I have very little of value to add to the Board, but enjoy reading. When it comes to taxes, however . . . there just are not a lot of people that will have a higher understanding of the Internal Revenue Code and tax concepts. So literally, for the first time ever, I was able to add some value here.
Politicians have created the mess in the tax Code that we deal with today. I am a firm believer that no one should meddle with the Code unless they understand taxes. Oh well, we have so many other problems that need fixing. But I just want to spend 3 min. with Trump and request that he please start appointing Federal judges that understand taxes. Bush started appointing people that did not understand taxes, and here we are 20 years later with a dysfunctional judiciary from top to bottom when it comes to anything related to taxes, finance, or business.
I enjoy reading, and rarely post. But I couldn't resist posting in this situation. Brian Beers did a fairly good job, but omitted a really crucial aspect.
When you must recognize gain in his example, your new basis is $350. Your basis would not be the $75 that you originally paid. His example needs to include that aspect of basis adjustment.
When you later sell for $60, you then have a $29,000 loss.
Still a massive nightmare because now you must amend your prior year income tax return and request a refund that will show up 1 year later. You must pay your CPA to prepare that return (because the tax assembly program is going to botch it). Then one of those 70K+ IRS agents is going to audit your return because you amended it, and they will find something else.
The analysis goes off the deep end if you sell at a loss more than 3 years later, because you can only amend so many years back.
Dumber than dumb policy, for many, many reasons. You can tell when someone that knows nothing about taxes takes a stab at tax policy.
William Bernstein wrote a great book that included a wonderful premise that suggested the British struggled with early entity investment (the South Seas Trading Bubble) due to short-term investment philosophy, and the Dutch excelled at it due to long-term investment philosophy. That policy suggested by Harris would be a major set-back that history has already proven a failure.
Much better connected people than I should provide that information to Trump.
I do think he has someone that responds for him, but I do not think for a minute that the person on the other side of the internet is presenting general population ideas to Trump.
I fall more into the category if I have what I think is a great idea, then a few thousand other better connected individuals are most likely having it at the same time, and someone is going to get that idea to a well-connected individual who can make a good decision.
I love your optimism, though!