Using dividends to reduce short term capital gains? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern) Frequently Answered Questions (by topic) Can we remove “Strategies for earning more money” from the on-topic list?Short or Long Term Capital Gains for Multiple InvestmentsCapital Gains in an S CorpHow do taxes work when your only income is from capital gains?Capital Gains Tax for State of Iowa: No distinction between short-term vs long-term gains?Is there a way to roll over short-term gains and avoid capital gain taxPaying taxes on dividends even though your capital gains were $0?Withholding for unexpected Short-Term Capital Gains and PenaltiesDoes “income” include capital gains?What are the “capital gains” my ETF is distributing to me alongside its dividends?Does Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT) apply to short-term capital gains
Output the ŋarâþ crîþ alphabet song without using (m)any letters
How to answer "Have you ever been terminated?"
Why is my conclusion inconsistent with the van't Hoff equation?
How to deal with a team lead who never gives me credit?
Why aren't air breathing engines used as small first stages
How do I keep my slimes from escaping their pens?
Withdrew £2800, but only £2000 shows as withdrawn on online banking; what are my obligations?
2001: A Space Odyssey's use of the song "Daisy Bell" (Bicycle Built for Two); life imitates art or vice-versa?
Is it fair for a professor to grade us on the possession of past papers?
In predicate logic, does existential quantification (∃) include universal quantification (∀), i.e. can 'some' imply 'all'?
Short Story with Cinderella as a Voo-doo Witch
What does this icon in iOS Stardew Valley mean?
How to call a function with default parameter through a pointer to function that is the return of another function?
If a contract sometimes uses the wrong name, is it still valid?
What is Wonderstone and are there any references to it pre-1982?
How widely used is the term Treppenwitz? Is it something that most Germans know?
Why didn't this character "real die" when they blew their stack out in Altered Carbon?
What does the "x" in "x86" represent?
Why was the term "discrete" used in discrete logarithm?
When a candle burns, why does the top of wick glow if bottom of flame is hottest?
Why do we bend a book to keep it straight?
What is the logic behind the Maharil's explanation of why we don't say שעשה ניסים on Pesach?
Dating a Former Employee
Why light coming from distant stars is not discreet?
Using dividends to reduce short term capital gains?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
Frequently Answered Questions (by topic)
Can we remove “Strategies for earning more money” from the on-topic list?Short or Long Term Capital Gains for Multiple InvestmentsCapital Gains in an S CorpHow do taxes work when your only income is from capital gains?Capital Gains Tax for State of Iowa: No distinction between short-term vs long-term gains?Is there a way to roll over short-term gains and avoid capital gain taxPaying taxes on dividends even though your capital gains were $0?Withholding for unexpected Short-Term Capital Gains and PenaltiesDoes “income” include capital gains?What are the “capital gains” my ETF is distributing to me alongside its dividends?Does Net Investment Income Tax (NIIT) apply to short-term capital gains
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
Let's say I have $100 in short term capital gains this year. I will need to pay taxes on this gains at the my ordinary tax rate (which we shall assume is 37%).
Let's also say there is a stock that has a dividend in December. It's $1000 stock and the dividend amount is $10. Let's also assume this stock has very low volatility.
So I buy 10 shares for $1000, collect the dividend, then sell the 10 shares for $990.
I've wiped out my short term capital gains. And now I only need to pay taxes on the dividend (which is a much lower rate than 37%).
What is wrong with this logic?
united-states taxes capital-gains-tax dividends
add a comment |
Let's say I have $100 in short term capital gains this year. I will need to pay taxes on this gains at the my ordinary tax rate (which we shall assume is 37%).
Let's also say there is a stock that has a dividend in December. It's $1000 stock and the dividend amount is $10. Let's also assume this stock has very low volatility.
So I buy 10 shares for $1000, collect the dividend, then sell the 10 shares for $990.
I've wiped out my short term capital gains. And now I only need to pay taxes on the dividend (which is a much lower rate than 37%).
What is wrong with this logic?
united-states taxes capital-gains-tax dividends
add a comment |
Let's say I have $100 in short term capital gains this year. I will need to pay taxes on this gains at the my ordinary tax rate (which we shall assume is 37%).
Let's also say there is a stock that has a dividend in December. It's $1000 stock and the dividend amount is $10. Let's also assume this stock has very low volatility.
So I buy 10 shares for $1000, collect the dividend, then sell the 10 shares for $990.
I've wiped out my short term capital gains. And now I only need to pay taxes on the dividend (which is a much lower rate than 37%).
