Quote:
Originally Posted by donquixote99
Per this U Penn discussion, you are correct from an accounting and tax perspective, but by accounting definition, not due to human labor input.
Per classic economic theory, standing timber still does not seem to me to fit the idea of 'capital.' Stockpiled cut logs would be capital.
http://extension.psu.edu/natural-res...estland-owners |
We can agree to disagree here, 'cuz there remain examples aplenty. Ask the sod farmer, for example, if his grass is capital. But I digress.
To your earlier post, sure: the argument that, I think, sensible folks would have isn't whether or not financial gains realized from the conversion or appreciation of capital should be taxed. Its how much. I don't think I agree that "too little tax" on capital damps economic activity. But there are typically societal costs to the conversion of capital that can be paid for with a MODEST capital gains tax.