Immense wealth inequality and the erosion of democracy that results is a nationwide - nay, worldwide - issue, and Sanders, the most recognized and respected figure on the American left, is supporting people who are trying to do something about it. People everywhere have had it with Musks and Bezoses and Zuckerbergs, and I hope that when Newsom runs for president, his stance on this will help them see who he's really working for.
both of these assertions are false - buyers cannot be guaranteed, and liquidating large chunks of stocks et al can have catastrophic effects on the stock price and general stock market.
they also do not address my main point which is this would be a tax on "gains" that do not exist, based on speculative valuations that cannot be guaranteed. The proposal itself defies logic; "unrealized gains" is an oxymoron!
extreme but not impossible scenario: someone builds an apartment building near your house, suddenly your house is "worth" ten times as much but no one will buy at that price so you sell your house for much less (just coincidentally to someone politically connected) and yet still owe taxes on a "gain" that was not actually possible to realize
In this specific instance, it's easy to see how large untimely stock/crypto fluctuations could lead to similar situations. That is a foreseeable disaster; there would be unforeseeable ones as well over time.
Band-aids such as limiting tax liability to not exceed the actual sale price of the asset will not help; the tax can easily cause the destruction of the wealth it seeks to collect, and not just for the one large shareholder.
This is a door that should not be open; it is disappointing to see this Dutch action is just a replacement for an existing illogical tax, so sadly too late for the Netherlands.
reply