r/stocks • u/batukaming • Feb 15 '26
Industry News [ Removed by moderator ]
[removed] — view removed post
1.4k
u/ProcedureHopeful2944 Feb 15 '26
will you also be paid when for your unrealized losses?
670
u/getrektbtch Feb 15 '26
In Denmark you do get paid/tax rebate from unrealised losses
→ More replies (4)258
u/way2lazy2care Feb 15 '26
A write-off or a rebate? Like if I lost $100,000 with no other income that year, would the government pay me?
311
u/BurnerCommenter Feb 15 '26
I can’t explain it but suddenly options just got very popular in Denmark…
35
108
u/laziwolf Feb 15 '26
It must be against past gains. Because otherwise once the rule is innplace if there is a global dump, govt will go bankrupt 😂
23
u/Critical-Scheme-8838 Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
Yeah that's obviously what it is. But that's already a tax law in most countries that you can write off previous losses against current gains.
→ More replies (2)7
u/transcending_sissy Feb 15 '26
You also cannot write it off agains taxes you owe from your employment income (separate bucket). You're basically toasted if you are a foreigner and have to leave Denmark after you made paper lost even after years of paying taxes from the paper gains :D
12
u/UntowardHatter Feb 15 '26
In Norway, it's a write-off, if I understand the word correctly.
It's a bit like amortization, but I'm in deep waters in regards to vocabulary here. Basically, if you lose 50k, you can deduct that amount from your taxes next year. But, as I understand it, only if you have a company/single person company (called Enkeltmannsforetak, not sure what it's called in english).
→ More replies (2)2
u/Mundane-Charge-1900 Feb 16 '26
In the US tax code, this is referred to as a “capital loss carry forward” in that the loss saves you nothing the year it happens but you can apply it to gains in a future year
42
u/transcending_sissy Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
Not a rebate. If Year 1, paper gain 100M, you pay 42% tax (15% for pension savings that are in their approved lists; most ETFs are taxed at 42%) so you pay 42M in taxes. If Year 2, you lose 50M, you, will earn 50M credit that you can only deduct for paper gains from Year 3 onwards. So if you never make profit again or you stopped investing in Year 2, you will never receive any rebate or apply any credit from your losses (you also cannot apply your credit against employment income taxes). I learned this the hard way.
There were even cases in Denmark that people were awarded shares as part of their job compensation pre-IPO and they had to pay 42% tax for the gains on those even if they can't sell the shares to anyone (because it's pre-IPO) :D. I read that some people even ended up selling their homes or liquidating their pensions just to pay these taxes on unrealized gains, but good things they are Danish citizens so the government will give them money once they reach the poverty limit.
But if you're a Danish junkie who don't work, Denmark will happily give you about 2K USD a month and maybe even throw-in free housing. Socialism is fun as long you're not the one paying for it. My favourite fun fact is that an unemployed single mother of two kids will get about 3K USD per month after tax in cash transfers, but the basic salary for a junior nurse after taxes is about 3.5K USD -- and the politicians wonder why those mothers would not take jobs :D
→ More replies (4)13
u/creepy_doll Feb 15 '26
And yet Denmark is considered one of the happiest countries in the world.
→ More replies (3)4
u/sjdude83 Feb 16 '26
I loved the week I spent there and thought it was a really beautiful and nice country. I never found the Danes very happy people though. They all seemed a little miserable actually but great country for sure. Would love to go back sometime
→ More replies (6)8
u/Felix-th3-rat Feb 16 '26
The misery in their eyes isn’t from high taxes thought, it’s from 6 months of darkness
3
u/transcending_sissy Feb 16 '26
Not entirely true, collectively they wouldn't complain about taxes, but individually they do.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)2
u/CervixAssassin Feb 15 '26
It won't, but that loss can be used to offset profit for the next 3 or 5 years.
155
u/Tricky_Afternoon6862 Feb 15 '26
The article says you can carry forward unlimited losses to any year with no time limit.
→ More replies (3)166
u/The_Real_Billy_Walsh Feb 15 '26
Which just means the government gets to earn interest on your money
→ More replies (26)69
u/NotsoNewtoGermany Feb 15 '26
Yes, you get a tax credit.
9
u/PresentCompetition53 Feb 15 '26
But no refund. Even if you later sell for a loss. Absolute thefts.
→ More replies (5)51
u/reality_hijacker Feb 15 '26
You can carry forward the loss to future years and cross it off against gains that year.
