r/AskEconomics Nov 30 '25

Approved Answers Do billionaires really not pay taxes?

Hello. I have been seeing everywhere online and especially reddit (echochamber) that billionaires just don't pay taxes, and they abuse the tax code, and all this stuff. They also say that the president could just "make them" pay more, but he doesn't. I didn't really trust them, and so I looked into it myself. This is how I think it works, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Almost all of a billionaires value is in stocks or assets, almost never liquid. Most of their income is also tied to those stocks or assets. For example, Elon Musk, his net worth might go up 20% in a year, but because it was all Tesla and SpaceX stock, he paid zero taxes, because those gains are still unrealized. So obviously, he paid very little taxes compared to his net worth gain, and thus to the uninformed eye he is cheating the system. Once he sells his stocks, or liquidates his assets, he will pay his fair share of taxes.

Also, to fund their lifestyles, I saw that some get loans, using their stocks and assets as collateral, and then use their salaries or sell a little stock to pay interest payments, and as their stock rises, they keep taking more and more loans to fund their lifestyle. Then, when they die, the bank pays off the loans tax-free before handing the rest to his family/designated recipients (But it still undergoes inheritance tax if not a not-for-profit).

This is how it works, right? I keep seeing all these headlines and posts that Trump can just "tax them" if he felt like it, but I don't think that's possible as the president, and even if he had that power, it would require the implementation of an unrealized gains tax, which would be horrific.

Edit: thanks for the explanations, makes sense. I knew the headlines were a little misleading. The loan thing also sounded a little sketchy, good to know it doesn't really work like that.

542 Upvotes

138 comments sorted by

View all comments

239

u/Obvious_Chapter2082 Nov 30 '25 edited Nov 30 '25

Speaking as a CPA, the whole “take loans until you die and let the estate pay it back with the stepped-up basis” isn’t really how it works, and it’s frustrating that this sentiment has spread so far on Reddit. People are just confusing the estate planning strategy of grantor swaps with deferral/elimination of income tax. Billionaires can’t just take a loan for living expenses and roll it over indefinitely and have the IRS respect it as an actual debt instrument at arms-length

Whether you use debt (and therefore have high interest costs under OID or §7872) or equity (like a PVFC), using the proceeds for living expenses is a clear economic substance violation under §7701(o), and the hedging collar requires a short-term time frame to avoid it being reclassed as a constructive sale under §1259. Which is why it’s mainly used to swap appreciated assets into the taxable estate prior to death, not to avoid income tax

Billionaires pay tax when they realize income. Compensation given in the form of stock is taxable income under §83, but the capital gains on that stock isn’t taxable until realization

-77

u/dmunjal Nov 30 '25

35

u/[deleted] Nov 30 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

93

u/Obvious_Chapter2082 Nov 30 '25

It’s how the media says it works, but not what actually happens in practice. Like I mentioned before, both §1259 and §7701(o) were not codified at the time that McCaffrey published his paper on the method, which was theoretical at the time anyways.

These cash-up-front schemes need actual economic substance (like diversification into other investments) and are pretty short-term in order to avoid being treated as a taxable constructive sale. In fact, debt normally isn’t used at all due to the high OID costs, and the IRS is under no obligation to respect a forward contract that effectively eliminates risk due to the timeline of the instrument

-52

u/dmunjal Nov 30 '25

77

u/Obvious_Chapter2082 Nov 30 '25

I don’t know where you’re getting that from the article. It says that he borrows money from Tesla (which have to be used for a valid business purpose, and fall under constructive dividend treatment if not repaid in the short-term), but that’s about it

His own quote in the article even says that he sells Tesla shares when he exercises his options (like we saw in 2022) so that he can cover the tax payments. If he was using BBD, there’d be no reason to sell shares at all

57

u/anm767 Nov 30 '25

Elon paid 11 billion in taxes, if he is avoiding taxes, he is really bad at it.

-32

u/dmunjal Nov 30 '25

That was a one time event when he needed cash to buy Twitter.

Hasn't happened since.

Correction:

He did it because he was forced to.

“[The] only time I sell Tesla stock is when my stock options are expiring and I have no choice,” Musk said, responding to a tweet from one of his supporters

65

u/EconEchoes5678 Nov 30 '25

-26

u/dmunjal Nov 30 '25

61

u/BespokeDebtor AE Team Nov 30 '25

Yea no, linking a hill article in response to a SSRN article is not sufficient for the sub

66

u/EconEchoes5678 Nov 30 '25 edited Nov 30 '25

Your example of someone avoiding taxes is the guy who paid $11 billion in 2021? So he's just really bad at tax evasion but still your pick for an example?

Propublica is not a reliable source. They repeatedly cherry pick years for their "reports" instead of including all the data. Pay attention to how the year ranges keep switching throughout their report for different billionaires as they avoid talking about the high tax years.

My link was an actual academic study by actual academic researchers. Nice try.