Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
I think what Bjauck is meaning is that if asset value goes up from $100k to $200k in tax year, you are liable for tax on the $100k value increase. But where are you going to get the $33,000 from (tax on the $100k) because you have not yet sold the asset. Some people would really be struggling to pay the tax when the value of their houses go up for example.
Its easier with stocks for instance to sell a portion of shares if you have to pay a bill, but for some larger capital assets this is very difficult, especially if these assets are not really liquid.
What makes you think the effective rate for a CGT would be comparable to the current income tax rates?