Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffC
If I were to buy a Picasso for £10m (say) and in 2 years time it appreciates to £15m, I have gained £5m.
However if, in that 2 years, it depreciates to £5m, then I have lost £5m.....
Why should I be penalised for my asset gaining in value when I would not be compensated for a loss ? ...  |
well first off you wouldn't have lost anything unless you first sold it at a loss and second capital losses are tax deductible but I could ask the same question about income tax. If I don't work for a day but spend $5 on lunch I've lost 5 dollars but if I work and earn $5 why should I be penalized by having to pay taxes? Taxes are a fact of life so we have to ask what should be taxed and how much? Under the theory that tax money is used for the common good like for fire department then the less socially beneficial income should be taxed more than the more beneficial ones.
I'm under the assumption that earning income though some kind of labor is more beneficial than waiting for something to appreciate and then selling it. I'm under the assumption that inheritance money has less social benefit than earned money. So I would tax the earned money less than the unearned.