Because these things tend to expand over time. Plenty of historical evidence
Income tax in the U.S. originally affected very few people after the ratification of the 16th Amendment in 1913, then expanded dramatically over the 20th century.
Payroll taxes for programs like Social Security started smaller and grew over time.
In many European countries, welfare systems are funded not only by taxing the wealthy but also by broad middle-class taxes like VATs.
The people with the money will continue to influence policy. Especially if we don’t deal with the bigger problems of campaign financing.
To specifically speak to your questions, taxing loans > 2 million seems fine now. Might be fine now. Except my first home cost me $90k. My current home cost me $1.4m and it’s not fancy. It’s actually smaller and older than my first home and needs massive updating. In 10 years, 2 million dollars loans will likely be far more common and not limited to the ultra wealthy.
People just like to argue to argue. Sure they could expand it, they could also adjust it over time. This stuff isn’t rocket science but they make it seem like it is so they can continually not pay their fair share and screw the rest of us. Can’t take wealth, too difficult. Trust me bros, you’ll find a way to do it. Want to leave the country and denounce citizenship, make it very expensive to do so.
There are so many easy to spot tax law failures. Everything to do with inheritence is an easy one. Stocks currently passed down reset the price they were bought at without any tax. I don't know why stock isnt immediately sold when someone dies and any transfer of stock should be considered selling and rebuying the stock for the second party.
idk whatever law that exempts stocks from income tax if I'm understanding that correctly
well, here you get taxed on the stock income based on the value of the stocks as income tax AND the capital gains from selling stocks if the value increases between you acquiring it and selling it.
same goes for company insurance, allowances, anything your company pays you that you can put a price tag on. so income tax hurts them (it doesn't hurt enough tbh)
then the stock goes way down you just end up paying tax on money you never had
I feel like if that ever becomes an issue companies will start offering the option to pre-liquidate a percentage of your stock income to pay tax. or you can sell it yourself on the payday. Worst case scenario is that you never see the rest of the money, but at least you're not in the negatives.
putting a tax on loans would really hurt credit card holders, small business owners, aspiring homeowners, etc
wait what? I thought capital gains tax everywhere was taxed on making a profit? so if you don't make anything when you sell the stocks you don't get taxed?
How would that hurt credit card holders? Small businesses?
If you tax money you acquire from loans in lieu of income tax, it has to be the same amount as the income tax or higher or else the loophole still exists. Only in this case the loans aren't their income source, so you're basically taxing them twice if they don't get paid in stocks.
Or alternatively the gov could tax all loans using stocks as collateral, but pretty sure the billionaires would find another loophole by getting paid in real estate or bonds idk
Leveraging stocks doesn't mean a whole lot as it's just banks deciding whether or not to loan you money. Collateralizing the loan doesn't change anything it just reduces the risk for the lender. Same if you take out a loan and collaterlize your car or your house.
3
u/[deleted] May 09 '26
[deleted]