A Valentine’s Day Guest Post – Blood, Bondage, Lust, Money

Editor’s Note: The Banker’s Wife offers up her guest post on “50 Shades of Monetary Inadequacy”

Biting lip 2I have bad news for you, Christian. No, it’s not that your movie will be universally panned, though you should pick up A.O. Scott’s review for your reading pleasure. 1 It goes deeper – I am here to tell you that you will never be as wealthy as the sparkly vampires.

This may come as a shock to you. After all, you share many of the same proclivities, a penchant for cashmere, fast sports cars with hushed leather interiors, obsessively protective behavior, and women who bite their lower lips when nervous.

What is it with the lip biting anyway? It is a truth universally acknowledged that all young women in these novels (by which I mean the chicklit genre that involves vampires, werewolves, or their human stand-ins) appear to have an insatiable appetite for their own facial features.

Perhaps this is our 21st century damsel in distress signal, the equivalent of dropping a handkerchief or blushing in the Elizabethan era? But I digress.

I’m not saying you are in the 99%, Christian. But the Cullens, the De Clermonts, the Akeldamas 2, the Horologists 3, and the rest of their undead kindred all possess, or will possess, more wealth than you can ever accumulate.

Why is that? It’s certainly not because of their lust for women willing to bleed for them – after all, you have that too.

It’s not because they can see into the future, though that certainly gives Alice Cullen several legs up. It’s the immortality thing, it will get you every time.
My spouse is not a vampire, despite rumors to the contrary when he is seen at the beach and his ghostly pallor draws gasps, 4 but he does understand the power of compound interest.

Christian, I know you began to invest early, but how much can even 100 million dollars accumulate over the course of one measly human lifespan? Considering that you have seven more decades, eight if I’m generous and you stop getting yourself overly excited by Ms. Steele on such a routine basis, your wealth can only grow so much.

Compare that to the vampire Matthew Clairmont, who can accumulate wealth over a millennium. As Deborah Harkness describes in her All Souls Trilogy 5 (if you do not wish to have plot points spoiled for you, you’ll have to trust me and skip to the end of the italics):

The little account book had been rebound periodically when more pages were required. The first entries were made on thick sixteenth-century paper and dated from the year 1591. One accounted for the deposit of the dowry that Philippe had provided when I married Matthew: 20,000 Venetian zeccchini and 30,000 silver Reichsthaler. Every subsequent investment of that money – such as the rollover of any interest paid on the funds and the houses and land purchased with the proceeds – were meticulously accounted for in Alain’s neat hand. I flipped through to the final pages of the book… my eyes popped at the amount indicated in the assets column.

So there it is, Christian. If you can invest and compound your interest over 424 years, the end result pops women’s eyeballs. I know it’s frustrating that you can’t cause women that kind of distress, at least until you too become immortal in that long awaited cross-over novel where the Greys meet the Cullens and the blood, sparkles, and expensive body wash fly.

But here’s what you can do to feel powerful, which we know you like. In your cute, domineering way, let your readership know. They should start now.
If a breathless, lip biting young woman of, say 18, begins to put $50 a month away in an IRA (like a 401K), and continues to do so until she turns 75, and earns a 10% return on her investments, she will have $1.77 million.

biting lip

She can retire to her very own Seattle penthouse, and decorate it only in white and stainless steel with splashes of red.

And all of your young readership could do this, Christian, if they can save the cost of just one cup of Twinings English Breakfast tea a day and put it towards retirement. But perhaps you wouldn’t like that, because then they would have the power and wouldn’t really need you. After all, you certainly don’t go for emancipated women, do you?

Say it with me, Christian, compound interest is power.

Good boy.6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post read (2156) times.

  1. Or Jezebel’s entertaining reviews.
  2.  At which point the banker’s wife outs herself as someone who has actually read a lot of these books, despite possessing several postgraduate degrees. But the first step is to admit you have a problem, I suppose. *bites lip pensively.
  3.  Also, my deep apologies to David Mitchell for lumping him in here. His heroines absolutely do not bite their lips.
  4.  He thinks it is his physique, please don’t tell. His brother calls him Casper the Friendly Ghost. [Editor’s Note: I may punish you for that comment. *Stares broodingly at Banker’s Wife, itching to commence punishment.
  5.  Which I recommend, by the way. It’s Twilight for women who have finished college.
  6. And to my pale, dark haired, clever, and occasionally brooding husband, who is certainly the only one reading the footnotes at this point, happy Valentine’s Day, my love.

Death and Taxes and Fairness

death_and_taxesA version of this post appeared in the San Antonio Express News.

I recently wrote about the unfairness of ‘carried interest’ tax breaks targeted to hedge fund and private equity owners. In fact, I’ve covered the topic before as well.

