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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (784071)	5/9/2014 2:08:26 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577381

>> Even laws he's actively lobbied to get passed, like the "carried interest" gimmick, oops, provision. AFAIK, the provision under which carried interests are taxed has been in the tax law since the 40s. I applied [correctly] the same basic methodology to partnership interests in the 80s with some frequency. Often very small ones. It is actually a commonly used, broad provision which many are wanting to do away with for the wealthy. That is, creating an exception for the wealthy that taxes them more heavily than other people. Small real estate projects often would not get off the ground without what we now call "carried interests" although I doubt changing the tax treatment in a reasonable way would create much disincentive. Some, but probably not much.