The Supreme Court is poised to hear arguments Tuesday in a closely watched case that some warn could have sweeping implications for the U.S. tax system and derail proposals from some Democrats to create a wealth tax.

The dispute before the justices, known as Moore v. United States, dates back to 2006. That year, Charles and Kathleen Moore made an investment to help start the India-based company, KisanKraft Machine Tools, which provides farmers in India with tools and equipment. The couple invested $40,000 in exchange for 13% of the company’s shares.

KisanKraft’s revenues have grown each year since it was founded, and the company has reinvested its earnings to expand the business instead of distributing dividends to shareholders.

The Moores did not receive any distributions, dividends or other payments from KisanKraft, according to filings with the Supreme Court. But in 2018, the couple learned they had to pay taxes on their share of KisanKraft’s reinvested lifetime earnings under the “mandatory repatriation tax,” which was enacted through the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump the year before. The tax was projected to generate roughly $340 billion in revenue over 10 years.

  • Zuberi 👀@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago
    • Direct registering stock provides a clear record of the owner’s name, making it easier to establish ownership and eliminate potential confusion or disputes.

    • Investors also avoid certain fees associated with intermediaries like the DTCC to reduce transaction costs.

    • Shareholders can also receive information and communications directly from the company, giving them a closer connection and greater involvement in corporate activities.

    • With direct registering, shareholders have the opportunity to directly vote on corporate matters, allowing for a more democratic and individualized approach to decision-making. The current system makes the votes basically only coming from big funds like Vanguard and BlackRock.

    If your stocks have Cede’s name on them, they are not “your” stocks in a legal sense.

    We’ve actually posted quite a few articles/sources on other ways the 1% is gutting true ownership over at: /c/drs_your_gme@lemmy.whynotdrs.org

    • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago
      • Do you think there isn’t a “clear record” without direct registration?

      • What registration fees does registering directly avoid? What are they called and how large are they? There are fees related to direct registration too. How do they compare?

      • Shareholder communication is public and sent to the SEC. Everyone can see it. You can see it on the SEC website, on the company website, or just on Yahoo Finance.

      • Your brokerage will send you any corporate matters to vote on. Direct registration probably complicates this, since you have to communicate with the company directly.

      Direct registration is not some secret thing that helps you make money. It just makes it harder to sell your investments. Also, you can’t loan them out for short sellers (which can earn you interest) or sell options against them.

      This all sounds like some copy pasta to try to influence the price of a stock (GME).

      • Zuberi 👀@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        If your stocks have Cede’s name on them, they are not “your” stocks in a legal sense. This was not how the system worked prior to the digitized banking system.

        • DRS is a more clear record of ownership, yes
        • Voting is easier via DRS
        • You know votes actually count via DRS
        • Communication avoids a middleman entirely, so no, it doesn’t complicate the process

        It’s obviously not a secret, I’m not implying it was. The other 20% of people actually own their shit, unlike the ones with Cede as the beneficiary.