Some readers became angry about my view of this tax break and took umbrage at my lack of sympathy for ‘job creators’ like hedge fund owners.

Among other complaints, readers wondered why I didn’t write about tax atrocities like the ‘death tax,’ known in other circles as the estate tax.

Inspired by that critique, I will offer my thoughts on other taxes that I pay and tax breaks that I enjoy, both from an objective standpoint – taking into account ‘what’s fair for society’ – and from a subjective standpoint – taking into account my own personal situation and ‘what’s fair to me.’

For this post: The Estate Tax.

Fair to Society
Honestly, estate taxes are my favorite ‘fair to society’ tax. When I am declared ‘Lord Of All Catan’ over this entire country I will quickly and happily raise the estate tax rate and lower the exemption for estate taxation. Estate taxes are fair to society because:

Very few pay this tax, which makes it 'fair' in my view
Very few pay this tax, which makes it ‘fair’ in my view

1. They are ‘progressive’ in the sense that they tax the upper levels of wealth and leave less wealthy households unaffected. Half of the estate taxes in this country are paid by the top 0.1% of income earners, and virtually all estate taxes are paid by the top 10% of earners.

2. All taxes distort the efficiency of markets, but estate taxes distort consumption and other economic activity less than other taxes. That minimized distortion makes it more efficient than other taxes.

3. Estate taxes contribute in some (small) way toward ‘churning’ the stratified wealth levels of society, something that is fair in a society that values socio-economic mobility.

4. Estate taxes encourage the creation of philanthropic avenues such as endowments and foundations to avoid estate taxation. In that way the wealthy dedicate funds according to their specific moral choices (education, health, fitness, parks, art, scientific research, whatever) rather than trusting to the government to make those choices for them. A diverse range of non-governmental philanthropic funding streams strengthens civil society.
Absence of Data
While I don’t have the economic statistics to back up statements two through four above – I instinctively feel they apply to any tax on inheritance. Maybe you totally disagree. I’m ok with that. Maybe you’d like to agree, but you’d also like to see some data to back up my statements.

For readers who prefer actual data over pontificating, I offer in reply one of my favorite sayings from former San Antonio Express News writer and faux-philosopher Jack Handey:

“Instead of having ‘answers’ on a math test, they should just call them ‘impressions,’ and if you got a different ‘impression,’ so what, can’t we all be brothers?”

Fair to Me
Since I don’t expect to inherit much from my parents, and I don’t expect to pass on much to my own children, I find the estate tax extremely ‘fair to me.’

I say, bring it on!

So that was easy. But now let me try a thought experiment.
How would my mind alter under different circumstances?

A mental test
What if I had a ten million dollar estate coming my way, and the federal estate tax would take 40% of all the money I was set to inherit over my $5 million estate tax exemption? Would I find it so ‘fair to me’ then? 1

I would like to think that I would be wise and grateful enough not to begrudge the federal government the $2 million estate tax (40% of the $5 million over the $5 million exemption amount) because I would get to keep $8 million in inheritance.

Ah, a cool $8 million for me, that I didn’t have to work for.

“I’m just lucky to be born into a family with $10 million to pass on,” I would think to myself as I inhaled from my Rosemary-Lime scented calming soap I order in bulk from Gwyneth Paltrow’s website.

Frankly, that’s not a bad deal that would leave me impoverished. I’m pretty sure I could just squeak by on a mere $8 million. In that scenario I do think the estate tax would still be ‘fair to me.’

The real test
Ok, but what if I stood to inherit a $100 million estate from my parents? And the federal government could tax 40% of my $95 million, (remember: we all get to keep the first inherited $5 million tax-free!) leaving me with just $62 million?

How do I like that estate tax now?

Well, if you put it that way, now I’m angry.

Because that is totally not fair to me!

Most importantly, how is guy like me supposed to get by on just $62 million? I have rights you know, based on the family I was born into.

The federal government probably just squandered the $38 million death tax it extracted from my deceased hard-working parents and me and gave it away to welfare queens and immigrants!

Gah!

Did you guys just call me a 'piker'
Did you guys just call me a ‘piker’

Somebody get the Koch brothers on the line right now and let’s fix this unfair system together!

What?

The Koch brothers said they don’t want to talk to me ‘and my measly $62 million?’

They said I’m a ‘piker?’

Oh, the humanity!

 
Please see previous posts on taxation such as:

Carried interest tax break seems unfair to me

Shhh…Please don’t talk about my tax loophole

Adult conversation about tax policy

529 Accounts and Tax Fairness

And see this interesting New York Times piece on the estate tax, linking it to wars of the Twentieth Century and ideas of fairness in society.

