Tue 19 Jun 2007
There’s been some press recentlyabout potential tax code that will put the hurt in the pockets of your friendly neighborhood private equity partner. For those who aren’t in the private equity circle, much of earnings currently are taxed at the lower capital gains rate rather than higher individual income tax rate. Not being in the Private Equity inner circle, I only became aware of this after reading an article in the Economist indicating that Washington was looking into this. The Economist and I share a similiarly muted opinion on this matter, but before I get into that opinion, let me highlight what the issue is. I know this probably a matter of little interest to most people given that it certainly doesn’t affect most of us, but it’s interesting issue with regards to the tax code.
Partners at private equity firms typically recieve the bulk of their compensation in what is called “carry” on top of their regular income. They earn a good income, but it’s really this carry which can easily be millions upon millons of dollars that is their bread and butter. I don’t have a problem with the money they earn or the work they do. Private equity and it’s nicer half brother, Venture Capital, have an important place in the financial and economic world. They along with their nanny, Investment Banking, do make the world go around, well at least the financial world. We can certainly argue about if these people are excessively compensated. Given that most of the people reaping rewards are only risking other people’s money, I think they are indeed rewarded quite lavishly. However that’s a decision of the market. Ulimately a investment banker or a private equity partner is beholden to how much clients will pay them. That’s the market. Taxes, however, are another question. Does it stand that Private Equity partners deserve to have “special” tax treatment?
The primary purposes of taxes is to generate revenue for the Government. The seconday purpose to encourage or discourage particular behaviors. The 1st and 2nd purposes are often in conflict as most taxes disinventvize production. Income taxes are a prime example of this, but in some regards capital gains taxes might be more important. Despite what some people may believe of me, I’m very much a capitalist and the most important thing about capitalism is that capitalist are given incentive to reinvest their capital into the economy. This is the primary reason to have lower long term capital gains rates. The problem with profits being made by private equity general partners as opposed to limited partners is question of who’s money. In a private equity firm a the general partners invest the money of the limited partners. Clearly limited partners should only be taxed at capital gains rate on the profits from the investments they make. It seems unreasonable to extend this lower tax rate to profits that the general partners earn without putting “skin in the game.” There is a reasoned argument that the government should tax all income regardless of sourceat the same rate, as there is an equally valid argument to go to purely consumptive tax system. I can support all those arguments, but I cannot support giving private equity managers preferential tax treatment over ordinary americans.
If you enjoyed this post, please subscribe to the RSS feed
June 19th, 2007 at 5:15 pm
A very complex issue (taxation and equity/fairness), but I don’t think a flat rate tax or purely consumptive tax system is nether fair nor sensible. (I know you didn’t say you are for or against.)
Just my two cents on taxation
June 20th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
Taxes are complex. It’s hard to have a system that is both fair, just and simple. Personally I would favor a consumption tax system but devising a system that doesn’t punish the poor is a nightmare (let alone without addressing the issue of undercollection). A progressive income tax is probably the best choice out of the selection of blunt instruments available. Though govt could really sit down and simplify the tax code bit, it’s really become unwieldy.
June 20th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
you know, the very reason for the thick book of tax code is the gov’t attempt to create a fair progressive income tax. Because there are always exception to the exception.
I think it’s important to have a system that doesn’t punish the poor. One of the fundamentals in sustaining a thriving capitialistic economy is to have a safety net for the poor/low income population. Part of this safety net construction is a fair tax system.
July 24th, 2007 at 8:56 am
[...] I wrote a few weeks ago about the debate on carried interest that has been waged in congress and is now being waged on the more erudite media outlets such as AskDong. Before we go any further, I just want to inform people what my stance on taxing carried interest is: Tax the general partners performance based “carried interest” as income and not capital gains. For people who are not familiar with carried interest, carried interest are the profits made by general partners from capital gains which in the case of private equity partnership would be part of the performance based 20% of profits in the 2-20 fee structure. [...]
November 3rd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Stolen home sex video….
Sex home video. Britney spears home sex video. Home video lesbian sex. Home invasion sex free video….