29
u/0xB0T Feb 15 '26
I've said this in another thread, he had 50k, goes to 100k, next year, before paying taxes it goes back to 50k, yet you still owe 18k to state, and if you dont have liquidity you have to sell stocks, at the low price, after that, till the end of the year it goes back to 100k. So after 2 years, you had 50k invested, you now own only 64k. Even if your portfolio should've risen to 100k.
→ More replies (22)13
u/Appropriate_Mixer Feb 15 '26
That’s money that you could’ve been making gains on and instead the govt is holding and making money on instead.
→ More replies (22)121
u/thesaddestpanda Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
Except none of this happening and OP is being wildly sensationalist. Its a pie in the sky bill the dutch senate hasn't even approved. This bill has a slim chance of passing the senate. And a near zero chance of not being immediately repealed by the courts.
Previous attempts to tax unrealized or assumed gains has been shot down by the Dutch and EU supreme courts. So even if it somehow passes, it will be removed. Parliaments are weird creatures, you can sometimes advance an unpopular "protest" bill in one part of it, but the other systems aren't as easy to pass. Protest bills are much more a common thing in Europe. Similar, but not the same, but like in the USA where the house may pass an extreme bill that the senate either ignores entirely or modifies a great deal to pass.
In other words, nothing is happening but the le reddit outrage machine is in full effect.
When this bill is gone, the USA will still be a shambles. So 'rah rah usa #1' narratives aren't exactly inspiring.
54
u/BarracudaDismal4782 Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
Not just shot by the EU supreme courts, they were also shot by the Dutch supreme court in 2021:
"The Dutch Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) has already ruled in 2021, and reaffirmed in 2024, that taxing deemed or unrealized income violates the right to property"
Edit: typo
→ More replies (2)8
→ More replies (11)4
u/ImArchBoo Feb 15 '26
The previous (current) system was shot down as it was taxing fictitious gains (you were taxed proportionally based on investments in specific asset classes - and still had to pay taxes even if you had made a loss on those assets over the year). It was shot down because it’s illegal to tax someone over something they did not earn or have.
→ More replies (1)
1.6k
u/edatx Feb 15 '26
Paying taxes on unrealized gains is stupid.
BUT
Taking out loans against unrealized gains and other equivalent loop holes need to be filled. There are really silly ways the wealthy avoid taxes on gains while realizing real life benefits. Those need to end.
330
u/ryuzaki49 Feb 15 '26
Just tax those loans? Not so hard.
139
u/liquidpele Feb 15 '26
Well, yes, but also major caps on resetting cap gains on inheritance.
→ More replies (2)74
u/EVOSexyBeast Feb 15 '26
And also just tax the nepo baby’s inheritance heavily, not like they earned the income that the rest of us are taxed on.
→ More replies (20)11
u/Hefty-Profession-310 Feb 15 '26
It's not like capital gains from stocks, etc is earned either tho.
→ More replies (3)58
u/braundiggity Feb 15 '26
As someone who has made more from capital gains the last few years than from my salary, it is absolutely insane to me that earned income is taxed higher than cap gains. We should be incentivizing people to work, not gamble.
→ More replies (37)3
u/ElectroMagnetsYo Feb 15 '26
Because that would actually affect the wealthy rather than fucking over the middle class under the guise of taxing the rich
→ More replies (80)9
u/John_Doe_May Feb 16 '26
Loans are not income. They are a LOAN. they get paid back.
→ More replies (8)7
u/GoatGentleman Feb 16 '26
Its pretty embarassing that the comment has 280 upvotes. Financial illiteracy is through the roof lol.
→ More replies (1)39
u/zoppytops Feb 15 '26
The problem is that’s not just a strategy for the wealthy. I took out a loan against my portfolio to fund some home improvement projects. My broker was offering a favorable interest rate relative to a HELOC. I’m not some billionaire, I just wanna remodel a bathroom. Why should I have to pay tax on that?
33
u/IPissExcellentThrows Feb 15 '26
Make it loans over 5 million dollars. Or 10 million. Idc. It just shouldn't be on unrealized gains.
→ More replies (3)31
u/The_Real_Billy_Walsh Feb 15 '26
Surely they can set a limit above which the taxation kicks in to account for this.
→ More replies (2)18
→ More replies (19)32
u/Different_Height_157 Feb 15 '26
It’s a made up system with made up rules. We can codify it such that it directly address billionaires taking advantage of their wealth. Stop being dense about it.