What is wrong with this logic?
united-states taxes capital-gains-tax dividends
Let's say I have $100 in short term capital gains this year. I will need to pay taxes on this gains at the my ordinary tax rate (which we shall assume is 37%).
Let's also say there is a stock that has a dividend in December. It's $1000 stock and the dividend amount is $10. Let's also assume this stock has very low volatility.
So I buy 10 shares for $1000, collect the dividend, then sell the 10 shares for $990.
I've wiped out my short term capital gains. And now I only need to pay taxes on the dividend (which is a much lower rate than 37%).
What is wrong with this logic?
united-states taxes capital-gains-tax dividends
united-states taxes capital-gains-tax dividends
edited Apr 12 at 18:11
Chris W. Rea
26.7k1587175
26.7k1587175
asked Apr 12 at 14:20
JPNJPN
1616
1616
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
(Assuming US tax jurisdiction based on use of $)
Unless I'm missing something, short-term capital gains and dividends are both treated like ordinary income and taxed at your marginal tax rate, so there is no tax advantage in converting short-term gains into dividends. The 37% you quote is the highest tax bracket and only applied to income (including capital gains and dividends) over $500,000+ (roughly).
A better option from a pure tax standpoint would be to realize long-term losses by selling securities that you have held for more than a year and are underwater. The long-term losses (which normally would reduce your tax by a lower percentage) can offset short-term gains that are taxed at a higher percentage, for a net tax benefit. This is referred to at "tax loss harvesting".
1
It appears that you are missing something, per BobBaerker (qualified dividends are taxed at a lower rate).
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:45
I think LT losses are first used to offset LT gains, and ST losses offset ST gains. You can only use them to reduce the other type if you have an excess of losses over gains within the same type. You can also use up to $3,000 in net losses to reduce ordinary income, the rest is carried forward.
– Barmar
Apr 12 at 23:00
add a comment |
Adding to D Stanley's answer, dividends are either Qualified or Ordinary. Qualified dividends are taxed at a lower tax rate. Ordinary dividends are taxed as ordinary income.
In order for a dividend to be Qualified it must be:
issued by a U.S. corporation, by a foreign corporation that trades on a major U.S. exchange, or by a corporation incorporated in a U.S. possession.
The shares must have been owned for more than 60 days of the "holding period" which is defined as the 121 day period that begins 60 days before the ex-dividend date.
1
Can you include the implication for OP's question, since you seem to be making an important correction to D Stanley's answer? This means that generating a capital loss plus a qualified dividend is a valid tax strategy (if you have no other loss harvesting option and can accept the risk of holding for 60 days), right?
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:38
add a comment |
Assumes United States tax rates (no country specified, but dollar sign ($) used in question)
What is wrong
Your biggest problem is that you have $100 in short term capital gains. Avoid those when you can, since you don't seem to currently have existing losses to realize against them.
Hold everything (that you can) 12 months so you are paying the long term capital gains rate instead of the short term rate.Creating a loss to offset a gain is almost always a bad idea.
Yes, I saw that the dividend offsets the loss - doesn't change my advice.You don't specify that you'll buy the dividend in time to get the good rate.
37% is too high for your assumption.
(If you are adding your state income tax rate to get up to this number... you shouldn't)
37% is probably 60%-70% higher than the rate you should be using.- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
(22 is 67% less than 37). - If you are making more than $200k, you should probably have a tax adviser
your income is still less than half way to the max 37% marginal tax rate. - If you are making more than $500k, you should already have a tax adviser - who can teach you that... although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates.
- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
6
"although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates." But the OP is discussing an attempt to avoid tax liability by cancelling, which by definition refers to the marginal tax rate.
– Acccumulation
Apr 12 at 16:58
3
Why shouldn't he add in his State income tax rate? And see Accumulation's explanation for why only marginal tax rates matter when you are comparing strategies.
– David Schwartz
Apr 12 at 17:11
Whether state tax should be considered depends on whether the state taxes dividends less than ordinary income. California does not, so converting ordinary income to dividend does not impact state tax.
– Ross Millikan
Apr 13 at 5:02
@RossMillikan Thanks for that! Also the question is useful to more people if state tax is not included in the rate.
– J. Chris Compton
yesterday
add a comment |
With stocks of individual companies, except for REIT's and BDC's, a dividend earned in one year but with a payment date in the next year is then taxed in the year paid. So buy this situation the day before the ex-dividend date and sell on the ex-dividend date as expecting the security to drop by the amount of the dividend. A capital-loss is realized in the current year while the dividend earned is realized in the next year.
