Serowbot wrote on 10/19/24 at 07:07:38:


You don't see what that will do to YOU?
If you own a house and it is Valued,for tax purposes, higher than you paid for it, you will be taxed on the Increase in Value.
If you rent, the landlord will be taxed on the increase in the value of His property.
Now,, exactly Who is Actually going to cough up Those dollars?

You don't see what that will do to YOU?
If you own a house and it is Valued,for tax purposes, higher than you paid for it, you will be taxed on the Increase in Value.
If you rent, the landlord will be taxed on the increase in the value of His property.
Now,, exactly Who is Actually going to cough up Those dollars?

 
 This is not true.  Again the problem is not just the actual proposal but all the nonsense lies people tell about the proposal.  You were lied to.

 Unless you have 100,000,000 - One Hundred Million in assets, you will not be taxed on unrealized gains.  The honest argument using facts and not lies is that humans with 100 Million should also not be taxed on assets they never gained but might someday.  So a landlord with hundreds of millions of dollars in tenants would be passing that cost on, but not 99% of average landlords.

 This is my opinion for anyone incapable of understanding what an opinion is.

Would a for-profit museum have to pay this tax on a collection of artifacts with an obvious market value over $100 million?


 Since no official proposal is presented that I know of there is no way to tell.  I can imagine this would not apply to businesses in specific corporate financial structures - or maybe none at all.  This is my opinion for anyone incapable of understanding what an opinion is.