Democrats Propose National Unrealized Gain Wealth Tax - Sergey Brin Condemns
- Thread starter fatpiggy
- Start date
and no mention of paying down debt..just tax more and spend more
The peak of this country was when the top tax bracket was 80%
trickle down economics is Santa for adults
it appears though that this proposal does nothing about tax brackets, it's strictly a wealth tax. And unlike what is being proposed in California, this would be an every year tax. Because based on the spending proposal, just child care for example, you have the spending/funding tail forever.
While the rest of your post is gold, as well, I wanted to highlight this portion of it as, perhaps, one of the worst statements not involving actual atrocities (murder, rape, molestation, slavery, etc. ... so PalmettoTiger's statement that wanting to bang your daughter is one of the highest honors you can bestow is excluded) that have ever been uttered.
All non-MAGAts need to do is grab this and post it as indicative of the MAGAt way, and game over ... MAGAts will never be in power again.
Hopefully we all agree that a wealth tax is stupid. Tax loans against wealth, raise capital gains taxes, but for the love of all that is holy do not pursue a wealth tax.
I stumbled across something the other day that was basically making this point. Specifically they were discussing how wealthy people use DAF’s to avoid taxes. Basically they create a DAF, contribute money tax free, have someone else withdraw it as a charitable contribution tax free. It’s genius, completely legal and there’s not a single law or proposed law on the books to amend it. No no no, the left just wants to tax your income and payroll more. How stupid can you be? Flat sales tax across the board fixes all this. Rich people buy rich people **** and spend lots of money - they don’t work, they don’t pay income taxes, they have high paid lawyers and accountants to avoid that - but they still have to pay sales tax. I guess the issue with sales tax is we have so many on entitlements the increased sales tax burden would just go back to the middle class who’s being forced to subsidize 100 million people.
A way for wealthy people to circumvent the system.
“DAFs” usually refers to Donor-Advised Funds in a financial or nonprofit context.
A donor-advised fund (DAF) is a charitable giving account set up through a sponsoring organization—often a large financial firm or nonprofit—such as Fidelity Investments, Charles Schwab, or National Philanthropic Trust.
Here’s how they work in simple terms:
- You contribute money (or assets like stocks) into the fund.
- You get an immediate tax deduction for that contribution.
- The money is invested and can grow tax-free.
- Over time, you “advise” the fund on which charities should receive grants.
Example:
Someone might contribute $50,000 to a DAF this year (getting the tax break now), then distribute that money to different charities over several years.
Supposedly it’s similar to how an HSA (money is supposed to be used on healthcare but they don’t make you validate) - you’re supposed to use the money for charity but they don’t really check.
I have a donor Donor advised fund..have had it for years. And while contributions might be tax free the "grants" that are made from the fund have to go to certified organizations like 501 c 3 or the like.
It's not as ominous as it might seem,. It's similar to previous tax laws where you could deduct charitable contributions on your taxes before the higher standard deduction sort of offset these kinds of charitable gifts. It's great for charities because money in the funds is invested, grows tax free and then is donated to them. I started mine with $xxxx and after all these years and all the "grants" that have been made I'm still just around the same amount as I started with...
OK, That seems like tax fraud to me. I'd be somewhat surprised if it's legal, but not shocked.
Democrats had a point when they hired 80,000 extra IRS people. I know several people who jump through hoops to "avoid" taxes if you will. It's in quotes because they just create plausible deniability for themselves. It's like we were talking about a couple weeks ago in another thread, a good accountant is easily worth his fee.
Instead of hiring extra tax enforcers, i prefer to simplify the tax code. I do think a flat tax should be considered. Much easier to enforce, fewer loopholes, more efficient, more fair.
That makes much more sense. If all grants must be made to certified charitable organization that makes it much more legit. Much harder to get around without committing fraud.
Had an interesting discussion yesterday
Formerly I was elected official and a town resident blew their horn and stopped me to ask a question about a problem at their house. I told the person I was no longer in office but what was the problem.
The person told me and I said to them who did you vote for in the last election.
They said my opponent. I said then why are you asking me to help you. The person said because you get stuff done.
My reply was you voted for my opponent yet you want me to fix your problem with government which I could.
My answer to the person was you need to talk to the person you voted for and not me.
Strange how people will vote for incompetence yet reach out to people who can help.
Told her to call who she voted for and moved on.
The hotels will get trashed and residents will be allowed to come and go without treatment.
It is absolutely a potential tax for most people. Page 26 of the bill.
No vote needed to change it to an everyone tax.
It’s a stupid tax but Dems have not proposed this. It was proposed by a health care union. They got enough signatures to put it on the ballot. Dems have not had a hand in any of this.
Newsome has been very outspoken against this prop.
No surprise to me that Democrats have totally disowned the Biden Harris admin. Total disaster.
The most prominent recent proposal related to taxing unrealized gains (also called a "national unrealized gains tax" in some discussions) stems from the Biden-Harris administration's fiscal year 2025 budget proposal. This was advanced during the 2024 election cycle when Vice President Kamala Harris endorsed key elements of it as part of her campaign platform.Key Details of the Proposal
- It is formally known as a "billionaire minimum tax" or minimum tax on the ultra-wealthy.
- It would require individuals (or households) with net wealth exceeding $100 million to pay a minimum effective tax rate of 25% on an expanded definition of income.
- This expanded income includes traditional taxable income plus unrealized capital gains — meaning increases in the value of assets (like stocks, bonds, real estate, or privately held businesses) that have not yet been sold and thus not "realized" under current tax rules.
- The tax would phase in (e.g., partial at $100 million, fully effective around $200 million in some descriptions), targeting roughly the wealthiest 0.01% of households (often described as affecting billionaires and multi-hundred-millionaires).
- It aims to address perceived inequities where ultra-wealthy individuals can defer taxes indefinitely by holding appreciating assets without selling them, while wage earners pay taxes annually.
- Revenue estimates from supporters (e.g., Treasury Department) suggested it could raise around $500 billion over 10 years, to fund priorities like childcare, housing, or deficit reduction.
- Other wealth-tax ideas, like a 5% annual billionaire wealth tax pushed by Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna (announced around March 2026), which targets billionaires' net worth directly rather than unrealized gains specifically, and aims to raise trillions for social programs.
- State-level efforts in places like California, Illinois, or others exploring wealth or unrealized gains taxes on the ultra-rich, amid federal inaction.
Yeah, too bad chamath is a con artist who should be in jail for his fraudulent spacs. Anyone who believes what he says needs help.
I agree with you about his spacs.
But you don’t need to believe what he says, just read page 26 of the bill. You can read it yourself.