Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What's striking to me is how he doesn't even have a grasp of the basic numbers that affect his returns. This speaks more to a "I am so rich and I made my money so easily that I don't care what I get taxed at" attitude.

>Nothing the government agreed to in the last few days actually affects the asset wealthy in this country.

The increased tax rate on dividends and capital gains definitely affects the "asset wealthy" in the country. In fact, both the top income tax rate and the dividend/capital gains tax rate for those making over $400k has increased by roughly the same amount [1].

However, complete inaction by government would have increased the dividend tax rate even more, so that it would have been considered ordinary income (43.4% top rate) [2]. The legislation passed on 12/31 and 1/1 by Congress definitely helped the asset wealthy. Oracle pays a 18c dividend per share, and Larry Ellison owns roughly a billion Oracle shares. The dividend tax savings he'll receive from this legislation is massive.

[1] The top income tax rate goes from 35% to 43.4% (39.6% + 3.8% health care tax) and the top dividend/capgains tax rate goes from 15% to 23.8% (20% + 3.8% health care tax). If person A makes $100MM in salary and person B makes $100MM in dividend/capgains in 2013, their relative tax rate increase compared to 2012 is about the same: 8.4% increase vs 8.8% increase.

[2] http://www.atr.org/trillion-obamacare-tax-hike-hitting-jan-a...

[3]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-02/bipartisan-house-ba...



If person A makes $100MM in salary and person B makes $100MM in dividend/capgains in 2013, their relative tax rate increase compared to 2012 is about the same: 8.4% increase vs 8.8% increase.

Michael's point was that person A (someone with a high ordinary income) will have approximately double the tax bill of person B (someone with capital gains income) on an absolute basis, and that he believes this disparity to be unfair.


I'm not sure how to define "fair" but haven't the investment money been already taxed as corporate profits before they are paid out to investors? I know some investment vehicles allow to avoid that but most regular investments do not, as far as I know.


This is the case with dividends, but is not necessarily the case with other types of capital gains.


Haven't ordinary business revenues already been taxed as sales tax when you pay income taxes on them?


And why does it matter if it's already been taxed once?


If you want to avoid double taxation, you are certainly free to choose a pass-through form of entity.

If you choose to create/invest in a corporation, you accept double-taxation as the cost of the benefits afforded by the corporate form.


You guys are all thinking in terms of forming a business and having income from it. Our tax system doesn't encourage that. Our system heavily incentivizes people to seek capital gains through (for example) stock market and real estate speculation.


Thanks for explaining. Very informative.

Is the dividend/capital-gain increase across the board? Or is it bucketed progressively like the income tax rates?


My read is yes, it's bucketed (corrections welcome, and my numbers are only for single filers):

Below $35k income: the 0% capital-gains/dividend rate is retained

Between $35k-$200k incomes: the 15% rate is retained

Between $200k-$400k incomes: PPACA adds a 3.8% capital-gains surtax, but the 15% base rate is retained, effectively raising the marginal rate to 18.8%

Above $400k incomes: the base marginal rate rises from 15% to 20%, plus the 3.8%, for a total of 23.8%


Thanks for the info. Sounds like if one has a big sell off of assets in a year, better get as low an income as possible, preferable with delayed income into the following year.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: