then why do they pay such a disproportionate share of them and how much should they have to pay?

No they didn't he paid millions both years it took to install it.

"Romney made about $22 million a year and paid millions in taxes both years. From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we see that in the San Diego metro area, the average elevator installer earned $83,460 in 2013."
https://www.politifact.com/article/2015/jan/18/punditfact-fact-checks-jan-18-news-shows/

What share of tax revenues should the top 1% pay? Top 10%? Bottom 50%. Give us your numbers that would be
"fair".