Capital gains is a fraudulent tax.

If you get a pension based on your payments into a retirement plan, you are getting monies returned to you which may not be based on the value of the currency when you worked.

When you get a pay check, your entire salary check is subject to taxation.

Re capital gains, only 20% of the gain is taxed (this after deferrals, depletion allowances, and other forms of corporate preferences). That's welfare. Let's make it equitable by taxing all of it just as with the other forms of income.

 

1) That's for long-term capital gains, which has a different tax treatment short-term capital gains. Short-term capital gains have the same tax treatment as wages and salaries at 37%.

2) Are you suggesting that capital gains isn't a form of income? That's clearly not correct. It's a different form of income, but suggesting that is not is obviously flawed.

 

Nothing I said was off topic. For whatever reason, you don't seem to understand that equities do not need to be indexed to inflation because they historically outpace inflation. Since equities have this quality, it is irrelevant what the value of equities will be in 20 years.

 

Incorrect. Capital gains are taxed similarly to wages and salaries. Only short-term gains are subject to different tax treatment. The only allowances for capital gains are capital losses, which are capped at $3,000 per year.

I don't know what you're taking about. They are taxed with other forms of income...

 

I said what you should have said if you cared about accuracy.

 

Post evidence that corporations don't pay payroll taxes, property taxes, state and local income taxes or Federal Corporate taxes on income earned in the US.

 

This:

 

Got my vote on indexing and then put the rate back to 15%.

 

Of course they should be taxed different they are entirely different types of income derived by entirely different means. What is more important at what rate you tax capital gains as in how much of it you take from the person, or the resulting revenue derived at a particular rate and the effect on the economy?

 

And look at the realizations, that is economic activity and growth in the economy. But that is not what it is about for the leftist. Regardless of the lower economic activity and lower actual revenues they want to just "stick it" to the higher earners as a matter of envy.

 

Erratum = meant to say corporate income taxes.

Thank you for pointing out the error.

 

Yep. There is no revenue argument for complaining about lower Capital Gains Taxes. The only problem is that Democrats need poverty to survive and lowering Capital Gains Taxes get in their way.

 

You do not seem to have a clue what you are talking about... All of a capital gain is taxable. The tax rate itself is a maximum of 20% of that gain.

If you buy an asset for 10 thousand dollars today, and sell it in 20 years at 20 thousand dollars and the inflation rate is 3.5% you have not made any capital gain because inflation has made the 20 thousand worth only as much as the 10 thousand was worth 20 years ago. But you are still taxed as though you actually made a profit.

 

You do not know what you are talking about. I suggest you find a topic you actually understand.

 

what is sad is that we tax labored income more

I am all for not taxing the first 50k of investment income per year..... but the right wont support that as they do not think benifits the rich enough

 

OP, this and some of the more "interesting" claims in the thread so far from people, almost none of whom would know a Schedule C from a Schedule E, who have -0- real understanding of tax law and tax policy in the U.S. other than what they get from radio shows, investment advertisements and "wealth pundits" (none of whom are CPAs or tax lawyers) is why I would highly recommend not bothering with starting specific tax policy threads here.

It's like the old "reasoning with a dog" cliche', irritates you, confuses the dog.

 

I hate to get off topic, but the income tax in my view is immoral. The only moral taxes are voluntary such as sales, or excise taxes, where you have some choice in the matter.

 

Direct taxation only.
I agree

 

The research suggest otherwise. Equities has outpaced inflation over the past several decades.

My post grad education is in this topic. What is your background?

 

Really? you actually graduated college and that is your line of reasoning? You are using a chart which illustrates an index, (S&P 500) in which non performing stocks are dropped, out of the index, not the entire market... but this is your business so I am sure you know that, and what the difference is. Tell me, did every Stock outpace inflation? Which did and which did not? Do you have exact statistics?

 

I also passed some series exams that covers this topic. Regardless, if you're going to tell others to find topics suitable fo their understanding, you can at least understand the basics...

That's not at all how the S&P 500 works. The S&P 500 is market-cap weighted. If equities are removed from the index, it's most likely due to the fact that they don't meet the market-cap requirements. OR, probably because the company in question was acquired by another (in which case, the target company was delisted). It has nothing to do with their performance.

The S&P is used because the index is used as the benchmark for all equity investments, considering it has the most consistent historical returns.

Irrelevant. Inflation is the measurement of a basket of consumer goods. For a comparison, you need a basket of equities. In general, equities outpace inflation.

It doesn't mean that every stock outpace inflation, but most stocks do. That is what the words, "in general" means.

 

Your capital gains are taxed similar as your wages and salaries... We don't tax wages/salaries any more or less. We have the same tax thresholds and brackets for capital gains as we do for wages and salaries.

The only difference is long-term gains, which as subjected to a different treatment due to the risk associated with long-term investments.

 

Jesus, I hope to hell no one pays you to manage their finances! When a stock declines, it looses market cap, therfore poorly perfoming stocks are removed from the index. If you are going to judge the entire market or any individual stocks on an index of the best perfoming 500 eqities then you are going to have some very nasty surprises.
Suppose you compose an index of the worst performing 500 stocks and let us know how they did.

To link indexing inflation to the perfomance of the S&P 500 is just a stupid idea.. Did you really graduate?

 

Nobody pays me to manage money. There are billions of things you can do in Finance, very few of which involves managing money.

I could ask you the same question, but I would only ask if you managed to graduate primary school. Not a single sentence in that paragraph was coherent.

First of all, no one is linking the performance to inflation. Stocks tends to outperform inflation, and the best evidence of that are stocks that are the most liquid and most profitable. The most liquid and profitable equities in the universe of stocks are the S&P 500. The S&P 500 is the benchmark for all U.S. based equities. That's not debatable.

What is probably also not debatable is your knowledge of this subject; which is near non-existent.

 

Well, they can't be terminated because it's not right for people/business to earn gains and not pay taxes. If terminated, this would certainly benefit the wealthier segment of society which won't go over well. It would also move money from cash positions and other investments seeking tax-free gains.

Like most taxes, seldom are they rational and/or fair...it's just government sucking every penny from society...