Wealth Taxes - Should the Rich Have to Pay?

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.

Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

searcher

searcher

morning
Moderator
Benefactor
Messages
24,233
Reaction score
4,445
Points
288

California Democrats consider wealth tax — including for people who moved out of state​

Story by Aaron Kliegman • Yesterday 8:09 PM

California lawmakers are pushing legislation that would impose a new tax on the state's wealthiest residents — even if they've already moved to another part of the country.

Assemblyman Alex Lee, a progressive Democrat, last week introduced a bill in the California State Legislature that would impose an extra annual 1.5% tax on those with a "worldwide net worth" above $1 billion, starting as early as January 2024.

As early as 2026, the threshold for being taxed would drop: those with a worldwide net worth exceeding $50 million would be hit with a 1% annual tax on wealth, while billionaires would still be taxed 1.5%.

More:

 
... "The bill sets aside as much as $660 million per year just for administrative costs, more than $40,000 per prospective taxpayer, giving an idea of how difficult such a tax would be to administer."

People are already moving from high-tax states into low-tax ones, according to a recent analysis by James Doti, president emeritus and economics professor at Chapman University. He found that the 10 highest tax states lost nearly 1 in 100 residents in net domestic migration between July 2021 and July 2022, while the 10 lowest tax states gained almost 1 in 100.

California lawmakers pushing the wealth tax think they can "get around" the problem of residents leaving "by trying to tax people even after they leave the state," said Patrick Gleason, vice president of state affairs at Americans for Tax Reform. However, he, Gray and Walczak all questioned the legality of such an approach or labeled it outright unconstitutional.
...
Click to expand...

Smart.
 
This would be a tax on unrealized gains, correct?

If so, when ones wealth drops from one year to the next, will there be a credit for taxes paid on the wealth that was lost without ever being realized?


pmbug said:
Smart
Click to expand...
I hope you are being very sarcastic. Lol
 
Joe King said:
This would be a tax on unrealized gains, correct?

If so, when ones wealth drops from one year to the next, will there be a credit for taxes paid on the wealth that was lost without ever being realized?



I hope you are being very sarcastic. Lol
Click to expand...
However it's drafted.

Basically, it's taxing money that's already taxed. It's taxing possession of property.

By legal logic, that is a declaration that your property, your money, is NOT...YOURS...but only held with permission of GOVERNMENT.

For which you have to pay a rent ("tax") to continue to hold.

Of course, cash held in hand cannot be counted, and thus cannot be easily taxed.

So...if this goes through, it's death to banks; death to productive investments; death to property rights. It will KILL California. It will wound or destroy the US - because it's a destruction of the concept of personal-property rights.

But I guess it's the trajectory we're on.
 
It sounds unConstitutional.
 
be very hard for a state to enact tax non-residents ....that would be taxation without representation, maybe the USA can just vote in a tax on ummmmm all Japanese and see how that goes, on billionaires who are smart enough to know how to avoid taxes in the first place, on arbitrary non realized gains......LOL......good luck with that......the only people that pay taxes are the W2 wage earners
 
ObPython:
"Speaking personally, I would tax all foreigners living abroad."

And further, "I would tax Raquel Welch. I am sure she would tax me."
 
For decades, California has been a desirable destination for Americans lured by the promise of riches, stardom, or at least a good place to surf.

That dream is over for an estimated 343,000 Californians who fled the state between July 2021 and July 2022, according to data from the Census Bureau. That marks the third consecutive year that California has seen a net decline in population.

Those heading out of state tend to be wealthier residents, and their exit threatens to blow a hole in the state's finances. California lost about $343 million in tax revenue during 2021 due to out-migration, according to a study from the online real estate firm MyEListing.com. The company says "California's high personal income tax rates seem discouraging for many high-wealth individuals."

While that study does not cover the same period as the most recent IRS data, both point to a worrying trend. So does a new projection from California's Finance Department, which expects the state's population to stagnate at 39 million for the next few decades. Less than a decade ago, the same agency expected the state's population to grow to 53 million by 2050.
...
... Still, inflation and the rising cost of living make every dollar count. Combine that with the fact that more jobs can be done from anywhere, and Americans on average are wealthier than ever. As a result, more people have the means and incentive to actively choose where to live, work, and pay taxes.
States must adjust to this new reality. Otherwise, they will discover, as California is, that punishing prosperity comes at a cost.
Click to expand...

reason.com

California is taxing itself to death

Since people leaving California tend to be high earners, their absence threatens to wreck the state's swollen budget.
reason.com reason.com

The beatings taxes will continue until morale revenue improves.
 