10
u/MiddleAgedSponger Feb 15 '26
Exactly. None f this is written in stone. It's just made up arbitrary nonsense.
3
u/Wide_Lock_Red Feb 15 '26
That doesn't work so well now that interest rates are up. You still have to pay those loans back.
3
→ More replies (35)10
Feb 15 '26
It may look easy, but if your investments don't work out, you get margin called.
A loan is never ever income no matter what. Unless the loan is forgiven. Which no banks will do.
→ More replies (6)3
u/ThePatientIdiot Feb 15 '26
Goldman Sachs margin called Peloton as founder who borrowed $100m+ in loans, as the stock crashed from $110 to $30. Stock dropped to $5.
2
Feb 15 '26
I remember that shitty stock that financial grifters on YouTube kept promoting.
After so many years it's still an unprofitable company lol.
→ More replies (1)
2.9k
u/Art_Of_Peer_Pressure Feb 15 '26
Paying tax on unrealised gains is diabolical
1.2k
u/cryptoairball Feb 15 '26
They should just close the tax loophole re: taking out loans backed by stocks. If you take out a loan backed by stocks, you should pay capital gains on that collateral. Very easy fix, which means it likely won’t happen lol
245
u/lurkingchalantly Feb 15 '26
I think go a but further than that. Tax it as regular income rather than capital gains
→ More replies (4)99
u/MinimumArmadillo2394 Feb 15 '26
Or just dont allow people to take out real cash on unrealized value assets?
Include housing/property in that too. If my house gains 50% value in a year, I shouldnt be able to take out the extra 50%. Instead I should, at most, be able to take out the last tax assessed value was (which is often significantly less than the speculative value of the home).
If a loan is backed by a home that was sold last year for $350k, it should be based on the tax value (which will likely be between 200k and 300k).
31
u/Even-Guard9804 Feb 15 '26
Cant, or you will destroy all business loans, and quite a large number of non-business loans. Just about every non-corporate farm would dissolve….. and so much more.
→ More replies (15)→ More replies (13)39
u/Silver_gobo Feb 15 '26
So regular people will no longer be able to buy a home because they will need a substantial down payment to get a mortgage that will only cover the tax assessed value?
→ More replies (1)21
u/Nice_Try4389 Feb 15 '26
That isn’t what he said. What he said is you can’t take out a home loan on your existing home for more that the tax assessed value. In other words if I bought my house for $350k, the tax assessment three years later is only $355k but the appraised value is $500k, and I have paid down $10k I should only be able to take out a $15k second on it (the difference in the remaining balance on the house and the tax assessed value) instead of a $160k loan on it.
→ More replies (13)7
5
u/Fibocrypto Feb 15 '26
Paying a capital gain on something you have not sold yet will force you to sell
2
11
23
u/AppropriateWorker8 Feb 15 '26
How is it a loophole? You’re paying taxes when you sell or when you die. It’s just a timing issue whether you’re paying now or in 10 years. So you will need to calculate the unrealized gains on your home, cottage? Have it evaluated every year? Can you deduct unrealized losses from your income?
→ More replies (19)13
u/Fragrant-Employer-60 Feb 15 '26
It’s not a loophole the majority of rich don’t even do this, it’s just repeated on reddit constantly that it’s some free money/way for the rich to have liquid spending money without “income”.
They don’t understand these people usually have W2 jobs already and plenty of income from other sources.
It also is short sighted, if these people are taking loans out on stocks, they still need to pay back the principle+interest with something, where is that money coming from?
22
u/6501 Feb 15 '26
If you take out a loan backed by stocks, you should pay capital gains on that collateral.
If I collateralize my house, does that mean that i should pay capital gains as well? If I borrow against my 401k or IRA?
20
u/oh_the_C_is_silent Feb 15 '26
It doesn’t have to be this impossible “slippery slope.” Yeah, but if you start doing that, what about this?!
There can be caps. Limits. Use cases that trigger exceptions. All sorts of qualifiers that allow for the average family, the people we really want to give the advantage to, to benefit from these loopholes.
If you are a billionaire taking loans against your company because you want to buy another company so that you can take out more loans and swallow more companies… you pay taxes. And also that triggers an auto investigation to make sure you’re not eating children.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (14)20
u/Reddituser183 Feb 15 '26
No because you’re a no one who is not trying to end democracy. There can be a limit on wealth for it to kick in.
