• Pacattack57@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Buddy as soon as they give money to a private start up it wouldn’t be unrealized gains. You can’t give stocks to a startup. Even if you could they would count as income for the business and would be taxed. And even if they went through the regular fuckery of business tax loopholes, they would have stimulated the economy through spending so it’s a win win.

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      Give yourself illiquid shares of the startup that have a time-bound restriction before they are allowed to become liquid

      Ok, but the problem is that unrealized capital gains are being used for disposable income by taking out loans using a tradeable asset as collateral. I suspect it would be much harder to get a loan using an illiquid asset like this one.

        • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Some who has $900m in a truly illiquid investment and $100m in liquid assets is basically a paper billionaire. As long as $900m is illiquid they have the means of someone with only $100m, and I’m OK if the IRS treats them that way.

    • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      this would push investors towards the non-included class of real estate

      You’d have to pay property tax then, and unless your in California your paying that on your “unrealized gains” as well since they’ll re-asses your property every few years and tax you on the newly assessed value.