2010 revenue proposals include 25% dealer tax hike
The US government has unveiled tax proposals that would require commodities and options dealers to pay higher tax rates, by forcing them to treat their income as ordinary income rather than capital gains.
The proposals, released earlier this month, were developed with the intention of closing budgetary shortfalls. They stated: "There is no reason to treat dealers in commodities, commodities derivatives dealers, dealers in securities and dealers in equity options differently from dealers in other types of property. Dealers earn their income from their day-to-day dealing activities and should be taxed at ordinary rates."
Under current guidelines, dealers may treat 60% of their gains as capital gains and 40% as ordinary income. If these proposals were enacted, dealers would then have to treat 100% of gains as ordinary income. According to Kurt Baca, Washington, DC-based senior counsel in the tax advisory practice at international law firm Paul Hastings, "this would mean that dealers' blended tax rate would go from around 32% to 39.6% at the highest of the margin, which would clearly affect individuals that are dealing in a partnership situation".
"The proposals would not affect banks acting as dealers, as they are generally required to treat all income as ordinary anyway," said Baca.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve
ECB seeks capital clarity on Spire repacks
Dealers split between counterparty credit risk and market risk frameworks for repack RWAs
FSB chief defends global non-bank regulation drive
Schindler slams ‘misconception’ that regulators intend to impose standardised bank-like rules
Fed fractures post-SVB consensus on emergency liquidity
New supervisory principles support FHLB funding over discount window preparedness
Why UPIs could spell goodbye for OTC-Isins
Critics warn UK will miss opportunity to simplify transaction reporting if it spurns UPI
EC’s closing auction plan faces cool reception from markets
Participants say proposal for multiple EU equity closing auctions would split price formation
Fed pivots to material risk – but what is it, exactly?
Top US bank regulator will prioritise risks that matter most, but they could prove hard to pinpoint