Talk:Enterprise Value Tax

Notability

This subject certainly seems to meet GNG since there is coverage by multiple independent reliable sources. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

Can you point to other articles about tax bills that were passed by the House but did not pass the Senate? BMK (talk) 01:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Philosophical debate

Apart from the question of "soaking the rich" or getting some tax revenue in quickly, the philosophy behind this recurrent proposal seems to be that the "enterprise value" consists of human capital, and hence that allowing sale at capital gains rates (which in the US are presumably lower than the top tier income tax rates) allows monetising of earned income. Conversely, presumably, opponents argue that this is clearly nonsense. WP:RS should be findable that discuss this debate.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 01:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

Just a reminder that talk pages are not intended for general discussion of the article's subject, but for discussions about how to improve the article. BMK (talk) 01:55, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

WP:RS should be findable that discuss this debate.

When they have been, the debate is a legitimate and significant part of the article. The distinction between "sweat equity" and monetised earned income is important.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:03, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

Some of these matters are covered in a paper by Field, M, published in the Hastings Law Journal. (See article page.) All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:08, 6 October 2015 (UTC).

Other matters that should be covered

• The concept of "taint"
• The Family farm exemption
• The 50% and 75% rules
• "Look through"

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:07, 6 October 2015 (UTC).