
As Clinton and Trump Call for Tax Reform,Silicon Valley Must Prove VCs Are Special - dsr12
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-23/as-clinton-and-trump-call-for-tax-reform-silicon-valley-must-prove-vcs-are-special
======
shawnee_
tl;dr The carried interest provision is a tax benefit offered to some
investors, allowing them to multiply their reward in successful ventures by
giving them extra tax breaks when those they fund turn out to be wildly
successful. / tl;dr

My opinion is that the tax code has long favored the few at the expense of the
many, and this loophole is no different.

Rather than concentrating allocation of this reward to a few non-risk-averse
investors as extra tax breaks, let things like Regulation A+ actually start
working
([https://www.sec.gov/rules/petitions/2016/petn4-699.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/rules/petitions/2016/petn4-699.pdf)),
which can spread reward over a greater number of people who can let it
contribute to their ordinary income.

~~~
spoonie
I'm beginning to wonder if income tax should be done away with entirety in
favour of Land Value Tax. Yes it's generally easier to track and measure
income than land value, but maybe the tax could should do the hard thing
rather than the easy thing + a bunch of loopholes. I just wonder if it's
possible to find enough revenue from non-income for it to work? (Though a
gradual shift, lowering income tax and increasing LVT, would make the
transition easier.) Could that be "fairer" to everyone if no one paid any tax
on their income?

I can think of many small-business or extra-income opportunities that are
passed over due to the burden of filing that income (not even the cost of tax
itself!). Then again, there is still sales tax/VAT that can be a burden (e.g.
VATMOSS).