California is exporting prosperity.

Those who remain will have nothing to tax. As the state fills up with "undocumented immigrants" whose leaders and shepherds lust for the creation of Aztlan...the whole state slowly assumes the prosperity, education and racial status of northern Mexico.
 
The left always seem to hate those that are successful and think that taking from the rich and giving to the useless leeches is the way to go. And how do they think they can get away with taxing those that left that sh*thole? Only those with mental disease would think this a good thing.
 
Casey Jones said:
However it's drafted.

Basically, it's taxing money that's already taxed. It's taxing possession of property.

By legal logic, that is a declaration that your property, your money, is NOT...YOURS...but only held with permission of GOVERNMENT.

For which you have to pay a rent ("tax") to continue to hold.

Of course, cash held in hand cannot be counted, and thus cannot be easily taxed.

So...if this goes through, it's death to banks; death to productive investments; death to property rights. It will KILL California. It will wound or destroy the US - because it's a destruction of the concept of personal-property rights.

But I guess it's the trajectory we're on.
Click to expand...

That's the thought to came to my brain right away. Once they do this, what's to stop them from taxing everything we own based on their own arbitrary rules? Another reason to be your own bank.
 
Just more money grubbing thievery by government.

What the gov needs isn't more money. It's less money.

Only way to have the small, limited power gov that the Constitution supposedly guarantees us, is if everyone pays equal amounts in taxes.
Ie: if the money needed to support a big bloated gov doesn't exist, you won"t get a big bloated gov to begin with.
 
Came across this by accident. Seems the author believes that a global tax on the rich can end "global jim crow." The writer(s) are serious. Posting because it's an interesting read, no other reason.

From the link:

Eighty-four percent of Europeans and 69 percent of Americans support taxing millionaires to assist low-income nations. Wider global solidarity taxes have merit. The resource blessings of the Global North both leverage old sins and enormous ongoing extraction to the tune of $10 trillion annually, suggesting that currently operated global markets are really just a form of neocolonialism.

This de facto global Jim Crow can’t continue for centuries. We must end it now.

undark.org

Global Injustice Is the Barrier to Sustainable Development

Opinion | The United Nations’ goal to end poverty will never be achieved without addressing global racial inequities.
undark.org undark.org
 
If they force us into world government and world socialism...the world gets what China and Russia got.

Famine and poverty and a world of lines for any and all products.

Basically, collapse.
 
Voodoo said:
NO taxation WITHOUT representation. Assholes.
Click to expand...
No restriction on free speech, either.

Or of the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms.

Except...they give zero (expletive)s what the Founding Documents decree.
 
Because California made noise in proposing a wealth tax, Texas put a proposed state Constitutional Amendment on the Nov. 7 ballot to prohibit the legislature from enacting one in Texas:


Early voting starts today. I will be heading out after lunch to vote and this one will get a yes from me.
 
it bears repeating every now and then one good thing about physical PMs ....is they are not readily visible for taxation, and only become semi-visible when converted into other assets

one tax i absolutely detest is property tax as it can and is voted in many times by non property owners ....usually young families (renters) with school age children....at least in missouri when you reach retirement age you can apply for property tax on your home to be frozen from raises

sorry taxation raises my hackles
 
Last edited:
Ttazzman said:
it bears repeating every now and then one good thing about physical PMs ....is they are not readily visible for taxation, and only become semi-visible when converted into other assets

one tax i absolutely detest is property tax as it can and is voted in many times by non property owners ....usually young families (renters) with school age children....at least in missouri when you reach retirement age you can apply for property tax on your home to be frozen from raises

sorry taxation raises my hackles
Click to expand...
Restrict the vote to owners of real property.

As was once done in all states.

Universal Sufferage leads, universally, to collapse...just as pure democracy leads to mob rule and finally, tyranny.
 
Cigarlover said:
No one should be paying taxes that haven't been apportioned according to the constitution.
Click to expand...
Disagree.

The Constitution only deals with matters of the Federal, that is the states' union, government.

It stipulated how taxes were to be raised - by duties on imports and fees from internal improvements.

How the sovereign States chose to tax, was up to those states' voters and their State Constitutions. Which is how we slowly crept towards Universal Sufferage - in steps, led by "liberal" state governments.

I don't like where it has taken us, but it's not a valid argument for centralizing power. That road ends in tyranny - as has happened, from the New Deal to the New Normal and coming collapse.
 
