teamosil
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 6,623
- Reaction score
- 2,226
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
As for inheritance, that is NOT income, as it must have been ALREADY taxed as income by whoever is leaving it (and much of it is passed on as non-cash assets, like a home, family farm or business).
Taxes were paid on all income by previous owners. If I earn $1,000 at my job, I pay taxes on it, then I use it to hire you to build me a widget, you still have to pay taxes on it. It isn't like money is somehow made immune to taxation in later transactions. When it changes hands, you need to pay taxes on it.
As for capital gains, interest and dividend (investment) income, that is a tricky point indeed. It can only be made by investing a portion of your "income", that has already been taxed, so it too, could be left tax free and still be "fair". I am willing to "trade" here.
That doesn't really add up either. You don't pay taxes on the part you invested, just the new income.
I would prefer that corporate income, not be taxed (at all) since a corporation is NOT a person (citizen) that can vote, so that creates both taxation without representation and leads (as we all know) to politcal favors (corrupton?) used to alter corporate taxation laws and drive many of them (and their jobs) off-shore. The "trade" I offer, for excuding corporate income from taxation, is this; tax all "investment" income at 1/2 the rate of wage income, by simply adding HALF of investment income to each individual's total income, and then tax that total.
Why half? Seems to me that, if anything, we ought to tax investment income more highly than wages. Wages you have to actually work to get, where investment income you don't. Seems to me that if we were to tax one more, it would be the one you don't have to do anything to get... I'm fine with taxing them the same, but I don't see any reason to tax investment income less..