However, buying a security the day before the ex-dividend date and selling on the ex-dividend date is a significant bet on the next day's market open.
This is WRONG for US (which this Q is); see pub 550 under 'Dividends received in January'
– dave_thompson_085
2 days ago
Read the last paragraph of this article: investopedia.com/terms/s/spillover_dividend.asp . Also, I have experience with REIT dividends in the U.S.
– S Spring
2 days ago
No, I can't go against the IRS 550. I'll have to revise the post.
– S Spring
2 days ago
Here is a link of information: ibkr.info/node/911
– S Spring
2 days ago
I revised the post. The Investopedia article is confusing and shouldn't be relied-on.
– S Spring
2 days ago
add a comment |
protected by JoeTaxpayer♦ Apr 13 at 19:10
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
(Assuming US tax jurisdiction based on use of $)
Unless I'm missing something, short-term capital gains and dividends are both treated like ordinary income and taxed at your marginal tax rate, so there is no tax advantage in converting short-term gains into dividends. The 37% you quote is the highest tax bracket and only applied to income (including capital gains and dividends) over $500,000+ (roughly).
A better option from a pure tax standpoint would be to realize long-term losses by selling securities that you have held for more than a year and are underwater. The long-term losses (which normally would reduce your tax by a lower percentage) can offset short-term gains that are taxed at a higher percentage, for a net tax benefit. This is referred to at "tax loss harvesting".
1
It appears that you are missing something, per BobBaerker (qualified dividends are taxed at a lower rate).
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:45
I think LT losses are first used to offset LT gains, and ST losses offset ST gains. You can only use them to reduce the other type if you have an excess of losses over gains within the same type. You can also use up to $3,000 in net losses to reduce ordinary income, the rest is carried forward.
– Barmar
Apr 12 at 23:00
add a comment |
(Assuming US tax jurisdiction based on use of $)
Unless I'm missing something, short-term capital gains and dividends are both treated like ordinary income and taxed at your marginal tax rate, so there is no tax advantage in converting short-term gains into dividends. The 37% you quote is the highest tax bracket and only applied to income (including capital gains and dividends) over $500,000+ (roughly).
A better option from a pure tax standpoint would be to realize long-term losses by selling securities that you have held for more than a year and are underwater. The long-term losses (which normally would reduce your tax by a lower percentage) can offset short-term gains that are taxed at a higher percentage, for a net tax benefit. This is referred to at "tax loss harvesting".
1
It appears that you are missing something, per BobBaerker (qualified dividends are taxed at a lower rate).
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:45
I think LT losses are first used to offset LT gains, and ST losses offset ST gains. You can only use them to reduce the other type if you have an excess of losses over gains within the same type. You can also use up to $3,000 in net losses to reduce ordinary income, the rest is carried forward.
– Barmar
Apr 12 at 23:00
add a comment |
(Assuming US tax jurisdiction based on use of $)
Unless I'm missing something, short-term capital gains and dividends are both treated like ordinary income and taxed at your marginal tax rate, so there is no tax advantage in converting short-term gains into dividends. The 37% you quote is the highest tax bracket and only applied to income (including capital gains and dividends) over $500,000+ (roughly).
A better option from a pure tax standpoint would be to realize long-term losses by selling securities that you have held for more than a year and are underwater. The long-term losses (which normally would reduce your tax by a lower percentage) can offset short-term gains that are taxed at a higher percentage, for a net tax benefit. This is referred to at "tax loss harvesting".
(Assuming US tax jurisdiction based on use of $)
Unless I'm missing something, short-term capital gains and dividends are both treated like ordinary income and taxed at your marginal tax rate, so there is no tax advantage in converting short-term gains into dividends. The 37% you quote is the highest tax bracket and only applied to income (including capital gains and dividends) over $500,000+ (roughly).
A better option from a pure tax standpoint would be to realize long-term losses by selling securities that you have held for more than a year and are underwater. The long-term losses (which normally would reduce your tax by a lower percentage) can offset short-term gains that are taxed at a higher percentage, for a net tax benefit. This is referred to at "tax loss harvesting".
edited Apr 12 at 14:40
answered Apr 12 at 14:35
D StanleyD Stanley
58.4k10169176
58.4k10169176
1
It appears that you are missing something, per BobBaerker (qualified dividends are taxed at a lower rate).
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:45
I think LT losses are first used to offset LT gains, and ST losses offset ST gains. You can only use them to reduce the other type if you have an excess of losses over gains within the same type. You can also use up to $3,000 in net losses to reduce ordinary income, the rest is carried forward.
