Taxes and the Mega-Wealthy

#103
#103
Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are saying "hey what about us?"

(Propublica Statement)

"Many will ask about the ethics of publishing such private data. We are doing so — quite selectively and carefully — because we believe it serves the public interest in fundamental ways, allowing readers to see patterns that were until now hidden."
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol, McDad and NorthDallas40
#104
#104
volinbham said:
Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are saying "hey what about us?"

(Propublica Statement)

"Many will ask about the ethics of publishing such private data. We are doing so — quite selectively and carefully — because we believe it serves the public interest in fundamental ways, allowing readers to see patterns that were until now hidden."
Click to expand...
By any means necessary…
 
#105
#105
McDad said:
You're still wrong. His unrealized wealth isn't paying for the house on Martha's Vineyard. BezoCorp is. He hasn't used unrealized wealth. His CPA and Tax Attorneys have used deductions available to the Corporation. I don't have a home through my corporation. But if it is like anything else my corporation funds, then there are strict rules governing usage for BezoCorp's home in Marhas Vineyard. It isn't Jeff's house. And he is probably limited on using it so it can meet the definition of a corp retreat (it's also likely it has to be made available to other executives is BezoCorp).

@BigOrangeMojo has forgotten more than I will ever know about this stuff. He should help us all.
Click to expand...

I would largely bet that the proceeds and investment income from his prior realized stock gains are what's funding the bulk of his lifestyle. For example, he sold $6.7 billion of Amazon stock in May.

Regarding the $500K Vegas weekends and related company transactions. it is a little different when you are a publicly traded CEO and transactions related to anything that might be considered compensation are disclosed in a SEC proxy. If he has a $500K Vegas weekend (for example), that would be disclosed in a proxy statement since most of that would be considered compensation. For example, Amazon discloses his security expenses in their proxy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad and volinbham
#107
#107
NorthDallas40 said:
Irrelevant. They are private citizens and their tax filing information is protected. You educate yourself.

What Is Tax Information Privacy?
Click to expand...
Your MAGA is showing by linking an article from some Russian developed "news" site that uses Donald Trump as an example of tax issues. Try linking something more respectable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic
#108
#108
BigOrangeMojo said:
I would largely bet that the proceeds and investment income from his prior realized stock gains are what's funding the bulk of his lifestyle. For example, he sold $6.7 billion of Amazon stock in May.

Regarding the $500K Vegas weekends and related company transactions. it is a little different when you are a publicly traded CEO and transactions related to anything that might be considered compensation are disclosed in a SEC proxy. If he has a $500K Vegas weekend (for example), that would be disclosed in a proxy statement since most of that would be considered compensation. For example, Amazon discloses his security expenses in their proxy.
Click to expand...

yes - it's not as simple as has been portrayed here
 
#109
#109
Tyler Durden said:
Your MAGA is showing by linking an article from some Russian developed "news" site that uses Donald Trump as an example of tax issues. Try linking something more respectable.
Click to expand...
Then go right to the US law governing the release clown boy 🤡

The issue of tax information privacy is covered by Internal Revenue Code Section 6103. The code, 26 U.S. Code § 6103, prohibits the Internal Revenue Service and your tax professional from disclosing your tax information to anyone without your explicit consent.
Click to expand...
 
#111
#111
volinbham said:
per the tweet graphic Bezos paid nearly 1 billion in taxes - how many average Joe's tax bills would it take to cover that?

nearly 50% of tax payers have zero or negative Federal income tax liability - define "average Joe"
Click to expand...
That would solve lots of problems
Gotta have skin in the game
 
#114
#114
You can own a million shares of AMZN, you don't have **** until you sell it. It's not like you can show people your trading account and they'll sell you a house or a car. When you realize that gain, Uncle Sam takes his cut. If you've made investments that have lost money you get to net it. And when you die if there's enough money the IRS comes calling again for their 45% of the wealth you didn't really earn. In Bezos' case he's already paid taxes on his RSU's or whatever mechanism he was granted shares. He probably receives little to no compensation and angel invests in a lot of things that wind up hemorrhaging money or failing altogether.
 
#115
#115
Tyler Durden said:
Isn't there an argument to be made that the average Joe's are the one's making up for the billionaire's lack of tax payment? Seems like the average Joe is bearing the burden for the billionaire's tax. They pay what they're supposed to they're still billionaires, but the average Joe has more money to spend, more products are bought, more money is made.
Click to expand...

In 2019 and 2020, I paid a similar rate (to the billionaires) on the increases in my net worth because I did not realize much in capital gains although I had a significant increase in the value of my investment holdings.

I'm not a billionaire, just a goofball on a message board with an elephant butt avatar
 
#116
#116
DancingOutlaw said:
You can own a million shares of AMZN, you don't have **** until you sell it. It's not like you can show people your trading account and they'll sell you a house or a car. When you realize that gain, Uncle Sam takes his cut. If you've made investments that have lost money you get to net it. And when you die if there's enough money the IRS comes calling again for their 45% of the wealth you didn't really earn. In Bezos' case he's already paid taxes on his RSU's or whatever mechanism he was granted shares. He probably receives little to no compensation and angel invests in a lot of things that wind up hemorrhaging money or failing altogether.
Click to expand...

