Re:Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of...
by DLTADragonHawk on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @06:47PM
(#29019990)
From what seems to be the intention of the tax plan it would be regardless of if the asset was available in a stock exchange so if the value of Tim's shares put him above the threshold he would still have to pay the tax. His wealth through epic would likely be less then if it were a publicly traded company though. The effect of paying tax on shares was always true as it becomes a realized capital gain and is already covered under the current tax system.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of...
by randyrand on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @07:08PM
(#29020167)
He could also attempt to sabotage the company's valuation in an attempt to maintain control.
As long as he has no legal fiduciary duty, it seems like an obvious thing to do. It's definitely what I would do.
And in 4 more years the new tax laws could be anything.
Re:Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of...
by dsizzle on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @06:58PM
(#29020068)
The stories I see, like https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/25/senate-democrats-push-for-bi..., says the tax on unrealized gains only applies to "tradeable assets." It doesn't seem like that would cover private companies. From what that article says, it would invoke an increased tax due to the deferral of taxes though.
Re:Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of...
by IG_Semmelweiss on Wednesday October 27, 2021 @10:18PM
(#29021574)
there are liquid secondary markets.