politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Kind of less, he's paying taxes on the sale too, because he's still selling it even tho he doesnt get to keep the money.
And when selling half a billion dollars of real estate, you're going to pay a lot of taxes even in America.
So the 200 million goes to the judgement, but he's paying 20-40% percent in state/federal/local taxes. And it's all gonna happen in the same calendar year while a shit ton of accountants are watching his every move.
He's going to end up having to sell a lot more than the judgement to pay his tax bill a year from now.
And that's not even getting into his loans.
Value a building at 100 million when it's worth 50
Borrow 70 million on property.
Sells for 40 and the bank needs 30 still.
There's no way out, even if the bank forgives the remaining 30, that still counts as taxable income for trump, compounding the first issue. And in that scenario, $0 is going to judgement and trump still loses the property and they move on to seizing the next on the list. He gets zero gain from the sale, but it's still drives up taxable income for him personally
trump could conceivably have a billion dollar gross income in 2024, and be completely broke with hundreds of millions due in tax.
Which is just insane.
I'll believe it when I see it.
And yet, it is just. He has been screwing people over for decades to amass what he has, and it's time he paid for his criminal (tax/loan/whatever fraud).
That’s not quite right.
If you buy something for 300m, with 200m in loans, and sell it for 250m, you pay the loan back first, and have 50m in losses. Your taxes go down.
He only pays tax on gains.
Remember the whole case is him inflating property value to get loans. Between the fire sale, and the bad loans, it’s very likely he has little to no equity. He could sell all he has and not have any money to pay the $500m (plus interest.) Which also means little to no tax burden.
But if he bought it for cheap, and got a loan on the property after the fact, or realistically, he held them for long enough then leveraged their new worth for other things, and hasn't paid any gains on the properties
He was on trial for taking loans on fake gains.
Right...
If he sells for less then he has a loan on, he still owes the money, and without the property as collateral, the lender is going to collect.
If they forgive the debt, that counts as earnings and is taxed.
So it would either force more sales to pay remaining loans, or it's forgiven and taxable income goes up
My schadenfreude is ramping up. I don't see him wiggling out.
Its possible at a firesale value it could end up being a capital loss. There wouldn't be any taxes then.
But you'd need a legit appraisal to even know if it's a loss, his appraisals are worthless
You don't need any appraisal. You only need to know the purchase price and the selling price. The difference between them is the gain or loss.
Oh, you're right. Whoops.
By that logic no one has ever paid taxes selling a used car...
They haven't. The buyer only pay sales tax, and the seller pays no tax at all. Except maybe crazy situations where it's a collectible antique that's worth way more now than when you bought it.
There is absolutely no way in the universe that little weasel didn't ask Elon for money over breakfast. No conceivable way.
Well pay taxes if you sell at a profit. Hard to say if the value of his assets increased.
No, it's still taxes.
If I buy a 50,000 car and sell it for 25000 2 years later, I'm still paying taxes.
How do you not know that?
You need to read more about how capital gain taxes work.
In your car example there would be a capital loss, so no taxes would be owed.
If you sold it for 55000, then there would be a capital gain and you would owe tax on the 5000 profit.
Here is an article that explains it relative to your example:
https://www.dmv.org/articles/income-tax-implications-of-selling-a-used-car/
The tax you pay is one the net gain, which is the amount realized less the base of the good (i.e., what you paid to acquire). I'm not a tax expert, and real estate can get really fucky with this stuff, but that's my understanding of the fundamental rules for taxation.
...
I'm not sure how to explain this any simpler.
My apologies, but if I tried again I'd just be repeating what I've just said.
Your explanation is wrong.
Here is an explanation of capital gains directly from the IRS:
https://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc409
The confusion is you think it's a "gain" only if sold for more than you paid, which isn't true.
And having a loan doesn't negate gains. It's two separate things. Which is why this situation for trump is so crazy and his taxable income can balloon so much despite trump not getting any money.
I don't think explaining more would help, but since you bothered to provide a link. I took the time to show you where you were confused.
It seems the confusion is that you think whatever the total amount the item sells for is a “gain.” A gain is the profit - the difference between what you sell the asset for and your cost basis in the asset.
In your car example, the cost basis is 50000. If you then sell it for 10000, you then have a capital loss of 40000. You don’t pay taxes on the 10000 because it is not earned income and it is not a gain - it’s part of your original capital. And you obviously don’t pay taxes on the 40k loss. And since it is a car, you can’t even deduct the loss.
If you sell the car for 55000, then you have a gain of 5000 (the difference between your cost basis of 50000 and what you sold it for). You are taxed on the capital gain of 5000, not on the entire 55000.
Considering I do that yearly you don't pay taxes on 25,000 but only on profit. You will write off a percentage of a capitalized item like that per year. The only way you would pay taxes above what you have expenses is if somehow that 50,000 dollar car sells for more then 50,000. That is likely not happening.