|
Eakinomics: A
Menu of Capital Gains Taxes
There is a lot of chatter about taxing capital gains, much of it confusing to
the average mortal. Let’s examine the issues.
I enjoy a good fantasy as much as the next person, so let’s imagine that in
2010 a frustrated, conservative economist began a daily rant about federal
policy. Let’s brand it, say, Eakinomics. Much to his surprise (and the abject
horror of the mental health profession) people subscribed by the multitudes
and the impact and perceived importance of the enterprise grew yearly. (Like
I said: fantasy.) Indeed, after 10 years he received an offer to sell the
franchise for $100 million. (Serious fantasy.)
Stripped of the dramatics, this is the situation of many people, especially
small/family businesses. There is zero basis (i.e., acquisition cost) and
$100 million in capital gains, an average gain of $10 million per year. What
are the tax implications of this situation?
- Current law. Under current
law, the capital gain will only be taxed if the capital gain is
“realized” – that is, Eakinomics is sold for $100 million. If so, the
maximum tax rate is 20 percent. Notice that if it is sold, suddenly the
annual income goes from zero to $100 million. The economist would
suddenly be “rich” and show up in the top 1 percent, only to return to
the bottom end the next year. Lesson: It is not just that the rich have
capital gains. It is that people are transitorily perceived to be rich
because they realize their capital gains.
Alternatively, Eakinomics could remain unsold, and gains could continue
to accumulate at $10 million a year. Eventually, the franchise is left
to his children (truly a dream come true for any child). Let’s suppose
that happens in 20 years. By then, the market value would be $300
million. The children would receive a “step-up in basis” – the tax code
pretends that the children acquired it for $300 million. If they
subsequently (how dare they) sell Eakinomics, they would owe taxes only
on the difference between the sales price and $300 million.
Those are the income tax proposals. Meanwhile, over in the estate tax,
the $300 million would be part of the estate and taxed at rates up to 40
percent.
- Biden proposal. The American
Families Plan Proposal is to tax capital gains as ordinary income and to
raise the top income tax rate to 39.6. There is also a surtax of 3.8
percent from the Affordable Care Act that applies to ordinary income, so
the combined capital gains rate would more than double to 43.4 percent.
Notice that if Eakinomics were sold this year, the net-of-tax amount
would be $56.6 million. If this remaining sum were
subsequently taxed in the estate at a 40 percent rate, the overall taxes
would total $66 million out of the $100 value today.
- Accrual taxation. There have
been numerous proposals to tax capital gains as they accrue, instead of
when they are realized. In this case, assuming a nice, even $10 million
a year in rising value, the tax would be $2 million annually, instead of
$20 million in one chunk at the end of 2020. Notice as well that much,
much “poorer” people (worth only $10 million) would be paying
capital gains taxes.
- Deemed realization. There are
a variety of proposals (notably the Sensible Taxation and Equity
Promotion (STEP) Act) that “deem” a realized capital gain when there are
transfers. For example, suppose the economist gives Eakinomics as a gift
to his children instead of bequeathing it at death. At the moment of
transfer, it would be deemed to have been realized and the tax would be
due. The same treatment would apply if Eakinomics were placed in a
trust. (The truly horrific part of the STEP Act is that it taxes old
transfers retroactively; deeming assets transferred long in the past to
be realized every 21 years.)
Roughly speaking, that list is what is under discussion. What do we
learn from this survey? Lesson one is that the same economic activity is
being taxed no matter whether one person (the original owner), multiple
people (the children), or a legal entity owns the capital. The amount of
economic activity affected determines the impact of the tax. The second lesson is
that thinking about capital gains taxation as a tax on the
rich can be misleading, especially if the taxpayer is only temporarily
rich because of realizing a long-held capital gain. The third lesson is that
the cumulative tax rate under the Biden proposal can be prohibitive,
and policymakers should take seriously concerns about deterring
risk-taking and productivity enhancing activities such as writing Eakinomics.
Finally, because people do respond to tax incentives, aggressive capital
gains taxers are increasingly trying to dictate when realization takes place,
so as to make those responses irrelevant.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment