Joe Biden's 'Zillow' Tax - An Income Tax On Income That Doesn't Even Exist

easyt65

Diamond Member
Aug 4, 2015
90,307
61,071
2,645
The year 2021 has seen President Biden and congressional Democrats explore, very publicly and painfully, seemingly every possible way to squeeze more tax money out of the American people. This exploration has taken place though the federal government just enjoyed the biggest revenue haul in two decades, inflation is higher than it’s been in three decades, and Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) has taken all tax-rate increases off the table.

Desperate for any new tax at this late hour of the “Build Back Better” soap opera of socialism, all hands have come on deck for perhaps the craziest idea yet — an income tax on income that doesn’t actually exist.


This new policy would, for the first time in American history, tax the annual increase in asset values held by “the rich” (those people, over there). It doesn’t matter whether the taxpayer in question sold the asset and realized an actual profit or notmerely the increased gain in value would be enough to trigger annual taxation. If certain versions of the proposal prevailed, it could mean that, if your house went up in value last year, Uncle Sam will want to tax you on the growth in its Zillow Zestimate.


It's sorta like your local property tax - if the value of your property goes up you are taxed on the value of the property.


If your stock value increases you can be taxed instead of being taxed when you cash in that investment. In a recent poll, in a 3 to 1 margin Americans opposed this tax. Then there’s the small matter that a Zillow Tax is unconstitutional. As Joe Bishop-Henchman of the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has pointed out repeatedly, such a tax violates the standard set out by the Supreme Court in Eisner v. Macomber (1920). In the case, the Court explicitly rejected a tax on the increase in value of a stock which had not actually been sold:


Income may be defined as the gain derived from capital, from labor, or from both combined, including profit gained through sale or conversion of capital. Mere growth or increment of value in a capital investment is not income; income is essentially a gain or profit, in itself, of exchangeable value, proceeding from capital, severed from it, and derived or received by the taxpayer for his separate use, benefit, and disposal.




 
They might as well just say "all your money will be routed to the government and we will give you what we think you should have and keep the rest".

Just be honest and say you want all of our money and will take it whether we agree or not.

I can't tell if this is intended to just get money, or tax us out of what we own.
 
They might as well just say "all your money will be routed to the government and we will give you what we think you should have and keep the rest".

Just be honest and say you want all of our money and will take it whether we agree or not.

I can't tell if this is intended to just get money, or tax us out of what we own.

They do believe that all money is theirs and what you get / have is due to their generosity and benevolence.
 
They might as well just say "all your money will be routed to the government and we will give you what we think you should have and keep the rest".

Just be honest and say you want all of our money and will take it whether we agree or not.

I can't tell if this is intended to just get money, or tax us out of what we own.
This is what communists truly think.

Someone on this board a few years back was explaining how we have no right to give our money to our family when we die....IT SHOULD GO TO THE STATE. :laughing0301:

These assholes walk among us.
 
It's hard to believe any US Representative other than a declared socialist would support this ridiculous tax. It doesn't appear to pass the SCOTUS test, but anybody who trust this SCOTUS to rule against unconstitutional tax related legislation hasn't been paying attention. Regardless, the fact that it is even in the bill should scare all but the most hardcore democrats out of that party.

61% of taxpayers in this country paid no federal tax last year. Is that not progressive enough?
 
Filthy rich people do benefit from their wealth investment.

They get loans based on the value of that wealth.

They get unearned income from that wealth.

They live very well from that wealth but they don't get taxed on it until they liquidate that wealth.

They pay next to no taxes on the unearned income from that wealth.

The result is that they are people like Jeff Bezos, they pay ZERO federal income taxes.

I don't know about you but most of the people in this nation want the filthy rich to start paying their fair share of taxes.

We have a debt that is over 20 trillion dollars.

How do you people expect to pay that debt?

Allowing the filthy rich to not pay any or their fair share of taxes makes that debt constantly grow every year.

If you all don't want to start properly taxing the filthy rich then all these decades of screaming about deficit and debt is just another one of your right wing lies.
 
No, seriously. The national debt is currently at $28 trillion. If we taxed all 81 million Biden-voters, that would only amount to $357,097 apiece.

I'm sure they could come up with that. Maybe have a garage sale or something. Or a bake sale.
 