– Barmar
Apr 12 at 23:00
add a comment |
1
It appears that you are missing something, per BobBaerker (qualified dividends are taxed at a lower rate).
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:45
I think LT losses are first used to offset LT gains, and ST losses offset ST gains. You can only use them to reduce the other type if you have an excess of losses over gains within the same type. You can also use up to $3,000 in net losses to reduce ordinary income, the rest is carried forward.
– Barmar
Apr 12 at 23:00
1
1
It appears that you are missing something, per BobBaerker (qualified dividends are taxed at a lower rate).
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:45
It appears that you are missing something, per BobBaerker (qualified dividends are taxed at a lower rate).
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:45
I think LT losses are first used to offset LT gains, and ST losses offset ST gains. You can only use them to reduce the other type if you have an excess of losses over gains within the same type. You can also use up to $3,000 in net losses to reduce ordinary income, the rest is carried forward.
– Barmar
Apr 12 at 23:00
I think LT losses are first used to offset LT gains, and ST losses offset ST gains. You can only use them to reduce the other type if you have an excess of losses over gains within the same type. You can also use up to $3,000 in net losses to reduce ordinary income, the rest is carried forward.
– Barmar
Apr 12 at 23:00
add a comment |
Adding to D Stanley's answer, dividends are either Qualified or Ordinary. Qualified dividends are taxed at a lower tax rate. Ordinary dividends are taxed as ordinary income.
In order for a dividend to be Qualified it must be:
issued by a U.S. corporation, by a foreign corporation that trades on a major U.S. exchange, or by a corporation incorporated in a U.S. possession.
The shares must have been owned for more than 60 days of the "holding period" which is defined as the 121 day period that begins 60 days before the ex-dividend date.
1
Can you include the implication for OP's question, since you seem to be making an important correction to D Stanley's answer? This means that generating a capital loss plus a qualified dividend is a valid tax strategy (if you have no other loss harvesting option and can accept the risk of holding for 60 days), right?
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:38
add a comment |
Adding to D Stanley's answer, dividends are either Qualified or Ordinary. Qualified dividends are taxed at a lower tax rate. Ordinary dividends are taxed as ordinary income.
In order for a dividend to be Qualified it must be:
issued by a U.S. corporation, by a foreign corporation that trades on a major U.S. exchange, or by a corporation incorporated in a U.S. possession.
The shares must have been owned for more than 60 days of the "holding period" which is defined as the 121 day period that begins 60 days before the ex-dividend date.
1
Can you include the implication for OP's question, since you seem to be making an important correction to D Stanley's answer? This means that generating a capital loss plus a qualified dividend is a valid tax strategy (if you have no other loss harvesting option and can accept the risk of holding for 60 days), right?
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:38
add a comment |
Adding to D Stanley's answer, dividends are either Qualified or Ordinary. Qualified dividends are taxed at a lower tax rate. Ordinary dividends are taxed as ordinary income.
In order for a dividend to be Qualified it must be:
issued by a U.S. corporation, by a foreign corporation that trades on a major U.S. exchange, or by a corporation incorporated in a U.S. possession.
The shares must have been owned for more than 60 days of the "holding period" which is defined as the 121 day period that begins 60 days before the ex-dividend date.
Adding to D Stanley's answer, dividends are either Qualified or Ordinary. Qualified dividends are taxed at a lower tax rate. Ordinary dividends are taxed as ordinary income.
In order for a dividend to be Qualified it must be:
issued by a U.S. corporation, by a foreign corporation that trades on a major U.S. exchange, or by a corporation incorporated in a U.S. possession.
The shares must have been owned for more than 60 days of the "holding period" which is defined as the 121 day period that begins 60 days before the ex-dividend date.
answered Apr 12 at 16:02
Bob BaerkerBob Baerker
18.7k22754
18.7k22754
1
Can you include the implication for OP's question, since you seem to be making an important correction to D Stanley's answer? This means that generating a capital loss plus a qualified dividend is a valid tax strategy (if you have no other loss harvesting option and can accept the risk of holding for 60 days), right?
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:38
add a comment |
1
Can you include the implication for OP's question, since you seem to be making an important correction to D Stanley's answer? This means that generating a capital loss plus a qualified dividend is a valid tax strategy (if you have no other loss harvesting option and can accept the risk of holding for 60 days), right?
