• MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        Lol! Ya got me! Yeah, autocorrect is a bitch, and I failed to verify the text. Socks = stocks. (And it tried to change it to sticks that time).

      • MasterBlaster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        No, since you didn’t make any money and were not taxed. Also, the bond issuer is now in bankruptcy and/or being sued into bankruptcy. I might even get back the principle depending on the output of the legal proceedings.

    • acargitz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      What happens to the property taxes you paid when your property value tanks? Do you get a tax refund then? No? Then no.

    • jtrek@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      It depends on the details of the implementation. There are many possible solutions.

      If we change it so the rule is like “if you use stock as collateral to get a loan, that is income and taxed as such” then no. You might just default on your loan, but that’s kind of on you and the bank for using a volatile asset as collateral.