I’d have to learn more about the specifics of this case. If there is a ruling, it will be narrow and not effect your house unrealized gains or unrealized stock capital gains imho.
In Ireland, where they do tax your unrealized gains as income for tax purposes, it is a reality. None of my mutual fund companies or drip stocks ever paid a dime of taxes for me, so I always had to pony up at tax time out of pocket. If they do tax unrealized gains, they just need to create more accounting jobs or sell 20% of your stock annually to pay the taxes.
Any ruling that would tax unrealized gains would destroy the investment model in the US.
I am salivating at the prospect of paying taxes on my BTC. wink wink, it hurts too much to spend.
> I’d have to learn more about the specifics of this case. <
The stock in question is that of a company that does business overseas, in India. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
Anyway, if the Supreme Court upholds the tax in general, it will be a great day for tax accountants. Your stock gains in value, pay a tax. Your stock drops in value, get a tax credit (I guess).
Great for accountants. A nightmare for everyone else.
Sure....because no government agency has ever attempted to expand their authority, or operate beyond what they are allowed to do.
A major problem with any type of assumption on unrealized gains, is that it simply can't be accounted for accurately. Real estate for example is considered fairly stable to increasing in value; yet we are actually seeing decreases in home prices in some areas.
Other investment areas are probably even more difficult to predict, take crypto for example. Looking at Bitcoin which is a standard has had a hell of a roller-coaster ride.
So if they are going to try and capture unrealized gains, how do they plan to account for unrealized losses? Although I'm willing to bet that in this scheme, there are no unrealized losses allowed. Especially since the money the government collects would be spent as quickly as they get their grubby hands on it.