BAILOUT BILL included a little addendum to BAIL OUT DOTCOM-SPECUVESTORS from 9 YEARS AGO (see link)

If this is our idea of a "rescue plan", I want to watch everything burn like they said it would.

Notice that Barbara Boxer, Charlie Rangel, etc., call this "Phantom Income." I admit, it's a very nasty tax, but anyone doing a SOPHISTICATED SCHEME to BEAT TAXES should be aware of the risk.

I was, and I PURPOSELY LEFT STOCK OPTIONS on the TABLE rather than risk being taxed for the difference between strike price and fair market value.

This aspect really doesn't bother me so much. It really was phantom income, and as someone who is for less taxes, I am surprised you're in support of taxing people on money they didn't actually make. (Except that I know that you're really in favor of more taxes, as long as they aren't yours).

My question is did they finally get rid of this loophole that would allow people who DID make money on these options to pay less taxes? That's what really needs to be addressed.

As for the rest of the bill - I think today was a perfect example of my belief that you cannot con investors into thinking everything is hunky dory.

I'll call her, but I will also make a vow to support redistricting in california because there is no good opposition to these jackasses.

@soulcamp: The tax is a nasty, tricky one, BUT WE DON'T NEED TO BAIL OUT DOTCOM SPECUVESTORS FROM 9 YEARS AGO!

http://brianholtz.defendsliberty.com/

Yeah, this looks good. Go, Brian! I'll add to your 2.5%.

and if we dont have tax loopholes then when are people going to want to invest in dot coms?

Libertarians will typically support ANY tax cut, even if it's distateful and unfair.

Or It might not be illegal and then we need to address a broader issue of defining some boundaries.

The bailout is not entirely stupid if we play our cards right.

This tax loophole really has nothing to do with investors. It concerns stock options which only apply to employees (at least in the case of ISO). It concerns the difference between NQSO and ISO options. Typically with NQSO, you exercise them by buying and selling them on the same day. The resulting gain (difference between the strike price and market price) is taxed as normal income. However, ISO are taxed only at the exercise price. This means that you are not taxed for any gain in price, and if you hold on to them for long enough, they are taxed as capital gains as opposed to ordinary income. However, it also means that if the options decrease in value from when you purchase them, you not only take a loss for the price you paid for the options, you also wind up paying higher taxes on stock that may have (in most cases) become worthless.

Reamworks is right there was an inherent risk in purchasing ISO. However, he is DEAD WRONG about classifying these people as SPECUVESTORS. These people were not wealthy investors who simple lost some money on an investment. These people were most likely the founders and initial employees who worked at the company, often times for nothing more than sweat equity, and who were typically left without anything after the company failed. ISOs were an incentive to reward those who created successful companies, but they wound up being a huge burden to many people who were not simply trying to make a quick buck, but who believed in what they were doing and were trying to utilize whatever options were available to make their hard work pay off.

As a former founder of a software startup company (who chose not to issue ISOs, simply because nobody working at my company could afford them anyway), I have sympathy for those who are still feeling the economic woes of the dot com bubble.

@lady o: The bailout is indeed stupid because it has 0.00147% chance of working. The money would be much better spent investing DIRECTLY into the American economy, such as creating a national directive to rebuild the energy infrastructure of the US, student loans, small business incentives (that do not apply to large, profitable corporations), and a NATIONALIZED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, that will not only incentivize small businesses, but also prevent further economic collapse by the millions of people who are about to lose their jobs and their employer sponsored health insurance.

Also, increasing NASAs budget from the measly $20B so that we don't go for 5+ years without any method of sending American astronauts into space other than renting seats on Russian spacecraft (WHAT. THE. FUCK!!!)

@soulcamp: I'll tell you one thing the money shouldn't have been spent on: BAILING OUT DOTCOM SPECULATORS from 9 YEARS AGO

Can I get a little bailout for my dumbassery?

1997:
"You need to come to work for my startup, Apollo."
"What do you do?"
"Online auctions."
"Are you fucking kidding me? I'm not moving to California for that."

Company: eBay. Intelligence level of decision: IQ = 25.

@OESTEO! If you had taken his advice, you would have been LAID OFF today!