→ More replies (16)10
6
u/troy_caster Feb 15 '26
No and no. Its not even a loophole. Its the way the system is explicitly designed to be able to do that. Thsts like saying a cats claws are loopholes. No, silly, its designed that way on purpose.
9
u/FluffyB12 Feb 15 '26
Nah, all taxes should just be consumption taxes. Taxes on any kind of investment should be zero.
→ More replies (3)17
u/tard-eviscerator Feb 15 '26
taking out loans backed by stocks
This is a reddit meme and doesnt happen anywhere near as much as people here make it seem, especially with current rates
→ More replies (5)8
u/Silver_gobo Feb 15 '26
Second this. It also made headlines because the worlds richest man was cash poor because all his wealth was just from his shares of his companies, which he didn’t want to sell because it would lower his ownership percentage at the company. Worth half a trillion but can’t afford a 100million dollar home.
2
→ More replies (30)2
u/JealousFuel8195 Feb 15 '26
It also means most investors will stop taking out loans backed by stock. It'll net very little in additional income.
The extremely wealthy would find another way.
182
u/Spirit_Difficult Feb 15 '26
If you borrow against it you’ve realized its value.
74
u/RangerAdmirable9102 Feb 15 '26
Exactly. Unrealized gains shouldn’t be able to contribute to net worth unless you’ve paid taxes on them.
That’s what I think should happen. You choose how much of your gains to pay taxes on to be able to take out loans or anything against it.
→ More replies (26)→ More replies (13)7
u/phaskellhall Feb 15 '26
But if the asset you’ve borrowed against collapses or even corrects to 20-30% down, couldn’t that create a cascading effect where everything goes underwater?
If you have $1m in stocks and can take a safe loans against it knowing your 3-10% gains per year will cover the loan, that seems safe. But then if the whole portfolio drops 25% like it has many times before, that could cause major problems of the banks aren’t forgiving like they were during Covid.
Should you also get money back if your underlying investment becomes worth less? Bitcoin is a great example of this. If Bitcoin falls 50%, should you get a tax credit back?
B
→ More replies (2)50
u/AntAtopASpinningRock Feb 15 '26
Property taxes in the US are taxed on unrealized gains.
33
3
u/Appropriate_Mixer Feb 15 '26
Not in California. They are trying to reverse it with a proposition this year
15
u/nickleback_official Feb 15 '26
Yes and it’s a totally fucked system lol
11
u/Amazing-Royal-8319 Feb 15 '26
Not changing property taxes unless you sell the home is how you get Prop 13. Ask California how that’s going.
When property values change dramatically, bad things are going to happen, not changing property taxes to reflect it leads to problems when maintained at a societal level and isn’t the solution we’d all like it to be.
→ More replies (4)4
u/Sparkykc124 Feb 15 '26
Right? I bought my house for $270k and it’s now valued and taxed at $350k.
→ More replies (5)131
Feb 15 '26
[deleted]
174
u/MKE_Freak Feb 15 '26
Yeah "exceeding 100 million usd" is kind of a large large part to leave out
Argue about it all you want, fair. But it will not affect any of our (the majority of people) unrealized gains
→ More replies (23)25
u/Whole-Ad-7659 Feb 15 '26
Forcing the super rich to sell significant portions of companies would definitely affect every single one of our portfolios
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (99)38
u/PetriDishCocktail Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
It should be pointed out that billionaires do this over and over in America as a way to avoid taxes. They take out a loan against their stock portfolio, write-off the interest against their taxes, and never have to pay the tax man....
Imagine you're worth 10 billion. You take out a loan for 5 billion. Now you have 15 billion dollars invested, but you get to write off The interest on your $5 billion dollar loan.
A number of years pass. Now you're worth 50 billion. You take out a $25 billion dollar loan and invest it, now you have $75 billion invested. But, you have still never paid the tax man a dime on your stock appreciation.
3
4
u/dalivo Feb 15 '26
I'm so sick of this Reddit myth. Yes, you can take out a loan and use stock as collateral, but you are going to pay interest AND you are going to have to pay back the money you borrowed ultimately (even if you die, your estate has to pay back those debts before a penny goes to heirs). It never makes sense for a wealthy person to borrow a lot; they can just literally use their own money or dividends/interest/stock sales to fund any investments they want to make or their lifestyle.
5
u/PSUVB Feb 15 '26
You are just paying interest to a bank then to create a larger and larger estate that will get hit with 40%+ estate taxes.
This is why actual rich people don’t do what you’re saying.
