patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,364,166 comments by 15,737 users - TheDonald online now
Comments 1 - 5 of 98 Next » Last » Search these comments
Patrick
@
2011 Nov 2, 6:01am
Not net assets. ALL assets.
So if you borrow to buy a house, you still do pay the 2% on the house each year.
SFace
@
2011 Nov 2, 6:38am
A 2% tax on all assets is simple and fair, and pretty easy to verify for large assets (real estate, stock, bonds). Why not do it?
First off, If I am a retiree and spent my life working and accumulated wealth, which was subject to income tax already on that path and now you're going to clobber me again with an asset tax now that I'm done earning income?
Financial assets are pretty liquid and I'm sure they would be taken elsewhere around the world and that 200T in assets as claimed will shrink to 100T easily.
Comments 1 - 5 of 98 Next » Last » Search these comments
If the total value of all US assets is about $200 trillion, and the total tax revenue in the US (federal, state, and local combined) is about $4 trillion per year, then it follows that a simple tax of 2% on all US assets would pay all taxes.
So we could eliminate the income tax, the sales tax, the inheritance tax, and the current property tax.
Here's one estimate of all US assets at $188 trillion:
http://rutledgecapital.com/2009/05/24/total-assets-of-the-us-economy-188-trillion-134xgdp/
Here's US federal tax revenue at $2.7 trillion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_tax_revenue_by_state
A 2% tax on all assets is simple and fair, and pretty easy to verify for large assets (real estate, stock, bonds). Why not do it?
#housing