Obviously, as apportionment as @Cigarlover was referring to is in the US Constitution.
....but State taxes could be done the same way if the People in the respective States wanted it done that way.
....but too many today want others to pay more than they themselves are willing to pay.

We are all supposed to have Rights equal to that of everyone else, have equal representation in government, and be seen as equal to all other citizens relative to the laws of our government.

So why shouldn't we all pay an equal amount (taxes by apportionment) to fund our government?

Take the governing body's (be it local, State, or federal) budget, divide by the number of people within it's jurisdiction, and send all of them a bill for that dollar amount.

It's the only way to ensure that we get the small, limited power government we are all guaranteed by the nations Founding Documents. Edited to add: a government with a virtually unlimited ability to tax will become virtually unlimited in size.

We only have big bloated government on all levels due to the fact that different people get charged vastly different rates for the exact same thing.

If prices for other goods and services were set the same way, it would be illegal.
...but if gov prices it's services that way, it's somehow seen as normal?
 

Democrats introduce 'billionaires tax' on unrealized capital gains​

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and other Democrats introduced a proposal on Thursday that would tax the unrealized capital gains of billionaires and very high earners.

Wyden has spearheaded an effort to make a mark-to-market proposal law for years, and the new legislation is the latest iteration of that effort. The plan would affect those with net worths of over $1 billion. It would also apply to high earners who made more than $100 million in three consecutive years.

More:

 
That will eliminate stock/securities ownership, to all but the crony-corporations (banksters) and other cronies who can obtain special carve-outs.

A melding of Fascism and Communism. State ownership/control of the means to produce.
 

Why Do We Let Billionaires Get Away With Not Paying Their Fair Share? | Robert Reich on CNBC​


10:35

I joined CNBC for a (somewhat heated) discussion of what's driving inflation and whether billionaires should be taxed. Take a look.
 
Going back a few posts to this......
1701475418366.png
For the year 2011: The US Government spends 318,166,660,000 (~$318 billion, 166 million) per month
So this $250 billion would be gone in approximately 23 and a half days.
Seems hardly worth the effort.

And with these figures coming from 2011, I'd be willing to bet it's more like 15, possibly 12 days now.

Here's a nice visualization of spending from 2011:
https://demonocracy.info/infographi...llion, 166 million) per month (both portions)
 
So they could raise 250 billion annually worldwide spread over 200 countries? This does nothing to address the real problem which is government overspending. In fact they could tax every person in the world 100% and it still wouldn't be enough.
Look no further than Cuba for a real world example. Government owned all business and real estate. people work for 30 bucks a month plus a food ration card that basically covers 3 weeks of food for the month.
In the US we have it better than everyone else because of the currencies reserves status.

I still say there is no reason to tax us at all anyway. Lets go back 20 years to Bush 1 and the national debt at 5 trillion. If someone had said then that we would be over 30 trillion in 20 years people would have said no way. the country will collapse with that much debt. Yet here we are still going strong. So why collect the 2-3 trillion a year in personal income tax? Just add it to the debt. Next year we go to 36, the year after 41 and so on. No big deal. Not like we aren't going to get there eventually anyway. Where will we be 20 years from now? 100 trillion? 150? The numbers have become so large now that they really are meaningless to just about everyone. I can't even imagine that anyone on the planet that is more than 10 years old thinks that someday we will grow our way out of the and pay down the debt. If the interest payments get to large congress will just pass a law that says government doesn't pay more than 1% interest on its debt. If the bankers don't like it they can get out of the way and congress can print the money interest free. It's not like the currency is a valuable commodity like gold used to be. It's just some cotton based paper with some numbers printed on it. Print 33 of them with a trillion dollar face value, hand it to the federal reserve and say thank you for your service. GL getting change at wal mart for those. Of course they could just deposit them in. bank but then they risk the bank going under and rehypothicating their money. LOL.
 
Cigarlover said:
So they could raise 250 billion annually worldwide spread over 200 countries? This does nothing to address the real problem which is government overspending. In fact they could tax every person in the world 100% and it still wouldn't be enough.
Look no further than Cuba for a real world example. Government owned all business and real estate. people work for 30 bucks a month plus a food ration card that basically covers 3 weeks of food for the month.
In the US we have it better than everyone else because of the currencies reserves status.

