Billionaires are hoarding trillions in untaxed wealth. They want the Supreme Court to keep it that way - eviltoast

A new report from Americans for Tax Fairness found that America’s richest families accumulated $8.5 trillion in untaxed capital gains in 2022

America’s wealthiest families held an astounding $8.5 trillion in untaxed profits in 2022. According to a report from the nonprofit Americans for Tax Fairness, which analyzed Federal Reserve data, “one in every six dollars (18 percent of the nation’s unrealized gains is held by these roughly 64,000 ultra-wealthy households, who make up less than 0.05 percent of the population.” The report comes as the Supreme Court gears up to decide a case that could preemptively block any efforts to tax the wealth of billionaires.

The data looks at “quiet” income generated by “centi-millionaires,” Americans holding at least $100 million in wealth, and billionaires through unrealized capital gains. Those gains accumulate, untaxed, as assets and investments like stocks, real estate, bonds, and other investments increase in value. If those assets are not sold — or “realized” — they are not taxed, yet America’s wealthiest families can leverage that on-paper value increase to secure favorable loans with low-interest rates in lieu of using taxable income to finance their lifestyle.

“Of the $139 trillion in America’s national wealth, almost three-quarters (73 percent) is held by the richest 10 percent of households, over one-third (35 percent) by the richest 1 percent, and an astounding 11 percent — $15.2 trillion — is held by the handful of fortunate households that make up the billionaire and centi-millionaire class,” the report says. “The wealthiest 1 percent of households hold 44 percent of national unrealized gains ($21.2 trillion), with billionaires and centi-millionaires alone controlling 18 percent ($8.5 trillion).”

  • prole@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    I guess if you change the definition of “democratically elected,” then sure. Supreme Court Justice is an appointed position. It’s literally the entire point of the distinction between the two (elected vs. appointed).

    If you were to consider anyone appointed by an elected official as being “democratically elected,” then that would mean that nobody is appointed. It would become a distinction without a difference.

    • Norgur@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      So… are they appointed by the President without anyone having any say or is there a vote? If there is a vote by an elected body like the senate or congress, then they are democratically chosen.

      • homesnatch@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Congress doesn’t pick or vote from a set of candidates… Essentially they are just confirming appointments, just like the appointed cabinet members and most other appointed positions.

        • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not relevant. And they can pick from whomever the President puts forward. I know because I asked Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch.

      • prole@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Pretty creative, I guess. Unfortunately for you, words have meanings, and you are objectively wrong about what you believe those meanings to be. The term “political appointment” is a term that is already defined in US politics, and it refers to government positions that are obtained by appointment (usually, if not always, by someone who WAS elected). Period. Those people are not elected officials no matter what weird reasoning you might come up with. That is the entire point of the distinction between the two terms.