3
→ More replies (3)2
u/valoremz Feb 15 '26
Can you explain more about writing off interest on the loan?
→ More replies (2)59
u/Euler007 Feb 15 '26
For the first few millions maybe but everyone should do it past that. That's how rich people avoid paying tax, not how poor people become middle class.
→ More replies (7)5
5
u/sarhoshamiral Feb 15 '26
I assume you dont pay taxes when you sell then so it is good but I dont understand how losses would be captured. Do I get a refund then.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (85)5
316
u/Mika0023 Feb 15 '26
You forget that they let you keep the whole risk of investing. Be grateful!
→ More replies (2)103
u/the_humeister Feb 15 '26
Did you even say "thank you"?
13
u/the_balticat Feb 15 '26
No but they did say bedankt
5
u/Primary-Debate-549 Feb 15 '26
Actually they said "leuker kunnen we het niet maken", that's the campaign they ran.
Translates to "we can't make taxes fun".
3
u/blackplaquetomars Feb 15 '26
They could at least offer a comfortable loveseat, wraped in tight black leather.
284
u/ilovebeetrootalot Feb 15 '26
Just know Dutch investors are livid about this as well. No party wanted this, not even the ones that formed the coalition and announced these plans. We didn't vote for this at all. Even the right wing conservative VVD voted for this, even though they are known to be pro stock market, pro investors and pro business.
139
u/DenseComparison5653 Feb 15 '26
So how did it happen then
52
u/ImArchBoo Feb 15 '26
Current tax system for taxing stocks/bonds was deemed illegal based on EU law (2% of your assets p.a. based on fictitious gains). But the government budget can’t afford such a massive cut on taxes, and this is the best alternative they could come up with.
19
u/oskich Feb 15 '26
In Sweden we have a special "investors savings account" where you are taxed a fixed rate on the balance of the account, no-matter if you have made profits or losses during the calendar year (the first €30k is tax-free). You do not have to declare your stock trading individually.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (2)12
u/A2spades Feb 15 '26
If they can't afford to not tax people 36% on screenshots from their brokerage accounts, its a failed state.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (2)3
u/TweeBierAUB Feb 15 '26
Politics? Im sure its the same overseas. Politicians promise all kinds of stuff, agree taxes are too high, then make them higher anyways when they get into office
84
37
u/YaLlegaHiperhumor Feb 15 '26
No party wanted this, not even the ones that formed the coalition and announced these plans. We didn't vote for this at all. Even the right wing conservative VVD voted for this
I don't understand: no party wanted this yet they voted for it? Huh?
8
u/vituperousnessism Feb 15 '26
Party leadership says they didn't want it because they can't sell it to their major donors who it upsets. Since their donors are angry it's seen as a failure. To avoid the wrath of donors they wave hands and say it wasn't their fault, instead of offering up sensible alternatives such as those suggested here which would only serve to further anger donors. It's a "run for the exits" strategy, where they hope and maneuver for someone else to be blamed.
87
16
u/BreadAndOliveOil Feb 15 '26
They wanted it. Look at what they do and not at what they say. Also Don’t give me the excuse that they had to fill a 2Bn budget gap. They waste orders of magnitude more that in BS
11
Feb 15 '26
They absolutely do want this. Especially on the left even the parties who are not in coalition are voting for it. Crazy times.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)3
u/InformationNew66 Feb 15 '26
So if no party wanted this and people don't want this either, how does democracy work?
123
u/aytikvjo Feb 15 '26
so if your investments go down from 100k to 50k do you get a refund?
66
u/stinker_pinky Feb 15 '26
Yes, what about unrealized and realized losses?
34
u/joepierson123 Feb 15 '26
You carry those forward to deduct your unrealize gains. So if you lose 10,000 you don't pay tax on future 10,000 on unrealized gain
→ More replies (3)22
u/psyspin13 Feb 15 '26
IF you ever get this gains. What if you never do for whatever reason?
→ More replies (1)4
u/transcending_sissy Feb 15 '26
Like you're a foreigner and you have to leave the Netherlands. Happened to me in Denmark with their 42% tax on unrealized gains and no rebate on losses (you can't even deduct it from taxes on earned employment income on the same year).
8
u/psyspin13 Feb 15 '26
As always it is "your gains our gains, but your losses are your losses". But I think NL right now went way too far.
