this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2026
1 points (100.0% liked)

Australian Politics

1850 readers
4 users here now

A place to discuss Australia Politics.

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone.

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

While most Australians receive the bulk of their income as wages or salaries, much of the increase in wealth for high net worth individuals comes from the rising value of assets they already own. Increases (or decreases) in the value of these assets are known as unrealised capital gains (or losses).

Suppose you buy a share for $1 in 2025. By 2026, its value has increased to $3. The share has generated a capital gain of $2. If you sell the share, you realise the gain. If you continue to hold it, the gain remains unrealised.

For billionaires, unrealised capital gains on shares in companies, real estate and other valuable assets, such as artwork or classic cars, account for a large share of the growth in their wealth.

For example, over the past 10 years, the wealth of Australia’s 200 richest people has grown from $197 billion to $707 billion, according to the Australian Financial Review’s Rich List.

From an economic perspective, these unrealised gains increase a person’s purchasing power just as wages do for workers. The key difference is how they are taxed, with unrealised capital gains receiving preferential treatment.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 day ago

If there is, it doesn't matter. They obtained their fortunes under the same conditions as the rest of us. They deserve to pay into society just as much as we do.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 day ago

As a reminder: Taxing the rich is STILL just a band-aid fix.

[–] gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org 0 points 1 day ago

I'm actually thinking that maybe, a higher wealth tax can only be implemented with a simultaneous restriction of free trade.

Like, you could always easily evade a wealth tax if you can just push your things out of the country, and into another country where they aren't taxed (assuming that these things are movable). So, the only way to effectively implement a wealth tax is to restrict the free movement of objects around?

Or alternatively, if only company shares are taxed, then they should be taxed independently of whether the person owning them is on the inside or outside of the country.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Aussie wealth is pegged to house prices. Add a land value tax to make it less profitable to hold without renting.

[–] ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago

Tax the worth of a person, all assets. If the asset can be used for financial leverage then it's a taxable asset.

[–] the_riviera_kid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

Instead of taxing the rich lets grind them up for chum.

[–] bassad@jlai.lu 0 points 2 days ago

Too bad the global 15% company tax made such a flop few years ago, it would have been a good start.

[–] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 days ago

If only we could charge some type of tax on the property they hold.

[–] fuzzy_tinker@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Much smarter people will need to work out the details, but I think that closing the capital gains loophole would be a good start. Basically, if a person wants to leverage their stocks to take out a loan, then they get taxed on that amount. We can have a minimum amount before it kicks in such as a million dollars to allow small business loans and other things to still occur.

I understand we can't tax peoples unrealized assets, but it's bullshit that unrealized assets can then also be used to gain real monetary value.

[–] gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

"unrealized assets" absolutely can be taxed, i.e. we know how much a company share is worth even if you didn't sell it yet, because there's something called the stock market where other people agree on the current value of the shares. so we can use that as a reference value.

and these other people have a high incentive to get the estimate correct, because there's lots of money to be made from estimating a more accurate valuation.

[–] aaa@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 day ago

Spot on. Some countries in Europe do this already, although it is controversial.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

The creation of capital gains tax worldwide corresponds to national debt worldwide. To make up the shortfall, governments brought in VAT to tax the poorer classes. Meanwhile, we still allow a massive loophole of borrowing against equity and not declaring that money income or capital gains. Zero taxes paid. So this leverage makes billionaires.

Any new money coming to any person should be income, and taxed as such. If we did that, nominal income taxes could be reduced to 20% for all, and we don't need VATs.

Needless to say, this would massively improve the world economy.

[–] evolatic@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They sure do tax my house every year even though I haven't realized those gains.

[–] MisterFrog@aussie.zone 0 points 2 days ago

That's because tax loopholes aren't for you, you dirty poor. /jk

[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Why not just tax the hell out of any non-mortgage/education related private loans over $150k (the HELP lifetime limit) and any non-real estate related business loans over $5M (or a different value, I’m not sure what’s reasonable for a commercial loan).

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 0 points 1 day ago

Only problem I see is residentail property becomes that much more of a target. Maybe limit the mortage loans to only those held by an individual or family.

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 days ago

Yes. Stop having complicit lawmakers pass complicated laws that let the ultra rich pass through all the hurdles for free. BOOM!, done.

[–] voxthefox@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I mean, the alternative is taxing their heads off

[–] LemmyPlaceDN@europe.pub 0 points 2 days ago

Axe the rich?

[–] Quokka@quokk.au 0 points 2 days ago

I was in favour of taxing them when I was a teen, those days are long gone.

I support your alternative.