Quak, Quak, quuaakk

  • 0 Posts
  • 683 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 23rd, 2023

help-circle











  • Exclude a mortgage for your primary residence, capped at the median house price or something… And only exclude it IF it is paid back in full over a max period.

    This is the case in the Netherlands… paid back in full after max 30 years… No cap in how much. This was because the interest on the mortgage are tax deductible. So some bankers figured… we keep the loan maxed, and put your paybacks in a special fund… and at the end of the 30 years the fund pays back the mortgage. That way we get max interests and you get max tax break. In the end the banks made a lot of public funds private this way.


  • Assets are taxed all the time (real estate tax, car tax… ). So taxing the value of a share portfolio at the 31st of December each year is perfectly doable. And if it has depreciated since last year, you get a tax deduction… which is capped by the income tax to maximally reach 0… No carrying over till next year… or maybe 1 year… whatever, that’s implementation details.

    How much do you tax these assets is the point that needs consideration… it’s not fully income… But a percentage is only fair. And if this means people need to realize gains to pay for it… that’s fine… Why would it not be?

    And borrowing against an asset portfolio should mean that it counts as realizing gains of the asset portfolio and the amount is seen as income and thus taxed. (You loan 10 million against your shares, that’s income) And to avoid fallout for the normal people you can build in a threshold and exclusions for example for the first million in your lifetime… or for the mortgage on your primary residence with a cap at the median house price or … something. So for these people borrowing against assets means they can keep the assets… but pay interest on the loan. Alternatively they can actually realize the gains and pay cash.

    It’s not hard at all, it’s a matter of political will, and writing proper laws that state your objective and exceptions.








  • What extra funding? The US just completed Afghanistan mission that cost billions. Now they only need to deploy to the southern border… it will be cheaper. Plus if it really needs extra funds… if there is anything the US always had funding for is the military. So yes as a non Americans I see them turning the border into a Korean style border. Possibly declaring a zone around the border as a special territory to make an end run around posse comitatus.