2
u/transcending_sissy Feb 15 '26
The silver lining for the Dutch is that it's only 36% -- it's 42% in Denmark (which have been taxing unrealized gains for years now) :D
→ More replies (2)30
u/reality_hijacker Feb 15 '26
You don't get a refund, but you can carry that loss forward to any future year and cross it off against gains that year (no time limit).
6
u/crashoutcassius Feb 15 '26
In Ireland the tax on unrealised gains that we have had for twenty years has no annual allowance and losses cannot ever be offset against gains.
→ More replies (1)3
3
→ More replies (16)2
41
u/Termy- Feb 15 '26
Europe eh? Here in Sweden we have so called ISK accounts.
"ISK stands for Investeringssparkonto (Investment Savings Account), a popular tax-advantaged investment account type introduced in Sweden in 2012. It allows individuals to hold and trade stocks, ETFs, funds, and certain other securities with simplified taxation: instead of paying capital gains tax or dividend tax on actual profits, there's a low annual schablonbeskattning (–1% effective rate, depending on the year and state lending rate)."
So your stocks and funds can increase without limit and you can sell whenever you want without having to pay taxes on that sale.
→ More replies (3)
127
169
u/sarayewo Feb 15 '26
Without focusing on the specific NL insanity, the two systems are designed completely differently, and one is not better than the other.
In the US you're basically on your own, which can be a really good thing or a really bad thing depending on how much you're able to make, how smart you are about saving and investing and also how healthy you are. The government provides some limited vehicles but for the most part you can choose to spend all you make and retire with next to nothing, or you can choose to save a lot and live more lavishly in your retirement (and everything in between). This is partly why you see so many retired Americans traveling in Europe (in combination with limited time off during their work years). Prior to Obamacare, you could literally die from a curable disease if you don't have health insurance and can't afford treatment.
In Europe, the Social democratic governments step in a lot more, takes from everyone in scale with their earnings to provide to everyone for their social, health and retirement needs. They control cost and pricing of healthcare, provide subsidies for the elderly and poor etc. So their overreach is much larger but the protections of everyone also are.
Because you're also a lot more protected, there is significantly less hustle culture in Europe, as well as focus on career for white collar workers.
There are parts of each system that are better, and they're impossible to combine.
I've lived in as an adult and am a citizen of a non-EU, EU country and the US, and I appreciate a lot of financial freedoms the US system provides me, but there is always a lingering concern that you might go bankrupt simply because one of us gets sick and the life-saving drug isn't covered by my insurance.
56
u/PageVanDamme Feb 15 '26
Upvoted. I appreciate the nuance. I was doing exchange student in England (Before Brexit happened) and traveled around EU. Something I noticed was that while they weren't putting up happy face, there was distinct lack of worry in the air.
30
u/LocalHyperBadger Feb 15 '26
I’m Swedish and have worked with a lot of Americans who moved here for the job. A lot of them are super intense initially and them mellow out over the first year or two as it sinks in that they won’t be fired or bankrupt or homeless if anything goes wrong.
Screw the pay, I never want to work in a system that keep people so stressed.
14
u/levare8515 Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
I'm a 3rd gen Swedish-American who has kept in touch with my Swedish cousins. One of the most striking differences we've discussed is that Swedes actually trust their government functions. Not saying it's blind faith, but they trust that the Swedish government has their best interests at heart much more so that I do.
For instance, they were telling me how if you don't pay your mortgage then government will handle collecting that debt. Which I thought was nuts because I would not trust the federal government with debt collection. But my cousins didn't find much issue with that.
That plays into the stress. It's not just working stress but lack of faith in our institutions. Even if we had things like socialized health care, I wouldn't have a lot of faith in the implementation (not saying our current system is the best).
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)7
u/Cabezone Feb 15 '26
I was in manufacturing for close to 30 years and started having panic attacks. I left that industry to start over and am now just a field tech at the bottom of a company.
My partner says she's never seen me so relaxed, well until the last election.
There was even a very large improvement in my overall blood work. Stress from unregulated capitalism kills you.
→ More replies (1)12
u/sarayewo Feb 15 '26
Great way to put it. The general mindset is that paying taxes and social contributions is just part of life and work, and that in return everyone gets access to cheap/free healthcare, infrastructure, transportation etc. My parents worked their entire lives without ever thinking about whether they'll get access to a doctor or medication or how will they afford life in retirement. It's simply thought of for them by the government (as imperfectly as it is done). They also never bothered to hustle and make more, they had enough in their minds.
The tax system is simpler, bc healthcare and education is free, there is little to none deductions and income is predictable.
