| |
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| |
| Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
05-09-2019, 01:27 PM
|
#1
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,306
|
The decrease in value of one's stock holdings isn't the same as declaring a loss on your taxes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-09-2019, 01:40 PM
|
#2
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,206
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
The decrease in value of one's stock holdings isn't the same as declaring a loss on your taxes.
|
So are you saying that Bezos and Zuckerberg didn't claim those losses on their taxes? |
"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
|
|
|
|
|
05-09-2019, 02:05 PM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,481
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
So are you saying that Bezos and Zuckerberg didn't claim those losses on their taxes?
|
It's not a loss unless you exercise the equities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-09-2019, 02:22 PM
|
#4
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 18,206
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
It's not a loss unless you exercise the equities.
|
Makes Sense
I never claimed to be a finance guy |
"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
|
|
|
|
|
05-09-2019, 03:22 PM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
Makes Sense
I never claimed to be a finance guy
|
If you pay $100 for a share of stock, and the next day it's worth $80, you have an unrealized capital loss of $20, but that loss is in theory only. The decrease effects your net worth, but has zero impact on your taxes until you sell the stock.
You pay taxes on realized capital gains, which is the difference between the price on the day you sell, and the price on the day you bought.
If you own commercial real estate, you pay taxes on your income, which in a simplified sense, is the revenue from rents collected, minus expenses like the mortgage, maintenance etc, Net income can be negative, in which case you owe no taxes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-09-2019, 02:43 PM
|
#6
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,306
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
So are you saying that Bezos and Zuckerberg didn't claim those losses on their taxes?
|
I didn't read the articles but Forbes tries to estimate rich folks net worth so if the value of the stock goes down those guys are worth less - but it is only a paper loss until they actually sell the stock. Of course the high value of the stock wasn't real money either until it was sold. So I think Trump's taxes vs the Forbes estimate is apples to oranges. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-09-2019, 03:17 PM
|
#7
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
So are you saying that Bezos and Zuckerberg didn't claim those losses on their taxes?
|
Only if they sold their shares. You don't pay taxes on assets, you pay taxes on income, and capital gains after you sell the asset. I can have a trillion dollars in assets, but possibly have no income, and then pay no taxes.
In the case of commercial real estate, investors owned office parks, shopping malls, etc. In most case you don't pay cash, you take out a mortgage and assume that the rent you collect from tenants will cover your mortgage and provide you income on which you'll pay taxes. In the 1980s there was a major recession, so offices and malls lost paying tenants, but still had mortgage payments to make. In that case, if you paid out more than you took in, you had no income, you had a loss, and therefore would owe no taxes.
Doesn't make you a loser.
Now, it's reported that no one in the nation posted a bigger loss than Trump. Somebody has to lose the most, and it stands to reason it would be someone who leveraged himself to a great degree in commercial real estate. Same thing as when Amazon stock tanked, whoever owns the most shares, lost the most money. Again, doesn't make you a loser by ANY stretch, in fact, when the economy rebounds you can be very wealthy, as happened to Bezos and presumably, Trump.
If a multibillionaire who clobbered a heavily favored presidential candidate is a huge loser, then I ask again, what does that make Hilary? I wish I was that kind of loser. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-10-2019, 04:25 PM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,481
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
Now, it's reported that no one in the nation posted a bigger loss than Trump. Somebody has to lose the most, and it stands to reason it would be someone who leveraged himself to a great degree in commercial real estate. Same thing as when Amazon stock tanked, whoever owns the most shares, lost the most money. Again, doesn't make you a loser by ANY stretch, in fact, when the economy rebounds you can be very wealthy, as happened to Bezos and presumably, Trump.
|
Sure, everybody got hit yet Trump seems to be the only one who couldn't get money from US banks so he had to go to Russia. That's the part you keep missing Jim. Follow the money... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-10-2019, 07:44 PM
|
#9
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Sure, everybody got hit yet Trump seems to be the only one who couldn't get money from US banks so he had to go to Russia. That's the part you keep missing Jim. Follow the money...
|
if US banks wouldn’t lend him money, and Trump
made that degree of a comeback, sounds like the US banks were the losers.
if you’re telling a story about his losses, shouldn’t his comeback be part of the story, Spence? The answer is yes, unless you have an agenda that’s different from reporting facts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-10-2019, 08:35 PM
|
#10
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,481
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
if US banks wouldn’t lend him money, and Trump
made that degree of a comeback, sounds like the US banks were the losers.
if you’re telling a story about his losses, shouldn’t his comeback be part of the story, Spence? The answer is yes, unless you have an agenda that’s different from reporting facts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
You really can’t connect the dots can you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-10-2019, 08:46 PM
|
#11
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
You really can’t connect the dots can you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Did Mueller miss some dots re this? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
05-10-2019, 09:07 PM
|
#12
|
|
Canceled
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,435
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
if US banks wouldn’t lend him money, and Trump
made that degree of a comeback, sounds like the US banks were the losers.
if you’re telling a story about his losses, shouldn’t his comeback be part of the story, Spence? The answer is yes, unless you have an agenda that’s different from reporting facts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
You assume somehow after Trump burnt the banks in NY with casinos, upside down financing on projects, Trump Air, etc, he magically found a foolish bank to bankroll him.
Who funneled him money thru Deutsche Bank?
Remember his boneheaded sons saying we get all the money we need from Russia.
Keep believing and defending Deranged Donald and Natasha
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!
Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?
Lets Go Darwin
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:04 AM.
|
| |
Hybrid Mode