Sulphur on 14/12/2009 at 16:50
Quote Posted by Koki
Star Wars sucks.
Yep, Darth Kokius ain't kow towing to the kowtow.
CCCToad on 14/12/2009 at 16:53
why Kokius?
Just saying "Lord Koki" sounds so much cooler.
Sulphur on 14/12/2009 at 16:55
We are pronouncing it as 'cock-y', aren't we.
SD on 14/12/2009 at 17:08
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Pocket Guide to Lib Dem Policies, 2nd paragraph "We would pay for this tax cut by closing tax loopholes which benefit the wealthy such as restricting tax relief on pensions to the basic rate and taxing capital gains as income."
Right, okay. This doesn't mean that we think capital gains are a form of income, it just means we would treat it
like income for tax purposes. There's a tax loophole here that enables some city executives to avoid income tax and pay capital gains tax at 10% or 18%, and wind up paying a lower percentage of their income in tax than the people who clean their offices. By aligning the CGT rate with the income tax rate, you close the loophole.
and it's pronounced Darth Cookie
SubJeff on 14/12/2009 at 18:18
Ah, yes. I've read the full version now. You might want to let your comrades know how unclear the short version is.
The actual plan is aimed at nerfing capital gains. More punitive taxes on the upwardly mobile. This will breed Lib Dems who are poor who then make some money then realise that they,ve been conned and aren't supposed to get sucessful.
And why do you say its city execs? You could do it. Smacks of more hatred of the rich.
Thor on 14/12/2009 at 18:38
Oh, to answer the thread if I'd return it, then I would not. I would just shoot anyone I don't like. :angel: Justice prevails!
SD on 14/12/2009 at 19:33
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
Ah, yes. I've read the full version now. You might want to let your comrades know how unclear the short version is.
It seems pretty clear to me.
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
The actual plan is aimed at nerfing capital gains. More punitive taxes on the upwardly mobile. This will breed Lib Dems who are poor who then make some money then realise that they,ve been conned and aren't supposed to get sucessful.
SE, it's pretty clear you haven't got the first clue about income tax avoidance or any of the issues surrounding it, hence your trotting out of tired old Tory cliches about "punishing the upwardly mobile". Do kindly run along.
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
And why do you say its city execs? You could do it. Smacks of more hatred of the rich.
I don't have
any hatred of the rich, so I can't very well have more if it, can I?
As to why it's city execs; if you had the first clue about the issue, you'd know why I singled them out here.
Oh, and not that it's remotely relevant (because I am motivated by what is right, not what is right
for me - I'm a liberal, not a conservative) but - no, I couldn't engage in that kind of tax avoidance too.
CCCToad on 14/12/2009 at 20:06
Quote Posted by SD
SE, it's pretty clear you haven't got the first clue about income tax avoidance or any of the issues surrounding it.
That statement actually does perk my curiosity. Would you mind taking the time to explain to me how proposed legislation affect tax avoidance?
heywood on 14/12/2009 at 20:08
Quote Posted by Swiss Mercenary
So, suppose I bought a house in the American Mid-West, for $500,000, and live there, and ten years later, it's worth $150,000 because the economy's in the shitter, what do you call that? According to your position, I've received an
unearned loss of 350,000$ due to dropping housing prices. I haven't harmed society in any way from me living in a property that rapidly depreciated in value. I haven't taken 350,000$ worth of wealth from society for living in that house for 10 years.
Does that mean I deserve a handout?
And if I deserve to take a penalty from the economy when it swings against me, why do I not deserve to earn a bonus when it swings for me.
Here's an even better question for you.
Suppose I bought a house for $300,000. Every house on the street was worth that much. I could afford to buy any of them. Let's say in ten years, every house on the street is worth $1,000,000, including mine.
Since you saying that since I don't deserve the wealth associated with my home rising in value, does that mean that in your perfect world, I should not be able to trade my home for any of the other million dollar houses on the street?
After all, I didn't earn the million. Neither technically or moraly am I entitled to a million. I only earned $300,000 of it. That ought to go only 30% of the way to buying the house across the street.
Here in the US, your main home is treated a little differently than other capital investments. You can take away a profit of up to $250k per individual ($500k for a married couple) from the sale of your main home without being taxed on it, as long as you've lived in it for 2 years. So in your example, assuming you're married you'd have to pay long term capital gains taxes on $200k of profit. If this happened today, it would cost you $30k in taxes to trade for one of the other homes on the street. But in a more likely scenario, suppose your home had appreciated from $300k to $600k. It'd cost you nothing to trade over to another equally valued home. And if you moved into a cheaper home, you could take the profit without being taxed on it.
Other capital gains and losses are treated like this:
There is no gain or loss until you sell the asset. If you gain from the sale, your gain is taxed at your marginal rate for short term holdings, 15% for long term holdings (with a couple exceptions). If the sale results in a loss, you can deduct the loss from your taxable income. In any one year, you can deduct up the full amount of your capital gains for the year + $3000. If your loss was bigger than that, you carry over the remainder of the loss from year to year until you've deducted it all. So it is at least somewhat fair.
SubJeff on 14/12/2009 at 21:10
Quote Posted by SD
It seems pretty clear to me.
Errr, one says "taxing capital gains as income" whilst the other explains - and this is for you CCC - that the aim is to tax capital gains at the same rate as income tax (but not actually treat it as income tax) in order that people cannot use capital gains in order to pay a lower tax rate. CCC - at the moment it's possible for people (anyone, not just "execs") to claim income as capital gains and thus pay the lower capital gains tax. Its quite genius really.
Quote:
SE, it's pretty clear you haven't got the first clue about income tax avoidance or any of the issues surrounding it, hence your trotting out of tired old Tory cliches about "punishing the upwardly mobile".
And yet you are unable to explain how I'm wrong. I'll tell you a story. I used to earn a lot less than I do now, prior to med school and such. I have found it little frustrating, already, that even earning over double what I did in my old job, in theory, I end up with far from double in hand. If the tax on my higher tier earnings did increase, or the tax on the investments I've been able to make by virtue of that salary increase went up I'd feel a little disincentivised to continue making those investments. With the effort it takes why not just sit on my salary and not try to do better? A 50% increase in effort does not yield a 50% increase in reward, far from it.
Do you think this will be any different for other people? I already know a lot of people who feel the same.
Quote:
As to why it's city execs; if you had the first clue about the issue, you'd know why I singled them out here.
You shouldn't be singling anyone out though. Its not their fault that someone made such a law, just like its not my fault that some of my ancestors gifted property to me long before the 7 year cutoff so that I wouldn't have to pay inheritance tax (and escaping capital gains is a little harder unless you have siblings you can trust iyswim).
Singling out "execs" just makes you look bitter.
Quote:
Oh, and not that it's remotely relevant (because I am motivated by what is right, not what is right
for me - I'm a liberal, not a conservative) but - no, I couldn't engage in that kind of tax avoidance too.
I wish I could believe you're just all heart SD. And technically, yes you could do the same, that is what I meant and you know that is what I meant.
