• @AlotOfReading@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    45 months ago

    I had hoped the point would be pretty obvious. Most people’s homes represent a significant part of their net worth, often a majority of their assets. The unrealized gains on that are taxed.

    Billionaires generally (are there even any counterexamples?) do not have the majority of their net worth stored in assets that are taxed the same way. It’s a meaningful difference.

    • @deathbird@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      35 months ago

      It is kinda weird that real estate gets taxed just for existing and being held, but stocks, which supposedly represent a fraction of a mass of real wealth too, don’t get taxed while just being held.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate
      link
      fedilink
      25 months ago

      are there even any counterexamples?

      Actually, there are a large number of billionaires whose primary assets are literally property.

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/giacomotognini/2023/10/04/the-richest-real-estate-billionaires-in-america-2023/

      I had hoped the point would be pretty obvious. Most people’s homes represent a significant part of their net worth, often a majority of their assets. The unrealized gains on that are taxed.

      But the real question is, do you think they should be? 'Cause I’m with you if you say no. Unrealized gains should not be taxed at all, it makes no sense.

      • @AlotOfReading@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        15 months ago

        You’re misunderstanding how their wealth is distributed. By and large, they’re not directly owning the land and paying taxes. They just own significant stakes in the actual companies holding property. I’m sure they own a house or three, but it’s not significant compared to their other assets.

        I’m not taking a position on whether property taxes are good. I think they are. I’m just pointing out the discrepancy.