I still say there is no reason to tax us at all anyway. Lets go back 20 years to Bush 1 and the national debt at 5 trillion. If someone had said then that we would be over 30 trillion in 20 years people would have said no way. the country will collapse with that much debt. Yet here we are still going strong. So why collect the 2-3 trillion a year in personal income tax? Just add it to the debt. Next year we go to 36, the year after 41 and so on. No big deal. Not like we aren't going to get there eventually anyway. Where will we be 20 years from now? 100 trillion? 150? The numbers have become so large now that they really are meaningless to just about everyone. I can't even imagine that anyone on the planet that is more than 10 years old thinks that someday we will grow our way out of the and pay down the debt. If the interest payments get to large congress will just pass a law that says government doesn't pay more than 1% interest on its debt. If the bankers don't like it they can get out of the way and congress can print the money interest free. It's not like the currency is a valuable commodity like gold used to be. It's just some cotton based paper with some numbers printed on it. Print 33 of them with a trillion dollar face value, hand it to the federal reserve and say thank you for your service. GL getting change at wal mart for those. Of course they could just deposit them in. bank but then they risk the bank going under and rehypothicating their money. LOL.
Click to expand...
I agree with much of this; but the nation is not "still going strong." It's not on the verge of a breakup; it IS breaking up. The Ruling Class is now completely lawless - erasing the nation's borders, without laws; supporting them with "tax" money (printed fiat) without budget or laws; and another round of lawfare dumped on Trump.

AND another Plandemic unfolding. Let's not kid ourselves, okay? This is for an objective - They LOVE the idea of Martial Law Infinity! Mostly, they love how after keeping people from working, the food will run out...Brother Malthus would be SO pleased, at the sudden drop in population!

In rational times this kind of lethal tyrannical insanity would have resulted in Washington BURNED TO THE GROUND. But, no...we're burying our heads in the sand.

Soon that won't be possible. Soon we'll see that observers of 1988, predicting collapse with the public debt at such figures, were exactly right.
 
Cigarlover said:
... So why collect the 2-3 trillion a year in personal income tax? Just add it to the debt. ...
Click to expand...

Because the world would balk at subsidizing us. De-dollarization is already growing roots on the world stage. Realize your suggestions and it would pour Miracle Grow on the situation.
 
Cigarlover said:
So they could raise 250 billion annually worldwide spread over 200 countries? This does nothing to address the real problem which is government overspending. In fact they could tax every person in the world 100% and it still wouldn't be enough.
Look no further than Cuba for a real world example. Government owned all business and real estate. people work for 30 bucks a month plus a food ration card that basically covers 3 weeks of food for the month.
In the US we have it better than everyone else because of the currencies reserves status.

I still say there is no reason to tax us at all anyway. Lets go back 20 years to Bush 1 and the national debt at 5 trillion. If someone had said then that we would be over 30 trillion in 20 years people would have said no way. the country will collapse with that much debt. Yet here we are still going strong. So why collect the 2-3 trillion a year in personal income tax? Just add it to the debt. Next year we go to 36, the year after 41 and so on. No big deal. Not like we aren't going to get there eventually anyway. Where will we be 20 years from now? 100 trillion? 150? The numbers have become so large now that they really are meaningless to just about everyone. I can't even imagine that anyone on the planet that is more than 10 years old thinks that someday we will grow our way out of the and pay down the debt. If the interest payments get to large congress will just pass a law that says government doesn't pay more than 1% interest on its debt. If the bankers don't like it they can get out of the way and congress can print the money interest free. It's not like the currency is a valuable commodity like gold used to be. It's just some cotton based paper with some numbers printed on it. Print 33 of them with a trillion dollar face value, hand it to the federal reserve and say thank you for your service. GL getting change at wal mart for those. Of course they could just deposit them in. bank but then they risk the bank going under and rehypothicating their money. LOL.
Click to expand...
Taxation really has more to do with controlling the masses than paying off debt imho
 
Ttazzman said:
Taxation really has more to do with controlling the masses than paying off debt imho
Click to expand...
That's true today. The shift happened about 16 years ago, when the Obombatons blew the doors off the Treasury.

Now, it's obvious, there is NO concern over spending, budget deficits, or debt. Their only concern is in INFLICTING PAIN on people liable to pay taxes.

I wonder if those Instant DemocRat new-arrival voters are gonna be assessed taxes, the way Deplorables are. (rhetorical)
 
To put ONE trillion dollars into perspective, if you spent one million dollars a day, every day, since the birth of Christ, you'd still not have spent a trillion dollars.
Quick math says you'd have spent less than 3/4 of a trillion, in the neighborhood of $738,883,000,000.
 
JayDubya said:
... if you spent one million dollars a day ...
Click to expand...
tenor.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom