I’m not sure what the justification is, but I assume it’s some flavor of “so index fund holders don’t miss out on returns”.
It’s crooked because index inclusion drives massive flows at any price. SpaceX understands this and with so much money on the table probably exerted influence (maybe the big AI players contributed too).
Passive funds don’t care about price (quite the opposite, they reward higher market caps in a feedback loop).
But with an IPO, you’re supposed to let the market have some time to find the right price.
Not to mention the changes related to profitability rules etc.
By “raising death taxes”, I meant comprehensively, eliminating loopholes, as the sources I linked discuss more at length.
Re: irrevocable trust, a cursory search revealed no legitimate use case imo, all use cases I see are proxies to skirt taxes or hide income/wealth. What would you consider a legitimate use case for one?
Your point re: case law is well taken, but per [2] up until a few decades ago there was a cat-and-mouse game between laws and tricks regarding inheritance wealth transfer. This stopped and it’s easier than ever to transfer > 10M tax free at or death, which has massive implications for wealth inequality.
That said I agree it’s extremely unlikely and have no hope that any of this will change.
Our business got charged a 200% tariff on a UPS import from Japan, completely incorrect. The dispute is taking much longer than OP’s.
Either UPS doesn’t know what they’re doing, or they willfully charge higher fees, or maybe they’re just understaffed from the massive layoffs they did to try to save their stock price.
edit: as a biz you (we) should use a legit import broker instead of UPS. But individuals like OP are stuck with no option.
He is describing how bidding for publicly funded projects fails, because the bidding process designed to avoid corruption has been poorly designed (or corrupted by lobbying) such that it effectively sidelines honest and qualified bids.
I would say this is a typical outcome with well meaning bureaucrats in a democracy, not capitalism
Agree except on the peer review part.
Peer review is a farce perpetrated by the journal industry, both of which are an unnecessary burden and tax on science.
What “peer review” pretends to accomplish should happen after publication (comments or the sort).