- David Sacks rejected the idea of a crypto transaction tax of 0.01%, stating concern about tax expansion and bureaucratic over -range.
- The Trump government has driven the idea to fully eliminate the IRS and shifted to rate-based taxes to finance the government.
David Sacks, the Crypto of the White House and AI Tsar, rejected the idea of a load of 0.01% on cryptocurrency transactions during a discussion On the “all-in podcast.”
The proposal, introduced by Tech investor Jason Calacanis, would generate government reserves in Bitcoin [BTC] And other digital assets.
The idea, introduced by Tech investor and podcast -guestheer, was quickly met with skepticism and concern.
The discussion led to a broader debate on government tax. Sacks argued that even small tax policy tends to expand over time, so that ultimately more individuals have influence than originally intended.
“That is always how taxes start”
His comments repeated historical precedents. To fail compared The idea for the early days of the American income tax.
When it was first introduced in 1913, it only applied to a small group of high earners. Over time, the tax policy expanded and reached millions of Americans.
Source: X
Calacanis proposed a simple tax mechanism. In it, every crypto transaction in the US would be taxed at 0.01%, whereby the reimbursement in the indigenous assets is traded.
He argued that it would create a steady stream of digital assets for the government and strengthen its position in an era of increasing financial digitization.
Calacanis said,
“Crypto wants to be legal. Crypto wants to be regulated. They want the rules. They want the rails. Why don’t we charge 0.01% in that native currency in the United States in the United States and put it in stock? “
Bags pushed back on this idea. He warned that even an apparently minimal load could make a dangerous precedent.
“That is always how taxes start. They are described as very modest. When the income tax began, it only applied to a thousand Americans, and the legislators swore up and down that it would never be applied to people from the middle class. “
Sacks warned that even small taxes create bureaucratic obstacles, which increases the regulations for companies and frequent traders. He also noted that taxing personal wallet transfers would go beyond speculative trade.
The concerns of Sacks are rooted in historical patterns.
A “modest” tax today, a financial burden tomorrow?
The 16th amendment entered The federal income tax in 1913, initially aimed at only high earners.
The first tax rate was 1% on incomes above $ 3,000, which affects a small group. By 1918 the top percentage rose to 77% on incomes of more than $ 1 million because of the First World War.
A similar pattern has been observed in the crypto sector.
Initially, crypto taxes only focused on capital wins, but over time the IRS has expanded its scope with mining rewards, stakes, airdrops and even transactions between personal portfolios.
While the White House has rejected the idea of a crypto transaction tax, there is a parallel debate about the future of federal taxes in the US
Abolish the IRS?
Recent statements by trade secretary Howard Lutnick to suggest That former President Donald Trump is considering a radical shift of the current tax structure.
Instead of an income tax system, the proposal would rely on rates for foreign goods to generate income.
Lutnick explained,
“Donald Trump announces the external entry service and his goal is very simple. To abolish the IRS and to have all outsiders pay. ‘
He argued that foreign companies that are active in the American benefit considerably avoid American taxes,
‘Do you ever see a cruise ship with an American flag on the back? They have flags from Liberia or Panama. None of them pays taxes. Every super tanker does not pay taxes. Alcohol, all foreign alcohol, no taxes. ‘
According to Lutnick, this shift would enable Americans to pay lower taxes while retaining the government revenue by rates for foreign entities.
He estimated that accepting a “mutual rates” system, that is, could generate $ 700 billion annually to raise import tax that corresponds to that of other countries.
The White House says no, but is this the last we will hear about it?
The debate about cryptocurrency taxes and wider federal tax reform is closely linked. While Crypto proponents resist new transaction tax, they have also criticized the IRS for unclear guidelines and over -range when regulating the sector.
Recent legislative movements, including a dual senate voice to cancel extensive IRS reporting requirements for crypto transactions, indicate a growing resistance to excessive taxes and surveillance.
At the same time, the tariff-based approach to the Trump administration raises questions about how crypto taxes can evolve in a radically different tax ecosystem.
If income taxes are lowered or eliminated, can crypto transactions ultimately be taxed as part of a broader income strategy?
