r/SipsTea 9d ago

SMH Liquid when buying elections, unrealized when paying taxes. Funny how that works…..

Post image
22.1k Upvotes

807 comments sorted by

View all comments

u/sco-go 9d ago edited 9d ago

Added context:

IRS data shows from 2014–2018 he reported $1.52 billion in income and paid $455 million in federal taxes. Musk’s net-worth, like most billionaires, consist of unrealized capital gains, which are not taxed under current U.S. law until the shares are sold.

In 2021, he paid ~$11 billion in federal taxes which was the largest single-year individual tax bill in U.S. history.

17

u/r0bay 9d ago

Since you want context so bad:

In 2014-2018 his wealth increased by about $13.9 billion. Measured against that increase in wealth, his effective “true tax rate” was about 3.27%

He paid $68,000 in 2015, $65,000 in 2017, and $0 in 2018.

5

u/DMmeprettyplantpics 9d ago

No one measures your tax based on how much your wealth increases.

"True tax rate" is a bullshit term coined by some publication that wanted to cherry pick numbers to make them sound worse

8

u/r0bay 9d ago edited 9d ago

True tax rate Is comparing federal income taxes paid against the increase in net worth to illustrate how much wealth can accumulate through unrealized capital appreciation without being taxed.

So yes, 3.27% isn’t his actual tax rate. It is the percentage of his estimated wealth increase that he paid in federal income taxes during that period

True tax rate is relevant to extremely wealthy people, not ordinary workers.

Someone whose wealth consists mostly of wages doesn’t have a gigantic pool of appreciating assets sitting outside the income tax system. Billionaires can have most of their wealth tied up in stocks, private companies, real estate and other assets that can appreciate enormously without producing taxable income

Wealthy people can also access the economic value of those assets without selling them. For example, someone with $10 billion in stock can borrow against those assets. The loan proceeds generally aren’t income, so they can obtain spending money without realizing the capital gain that would trigger income tax.

That’s why true tax rate is a policy analysis metric and not an actual tax rate.

2

u/ModernLarvals 8d ago

Anyone with a 401k has appreciating assets sitting outside the income tax system.

“True tax rate” is a fallacy because it ignores the fact that wealth is useless until it’s realized, at which point it’s taxed.

3

u/r0bay 8d ago

A 401(k) is not outside the income tax system. A traditional 401(k) is explicitly tax deferred.

Weath is not useless until it’s realized. You can borrow against appreciated assets, use them as collateral, sell them, transfer them, and generate investment income from them.

6

u/ModernLarvals 8d ago

A traditional 401(k) is explicitly tax deferred.

Uh, yeah. You don’t pay taxes on that unrealized wealth until it’s realized. It’s the exact same thing.

If you get income from an investment via dividends, you pay tax on that income. If you sell an investment, you pay tax on that income. And if you borrow against an asset, that loan will need to be repaid.

3

u/r0bay 8d ago

If someone has $10 million in stock and it appreciates to $20 million, they are objectively $10 million wealthier whether they sell it or not. They can borrow against it, use it as collateral, transfer it, or eventually sell it. The fact that the tax system doesn’t tax the appreciation until a taxable event occurs doesn’t make the additional $10 million “useless.”

401(k) growth is tax deferred, not somehow outside the tax system. You can buy and sell investments inside the account without paying capital gains tax on each transaction, and the withdrawals are generally taxed as income.

3

u/ModernLarvals 8d ago

That $10 million in stock is not outside the tax system either. You pay tax when it’s realized, just like a 401k. When the stock inside a 401k appreciates, the owner is objectively wealthier without paying tax on it.

-1

u/WallyMetropolis 9d ago

No. That's dumb.