• DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I think that doesn’t work well due to price fluctuations of the stocks and avoiding double taxing, but I don’t understand stock options and current tax laws enough to be confident about that.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Average price over the last 30 days.

          There are so many issues with this idk where to start. Maybe with: not all stock given as compensation are publicly traded yet. There may be no average price yet when they vest.

          PS: Also, the original comment proposes taking 40% of the shares, not monetary equivalent which I originally misunderstood as well. So neither of our comments is really rellevant.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        avoiding double taxing

        Who cares? Even double-taxing the billionaires is still the moderate compromise position, compared to the guillotine.

        • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          The guillotine is a dumbass fantasy that prevents people from having to think about real options while cosplaying on the internet.

          Who cares? If the goal is the universal application of the law, that goal is not obtained when you use the law to apply to people you don’t like.

      • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s the point. If you get paid $10 at 30% tax the government takes 3 of the dollars. If you get paid $10 and 10 options, the government takes 3 dollars and 3 shares (when they vest). Simple as that.

        Deciding what to do with the shares as the government is a hairy problem though.

        • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Ok, I see what you mean, but now you have government holding stocks with 0 idea if they should cash out or hold. Both cases could result in the government loosing out on tax money.

          If government immediately sells, and you hold until the stocks are 10x the value, the governmwnt lost out on 90% of the money.

          If government holds and you sell, the government stocks can become worthless (e.g. company goes bankrupt) and again lose out on tax money. Plus government needs money in the budget, not stocks.

          This is why you usually tax the income when you sell the shares. The loophole is taking a loan against those shares, but if you ask me, the answer is to tax the loan money and make repayments tax deductible. The loan is basically getting the money from selling shares early, so it should be taxed when you get it.

          • Barbarian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Maybe the shares could go to a sovereign wealth fund with staff employed to try and maximize the value of the fund over the long term?

            • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              24 hours ago

              Maybe congress gets voting shares…essentially making “the American people” a part-owner of the company. All companies.