364
The Secret IRS Files: Trove of Never-Before-Seen Records Reveal How the Wealthiest Avoid Income Tax
(www.propublica.org)
this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
364 points (98.4% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
9509 readers
544 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My "true tax rate" is a low single digit number too, if you measure it the same way, and I make ~$50k a year.
It's extremely disingenuous to talk about taxes paid as a percentage of income, and as a percentage of total wealth/net worth, in the same breath, as if they are anywhere near the same thing.
It's also extremely disingenuous to say someone is 'avoiding tax' by not paying tax on their unrealized gains in net worth. He doesn't OWE any tax on that. NOBODY in the US does.
This is like calling someone a draft dodger, who was never drafted, lol.
Normal people regularly owe taxes on unrealized gains. That's what property tax increases are.
Not sure what point you were trying to make here, lol. There is no type of unrealized gain that "normal people" are taxed on (federally or otherwise), but Buffett isn't.
I had hoped the point would be pretty obvious. Most people's homes represent a significant part of their net worth, often a majority of their assets. The unrealized gains on that are taxed.
Billionaires generally (are there even any counterexamples?) do not have the majority of their net worth stored in assets that are taxed the same way. It's a meaningful difference.
It is kinda weird that real estate gets taxed just for existing and being held, but stocks, which supposedly represent a fraction of a mass of real wealth too, don't get taxed while just being held.
Actually, there are a large number of billionaires whose primary assets are literally property.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotognini/2023/10/04/the-richest-real-estate-billionaires-in-america-2023/
But the real question is, do you think they should be? 'Cause I'm with you if you say no. Unrealized gains should not be taxed at all, it makes no sense.
You're misunderstanding how their wealth is distributed. By and large, they're not directly owning the land and paying taxes. They just own significant stakes in the actual companies holding property. I'm sure they own a house or three, but it's not significant compared to their other assets.
I'm not taking a position on whether property taxes are good. I think they are. I'm just pointing out the discrepancy.