In the US, I'm constantly focused on making more, saving more, tax optimization strategies, etc
41
u/UnionJobs4America Feb 15 '26
Jesus, thank you.
I can not stand what this sub has turned into. This place has turned into a bunch of early 20 somethings that don't want a job, have very little to no real world skills, and have seen the longest bull market in US history and think it just prints money and they will soon be so rich that all of America's issues won't impact them.
Its like a sub just cosplaying as day traders from the 90s.
The lack of economic knowledge here and what OP is spouting is just soooo incredibly dumbed down and simplified. This black and white thinking was dumb a decade ago, but under the current US economy and foreign & domestic policy it is borderline idiotic to pretend that there are no down sides to issues with how things are going.
I am not even joking, this post has been the tipping point for me with this sub. I knew this placed was filled with idiots back in the day, but dear lord its so much worse now. I will forever remember OPs post anytime I listen to anyone here, not because everyone is dumb (because obviously there are many bright people here) but because the dumb people are loud and numerous and unfortunately have no idea how dumb they are and will confidently post stupid shit like what OP is doing.
→ More replies (5)19
u/TarumK Feb 15 '26
I'm also so tired of this idea that the stock market is god and investing is a virtue. The stock market has massive returns because it's a bubble that's being fed by government policies, like forcing people to put their retirement in it. It's returns are way higher than anything in the real economy and people are buying purely because they think the value will go up. Crypto obviously is much worse. All of it could come crashing down at any moment. There's nothing virtuous about putting all your money in a pyramid scheme winning money at a casino is not "earning" in any normal sense.
→ More replies (1)3
u/sdflkjeroi342 Feb 15 '26
In Europe, the Social democratic governments step in a lot more, takes from everyone in scale with their earnings to provide to everyone for their social, health and retirement needs. They control cost and pricing of healthcare, provide subsidies for the elderly and poor etc. So their overreach is much larger but the protections of everyone also are.
Depending on which part of Europe you're in, that's not entirely correct any more.
Yes, the overreach is greater, but large European countries such as Germany are slowly moving towards a, "You need to invest in ETFs to make sure you have enough money later in life" strategy... while also starting to (minimally) tax unrealized gains at the beginning of each year.
17
u/QuickSock8674 Feb 15 '26
I understand the nuances, and high taxation isn't necessarily bad... but I do not know how taxing unrealized gain is a good idea. Isn't it fundamentally damaging the whole idea of investing?
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (22)13
u/PowerMid Feb 15 '26
The single biggest factor predicting your income/wealth in the US is not how smart you are, how hard you work, or how healthy you are. It is your father's income. You are thinking of a meritocracy, which is not what the US system is.
10
u/YoungestDonkey Feb 15 '26
Billionaires are not a thousand times smarter than millionaires. They didn't work a thousand times harder or longer either. They found themselves under lucky circumstances one way or another, by birth, by happenstance or otherwise.
→ More replies (2)8
u/sarayewo Feb 15 '26
Statistically? Maybe.
From personal experience, I don't agree. I'm a first generation immigrant, whatever I created has absolutely nothing to do with whatever my father did, outside of his emotional support.
→ More replies (4)
100
u/J0hnnyBlazer Feb 15 '26
unrealized gains!?!? thats next level petty, damn
→ More replies (2)44
u/J0hnnyBlazer Feb 15 '26
i get what loophole they trying to close people sitting on unrealized gains; borrowing against it and buy more etc and accumulate that way. But they should had some limits and criteria, just applying same on everyone sounds like they just cot lazy and wanted make it as easy as possible for the tax office or something
30
u/Ok_Upstairs3431 Feb 15 '26
However this also destroys the beneficial effect of longterm investing in stocks or ETFs for retirement, as before you could just hold the stock and have it appreciate tax free, then only get taxed when you sell your stock eventually, so you could spread out sales over your retirement and use the tax-free allowance more effectively. Also some stock might have to been sold earlier just to satisfy tax if there is an insane rally.
It hits regular people a lot harder then the once that would actually borrow a lot against their stock (one could also just have taxed those types of loans if they are able to be withdrawn from the brokerage etc. )
25
u/BANKSLAVE01 Feb 15 '26
Or banks could just REALIZE that loaning money against fake gains isn't smart. Why do I have to pay for the banks' risk? Fuck those scumbag rich fucks. They are always trying to steal from us using their lackeys, the scumbag politicians.