 

 

Post read (1963) times.

  1. Technically, I would be taxed on 40% of all amounts over $5.34 million – the current exemption for estate taxes – but please humor me, I’m trying to stick to round numbers to keep the numbers from distracting us.

Taxes Rant: Carried Interest Edition

Note: A version of this post appeared in the San Antonio Express News.

Dear Money: I miss you so, so much.

I recently mailed off – with deep feelings of loss – two of my biggest checks of the year: one for real estate taxes to the county where I live and the other to the IRS for estimated federal income taxes.

Money: I miss you so, so much
Money: I miss you so, so much

After we said our long sorrowful goodbyes at the US Post Office, money and me, I wiped those tears away, threw my shoulders back, and bravely walked back to my car. No looking back. Please, county and federal government, take good care of my money. I raised it with my own two hands, and I dearly loved it.

Don’t worry, though, this is not going to be an anti-tax rant. I’m not a TEA Party member. [1]

On the contrary, over the years I learned to embrace what my accountant taught me: If you think you pay a lot in taxes, try to remember to be happy, because it means you made what to you is a lot of money that year. Or, in the case of real estate taxes, paying a lot means you own valuable real estate.

Seen that way, complaining about paying high taxes is unattractive in the same way that a guy bemoaning the cost of expensive repairs on his Porsche is unattractive. I mean, seriously, don’t be that guy.

The key is fairness

While I believe everyone should pay a fair share of taxes, the key word here is fair.[2]

Since I just coughed up too much money in federal income taxes and local real estate taxes, I’d like to complain now about an unfair aspect of federal income taxes. Later, in an upcoming post, I’ll rant about unfairness in local real estate taxes.

Federal Income Tax unfairness

I started and ran a hedge fund for a short while. (This was years before I landed this lucrative gig writing financial rants online, for free. But anyway.)

The awesome thing about running a hedge fund or private equity fund is just how unfairly advantaged these business structures are, from a federal income tax perspective.

Fund managers earn fees in two ways, a ‘management’ fee and a ‘performance’ fee, sometimes also known as ‘carried interest.’

The more important of these – the ‘carried interest’ or ‘performance’ fee – in most cases gets taxed at a lower rate than other types of income because of the illusion that the performance fee is somehow like ‘long-term capital gains,’ rather than like regular income. It’s not.
But the tax law says it is, so, big tax advantages if you’re a hedge fund manager!

Carried interest tax loophole
Carried interest tax loophole

If we were talking about the regular scale of incomes for a blue-collar or white-collar job of people you meet in your ordinary life, the difference in these tax rates might not matter much, something on the order of $500, up to maybe $5,000, tops.

But since we’re talking about hedge fund manager-level earnings – which sometimes hit a billion dollars a year, the difference in the tax code for certain individuals can reach the hundreds of millions of dollars per year level. Which, I don’t know, starts to chafe me in my sensitive areas a bit.

Don’t get me wrong, we can all agree that nobody deserves an unfair tax break more than private equity and hedge fund owners, but at a certain point we begin to wonder about the extent of the unfairness of it all, no?

 

Please see related posts on taxes:

Shhh…Please don’t talk about my tax loophole

Adult conversation about tax policy

529 Accounts and tax fairness

 

[1] A quick aside to my liberal friends who think the TEA Party is something new. Unhappiness about paying taxes (TEA, as we know, stands for Taxed Enough Already) is as American as Apple Pie, the Star Spangled Banner, and eating greasy food until you nearly burst, on Super Bowl Sunday.

The drunken faux-Indians of the Boston Tea Party Patriots hated paying taxes to the English King. The death-seeking gun-nuts of the Alamo hated paying taxes to Mexico City, and the tyrant Santa Anna. A complete history of the United States could be written using tax-opposition as the prime motive for all major events. I’m not saying TEA party folks aren’t wacky (because many are!) but I am saying at least they have a long list of historical precedents from which to draw political sustenance.

[2] A quick aside on fairness: Fairness, of course, is in the eyes of the beholder.
In my family we retell the story of my super-cute niece, then aged four, who announced one evening: “It would be fair, to me, if I got to take a bubble bath after dinner.” She had learned enough by age four that “being fair” was important to adults, but like many of us, decided to interpret fair according to her own worldview. Since then, I frequently tell my family over dinner that it would be fair, to me, if someone drove out to Dairy Queen and bought me a treat, like, right now. This never works. Anyway, fairness. It’s important in the tax code.

[3] In the tax world, there are always exceptions to everything so I am simplifying greatly and using these hedging words like ‘usually’ and ‘sometimes’ and ‘often.’

 

Post read (1082) times.