1 edit
-Removed-I already did so with a link to the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance: "Property tax is based on the assessed value of the real property. Generally, the assessed value of your home is the value of your real property as determined by your local government officials. It is typically based on the market value of the real property."
https://www.tax.ny.gov/help/taxpayer-education/financial/2-filing-responsibilities-4.htm#:~:text=Property%20tax%20is%20a%20tax,value%20of%20the%20real%20property.
It's actually far easier to assess the value of a paper asset like stock shares than it is real property. As I already stated, you can look up a share price in numerous places on the internet in seconds.
1 edit
-Removed-So what? What's the difference what it is called, it still taxes unrealized values. That's all I said:
no1: Pretty much every State has local real property taxes which are based on "unrealized" values. The shrieking here isn't because the idea is novel, but because it would be a step to a fairer tax system that would raise more revenue from the rich.
p. 6 of this thread
-Removed-You saying so doesn't make it so. You've yet to make a coherent argument why it would be "silly". In fact, it seems an excellent way to raise revenue from the wealthy that primarily benefit from our economic and social system to pay for spending the majority's representatives find necessary.
@no1marauder saidWell, well.....Marauder says here...."(Kamala) raising taxes on the working and middle classes would depress consumer spending....".
Raising taxes on the working and middle classes would depress consumer spending which accounts for up to 75% of GNP. This could likely trigger an economic downturn which because of the countercyclical effect of government fiscal policy would increase the deficit.
Who will he vote for, I wonder. Consider Trump will reduce taxes.
1 edit
-Removed-
Trying to conflate this as a precedent to tax stock and shares held only on paper is silly
What? You think wall street trades pieces of paper?
A stock represents the estimated but very real value of a company. Most of these publicly traded companies rely on government services to varying degrees and their value would plummet without a functioning US govt. That value should be taxed with the same rationale that property taxes are used to support local services that stabilize the value of property.
-Removed-The reason why capital gains on non real estate investments is not taxed is not about logistics or the power of explanation. It's clear why it makes sense.
But political donors don't want it. So the burden of paying for corporate welfare falls to the middle class homeowners.
-Removed-So your "holding your breath until you turn blue" style of argument might work for a 5 year old wanting an extra cookie from grandma, but it doesn't explain why "unrealized" gains from real estate should and are taxed but far greater "unrealized" gains from stocks shouldn't be.
I might add that because the latter, unlike the former, have extraordinarily high liquidity in the modern economy, the wealthy can easily dispose of any that fall below their initial purchase price and use that loss to reduce their taxes owed while hoarding the ones that are increasing in value with no tax consequences whatsoever. Like most of the US system, it's a win-win for them and a net loss for the rest of society.