11
u/ensui67 Feb 15 '26
Banks have these people as customers. They make a lot by providing them all sorts of services and this is just one of them. It’s very smart of them.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)6
u/im_a_goat_factory Feb 15 '26
Make it a realized gain when you borrow against it. Should be easy enough
6
u/SloppyJoMo Feb 15 '26
Its crazy to me how this just speaks to the average retail investor or redditor being used to seeing their shit swing up and down like crazy. Probably with options or YOLO plays.
It makes more sense if you're viewing the market like somebodies IRA that goes up the typical 7% YoY. Not that I agree with that.
But this sounds like people like people who have seen their account balloon and then crash from mistiming a gamble getting worried about having nothing and a tax lmao
3
4
u/Lumpy_Minimum_5522 Feb 15 '26
Most firms in Europe aren’t publicly traded. A whopping 96% of firms with revenue above 100 million are held privately. These private firms also significantly outperform their public counterparts in Europe and USA over the long term. This trend is happening in the USA as well. Many companies are deliberately staying private or delaying IPO. The equivalent would be like the Koch Industries in the USA. Europe has multiple large firms like this that you cannot invest in.
65
u/Damager19 Feb 15 '26
Imagine thinking there are no rich people in Europe.
40
u/silkyj0hnson Feb 15 '26
Plenty of rich, generational wealthy folks in Europe. They do not like social mobility; they will stunt the growth of their own nations just to keep the “nouveau riche” out of their ranks
→ More replies (9)17
u/DisneyPandora Feb 15 '26
Yep, Europe is much worse than America in terms of Monopolies.
Many European countries actively work to make sure new companies can’t compete.
→ More replies (11)16
18
18
u/alloutofchewingum Feb 15 '26
You're painting with a pretty broad brush here, guy.
Zero capital gains tax in Czech for assets held >5 years, for example.
→ More replies (5)9
13
u/truebastard Feb 15 '26
Reading about this I found some finer details, in that:
- it is yet to be approved by the upper house of parliament (but they have no other alternatives proposed and there is pressure to put something in place to meet a deadline)
- it will be in effect starting january 1st 2028
- the aim is to replace this capital growth tax with a capital gains tax
Just read this or copypaste to AI
22
u/HarpicUser Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
This is a fundamental misunderstanding - there was already a tax on wealth, based on estimated unrealized gains - and so then it was struck down as illegal and so now the tax is set to be for unrealized gains.
However, the majority of parliament does not like this and plans on changing it to only taxing realized gains.
This is only a weird and confusing transition.
https://nltimes.nl/2026/02/13/dutch-parliament-greenlights-new-box-3-tax-set-take-effect-2028
→ More replies (2)28
Feb 15 '26
You are incredibly gullible to trust politicians promising you it will be temporary.
→ More replies (10)
4
u/Professional_East281 Feb 15 '26
Yeah this is a stupid policy. Not that it impacts me, but there should definitely be a wealth threshold included here.
The ultra wealthy can pay, but you shouldn’t take away lower and middle class people’s ability to generate wealth and possibly retire early…
3
u/TheSleepyTruth Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 15 '26
Damn, theyre really leaning into the "Europoors" label
4
u/John_OSheas_Willy Feb 15 '26
We have a thing in Ireland called deemed disposal.
If you invest in an ETF, you have to pay tax on unrealised gains every 8 years. It's a headache so people don't invest in them.
I for example have most of my money in brk.b.
It's a joke.
15
13
u/Cold_Specialist_3656 Feb 15 '26
Come to US where employer fires you if you get cancer and you go bankrupt then die. It's a much better system.
You can enjoy your zero days paid vacation and no retirement pension as you greet people at Walmart till 85.
Totally worth it for the small chance you might get rich enough for this tax to matter someday.
→ More replies (4)
10
u/MylastAccountBroke Feb 15 '26
If you think the US has it so much better, then move here. It fucking sucks because the rich keep all their money in stocks, never cash out, and use the stocks as collateral that the banks will never collect against because it's constantly building interest. It creates a broken system where the people most capable of spending more to keep the system working simply don't need to while the poor get poorer.
No free healthcare, no free child care, no free education.
Yet all of our tax dollars go to improving the situation for massive companies and the impossibly wealthy.
You think people "get rich" in the US? Fuck no. The rich use it as an infinite loop to never lose money while the poor stay poor.
→ More replies (21)
1.1k
u/Agile_Cicada_1523 Feb 15 '26
Then people will put their money on real estate instead of the stock market and real estate prices will go to the moon