And what their shareholders borrow against the value of their inflated shares and never have to pay income taxes? Seems almost like a national bust out based on the article definition.
Either I'm missing your point, or you are missing mine.
Any loans that the ultra-rich take out against their assets to fund their lifestyle, are going to have an associated interest rate, and a payment schedule. If they don't want to default, they'll need another source of funds to make those payments.
IF that source of funds for load servicing is a salary, they'll be paying income tax (income) + interest payments (loan).
IF that source of funds is dividends, then they may be cap-gains or income, depending on qualification status.
In either case: there is..
* A limit to how much can be borrowed, before the loan payments outstrip the loan-funding income or qualifying dividends
* In the case of income, they are still generating an income tax liability to service that loan, and also paying interest on top of it. Paying 124K/year for 10 years to pay off $1M at 4.5% means they fell into the 24% bracket for 10 years ($297.6K tax total) , rather than 37% in 1 year ($370K tax total). So while it does appear to create a tax savings -- even with the 4.5% loan interest -- funding life with loans is not the absolute "never have to pay income taxes" that my PP described it as.
