Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Who Really Pays Taxes? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (267)	8/15/2000 4:33:41 PM
From: PMS Witch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 666

Capital gains ... I don't know the justification for taxing capital gains at a different rate than income, but if I were to guess, it's because for capital to be accumulated it must have, at one point, been earned, and taxed as income at that time. If this is the case, it's simply an attempt to reduce multiple-taxation. Does it seem odd that if person A spends their paycheque and person B invests theirs, that the paycheque is taxed once in the hands of A and continually in the hands of B? Hope this doesn't start another war. Cheers, PW. P.S. If option grants are brought about by the receiver being employed by the firm, they bear the characteristics of income and are taxed as such. This seems reasonable.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (267)	8/15/2000 4:48:53 PM
From: kvkkc1	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 666

I don't know the specifics of tax on options. But if one agrees to receive options in lieu of income, you know the Gov't will take their piece of the pie. Capital gains demonstrate the willingness of an investor to finance businesses which in turn create jobs and an increased revenue base. Without investment, the economy would be in sad shape. The Contract with America proposed capital gains tax reduction, but it was defeated and won't ever be passed under a Democrat.knc