Just ask all those folks with giant Beanie Baby collections what they are worth now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#117
#117
n_huffhines said:
But he does have a house. He uses it. He controls it. It's his. Do you think his guests correct him when he calls it his house?
Click to expand...
Your conflating use and ownership. You rent a car but do not own the car. Your question about his guests is not a good one. A better question is, Do you think he adheres to the rules set in the IRS code for corp housing/retreats (if such exist)?
 
#118
#118
volinbham said:
Just ask all those folks with giant Beanie Baby collections what they are worth now.
Click to expand...
I would like to see the logic of the eat the rich crowd. If your position is that Bezos should pay a "wealth tax", how does that work? Say he's worth $200B, he pays a 1% tax this year. Next year AMZN trades sideways and he's still at $198B (he lost 1% to taxes last year). He pays tax on the wealth again? So another $2B to the Treasury for the crime of daring to live another year. They cannot accept that there is a system of tax deferral in our code, which is designed to protect the average person. The apes buying Gamestop and AMC most likely don't have the cash sitting around to pay the "wealth tax" on their new money without selling the thing that gave them the wealth. Look up what happened to the Robbie family when Joe Robbie died. They owed so much inheritance tax on the Dolphins franchise they had to sell the team to come up with the cash to pay the tax. That's idiotic.
 
#119
#119
n_huffhines said:
But he does have a house. He uses it. He controls it. It's his. Do you think his guests correct him when he calls it his house?
Click to expand...
My tenants call the house I lease to them, their house. I don't correct them. They can choose paint colors, choose who to have over, choose how to use it within the law. But I assure you, they do not own the house. They do not have the house. They have use of the house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill and NorthDallas40
#120
#120
n_huffhines said:
I already bashed the original article. We're well past this. I got that out of the way with my first post. The whole time I've been talking about fairness. What's legal, and the semantics surrounding the term "realized", do not matter to this question.
Click to expand...
Then you shouldn't have constructed your post around realized wealth.

What is fair or not fair is not as easy to define.
 
Last edited:
#121
#121
Tyler Durden said:
Isn't there an argument to be made that the average Joe's are the one's making up for the billionaire's lack of tax payment? Seems like the average Joe is bearing the burden for the billionaire's tax. They pay what they're supposed to they're still billionaires, but the average Joe has more money to spend, more products are bought, more money is made.
Click to expand...
For an average Joe to make up what someone else doesn't provide hinges on the premise that certain assets inherently belong to the entity which isn't made whole. This isn't the presumption under which I form my thoughts on taxation.
 
#122
#122
McDad said:
Your conflating use and ownership. You rent a car but do not own the car. Your question about his guests is not a good one. A better question is, Do you think he adheres to the rules set in the IRS code for corp housing/retreats (if such exist)?
Click to expand...
Just want to jump in here and say the vast majority of corporations got out of the real estate game a long time ago. In the before times it was not uncommon for companies to have a real estate arm that bought and sold executive homes, especially companies that made a habit of transferring people across the country or overseas. The complications of running a real estate company inside say a chemical manufacturer and the tax issues it creates have all but killed that perk. Nowadays they give you a moving allowance or some sort of fixed amount in lieu of buying your house. Corporately owned retreats have gone a similar direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#123
#123
n_huffhines said:
Just because everybody has the same legal opportunity doesn't make it fair.

Don't you agree a flat tax rate would be more fair than our current system?
Click to expand...
Flat tax rate with no deductions allowed and all income from any source taxed at the same flat rate? Same flat for people and corporations?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#124
#124
BigOrangeMojo said:
I would largely bet that the proceeds and investment income from his prior realized stock gains are what's funding the bulk of his lifestyle. For example, he sold $6.7 billion of Amazon stock in May.

Regarding the $500K Vegas weekends and related company transactions. it is a little different when you are a publicly traded CEO and transactions related to anything that might be considered compensation are disclosed in a SEC proxy. If he has a $500K Vegas weekend (for example), that would be disclosed in a proxy statement since most of that would be considered compensation. For example, Amazon discloses his security expenses in their proxy.
Click to expand...
Good post. Thanks.

If we change the scenario from Bezos enjoying a 500k weekend in Vegas, to a team from Amazon at the International Trade Expo held in Las Vegas each year racking up 500K expenses that week, would the team's week be held to the proxy statement?
 
#125
#125
DancingOutlaw said:
Just want to jump in here and say the vast majority of corporations got out of the real estate game a long time ago. In the before times it was not uncommon for companies to have a real estate arm that bought and sold executive homes, especially companies that made a habit of transferring people across the country or overseas. The complications of running a real estate company inside say a chemical manufacturer and the tax issues it creates have all but killed that perk. Nowadays they give you a moving allowance or some sort of fixed amount in lieu of buying your house. Corporately owned retreats have gone a similar direction.
Click to expand...
Understood. Didn't know that but I can understand your explanation.

We were discussing the framework Huff built in his example of a house on Marthas Vineyard. Huff made it clear is was for illustration.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top