The year 2021 has seen President Biden and congressional Democrats explore, very publicly and painfully, seemingly every possible way to squeeze more tax money out of the American people. This exploration has taken place though the federal government just enjoyed the biggest revenue haul in two decades, inflation is higher than it’s been in three decades, and Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) has taken all tax-rate increases off the table.

Desperate for any new tax at this late hour of the “Build Back Better” soap opera of socialism, all hands have come on deck for perhaps the craziest idea yet — an income tax on income that doesn’t actually exist.

This new policy would, for the first time in American history, tax the annual increase in asset values held by “the rich” (those people, over there). It doesn’t matter whether the taxpayer in question sold the asset and realized an actual profit or notmerely the increased gain in value would be enough to trigger annual taxation. If certain versions of the proposal prevailed, it could mean that, if your house went up in value last year, Uncle Sam will want to tax you on the growth in its Zillow Zestimate.


It's sorta like your local property tax - if the value of your property goes up you are taxed on the value of the property.


If your stock value increases you can be taxed instead of being taxed when you cash in that investment. In a recent poll, in a 3 to 1 margin Americans opposed this tax. Then there’s the small matter that a Zillow Tax is unconstitutional. As Joe Bishop-Henchman of the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has pointed out repeatedly, such a tax violates the standard set out by the Supreme Court in Eisner v. Macomber (1920). In the case, the Court explicitly rejected a tax on the increase in value of a stock which had not actually been sold:








It's another attempt at a "wealth" tax.

What they don't realize that this would probably require people to liquidate some of their assets, and all at once. A flooded market of assets would result in them being unable to get fair value for those assets.

Of course, this could be part of the plan for the Dems, with their donors ready to swoop up said assets at a discount.
 
The year 2021 has seen President Biden and congressional Democrats explore, very publicly and painfully, seemingly every possible way to squeeze more tax money out of the American people. This exploration has taken place though the federal government just enjoyed the biggest revenue haul in two decades, inflation is higher than it’s been in three decades, and Senator Kyrsten Sinema (D., Ariz.) has taken all tax-rate increases off the table.

Desperate for any new tax at this late hour of the “Build Back Better” soap opera of socialism, all hands have come on deck for perhaps the craziest idea yet — an income tax on income that doesn’t actually exist.

This new policy would, for the first time in American history, tax the annual increase in asset values held by “the rich” (those people, over there). It doesn’t matter whether the taxpayer in question sold the asset and realized an actual profit or notmerely the increased gain in value would be enough to trigger annual taxation. If certain versions of the proposal prevailed, it could mean that, if your house went up in value last year, Uncle Sam will want to tax you on the growth in its Zillow Zestimate.


It's sorta like your local property tax - if the value of your property goes up you are taxed on the value of the property.


If your stock value increases you can be taxed instead of being taxed when you cash in that investment. In a recent poll, in a 3 to 1 margin Americans opposed this tax. Then there’s the small matter that a Zillow Tax is unconstitutional. As Joe Bishop-Henchman of the National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has pointed out repeatedly, such a tax violates the standard set out by the Supreme Court in Eisner v. Macomber (1920). In the case, the Court explicitly rejected a tax on the increase in value of a stock which had not actually been sold:







well ain't that nice.
 
Filthy rich people do benefit from their wealth investment.

They get loans based on the value of that wealth.

They get unearned income from that wealth.

They live very well from that wealth but they don't get taxed on it until they liquidate that wealth.

They pay next to no taxes on the unearned income from that wealth.

The result is that they are people like Jeff Bezos, they pay ZERO federal income taxes.

I don't know about you but most of the people in this nation want the filthy rich to start paying their fair share of taxes.

We have a debt that is over 20 trillion dollars.

How do you people expect to pay that debt?

Allowing the filthy rich to not pay any or their fair share of taxes makes that debt constantly grow every year.

If you all don't want to start properly taxing the filthy rich then all these decades of screaming about deficit and debt is just another one of your right wing lies.
If you think taxing the wealthy more is going to reduce the federal debt, you are completely delusional.
 
They got millions on work that doesn't exist so why not taxes also?
 
Hey, lefties...just confiscate all wealth.

You guys do not give a fuck about the Constitution anyways...just steal 100% of everyone's money.
 
I'm just wondering what happens if the 'unrealized' profits turn out to be losses.

Will the government then cut a check back to the person they took the taxes from?
 

Forum List

Back
Top