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:38
1
1
Can you include the implication for OP's question, since you seem to be making an important correction to D Stanley's answer? This means that generating a capital loss plus a qualified dividend is a valid tax strategy (if you have no other loss harvesting option and can accept the risk of holding for 60 days), right?
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:38
Can you include the implication for OP's question, since you seem to be making an important correction to D Stanley's answer? This means that generating a capital loss plus a qualified dividend is a valid tax strategy (if you have no other loss harvesting option and can accept the risk of holding for 60 days), right?
– nanoman
Apr 12 at 22:38
add a comment |
Assumes United States tax rates (no country specified, but dollar sign ($) used in question)
What is wrong
Your biggest problem is that you have $100 in short term capital gains. Avoid those when you can, since you don't seem to currently have existing losses to realize against them.
Hold everything (that you can) 12 months so you are paying the long term capital gains rate instead of the short term rate.Creating a loss to offset a gain is almost always a bad idea.
Yes, I saw that the dividend offsets the loss - doesn't change my advice.You don't specify that you'll buy the dividend in time to get the good rate.
37% is too high for your assumption.
(If you are adding your state income tax rate to get up to this number... you shouldn't)
37% is probably 60%-70% higher than the rate you should be using.- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
(22 is 67% less than 37). - If you are making more than $200k, you should probably have a tax adviser
your income is still less than half way to the max 37% marginal tax rate. - If you are making more than $500k, you should already have a tax adviser - who can teach you that... although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates.
- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
6
"although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates." But the OP is discussing an attempt to avoid tax liability by cancelling, which by definition refers to the marginal tax rate.
– Acccumulation
Apr 12 at 16:58
3
Why shouldn't he add in his State income tax rate? And see Accumulation's explanation for why only marginal tax rates matter when you are comparing strategies.
– David Schwartz
Apr 12 at 17:11
Whether state tax should be considered depends on whether the state taxes dividends less than ordinary income. California does not, so converting ordinary income to dividend does not impact state tax.
– Ross Millikan
Apr 13 at 5:02
@RossMillikan Thanks for that! Also the question is useful to more people if state tax is not included in the rate.
– J. Chris Compton
yesterday
add a comment |
Assumes United States tax rates (no country specified, but dollar sign ($) used in question)
What is wrong
Your biggest problem is that you have $100 in short term capital gains. Avoid those when you can, since you don't seem to currently have existing losses to realize against them.
Hold everything (that you can) 12 months so you are paying the long term capital gains rate instead of the short term rate.Creating a loss to offset a gain is almost always a bad idea.
Yes, I saw that the dividend offsets the loss - doesn't change my advice.You don't specify that you'll buy the dividend in time to get the good rate.
37% is too high for your assumption.
(If you are adding your state income tax rate to get up to this number... you shouldn't)
37% is probably 60%-70% higher than the rate you should be using.- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
(22 is 67% less than 37). - If you are making more than $200k, you should probably have a tax adviser
your income is still less than half way to the max 37% marginal tax rate. - If you are making more than $500k, you should already have a tax adviser - who can teach you that... although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates.
- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
6
"although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates." But the OP is discussing an attempt to avoid tax liability by cancelling, which by definition refers to the marginal tax rate.
– Acccumulation
Apr 12 at 16:58
3
Why shouldn't he add in his State income tax rate? And see Accumulation's explanation for why only marginal tax rates matter when you are comparing strategies.
– David Schwartz
Apr 12 at 17:11
Whether state tax should be considered depends on whether the state taxes dividends less than ordinary income. California does not, so converting ordinary income to dividend does not impact state tax.
– Ross Millikan
Apr 13 at 5:02
@RossMillikan Thanks for that! Also the question is useful to more people if state tax is not included in the rate.
– J. Chris Compton
yesterday
add a comment |
Assumes United States tax rates (no country specified, but dollar sign ($) used in question)
What is wrong
Your biggest problem is that you have $100 in short term capital gains. Avoid those when you can, since you don't seem to currently have existing losses to realize against them.
Hold everything (that you can) 12 months so you are paying the long term capital gains rate instead of the short term rate.Creating a loss to offset a gain is almost always a bad idea.
Yes, I saw that the dividend offsets the loss - doesn't change my advice.You don't specify that you'll buy the dividend in time to get the good rate.
37% is too high for your assumption.
(If you are adding your state income tax rate to get up to this number... you shouldn't)
37% is probably 60%-70% higher than the rate you should be using.- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
(22 is 67% less than 37). - If you are making more than $200k, you should probably have a tax adviser
your income is still less than half way to the max 37% marginal tax rate. - If you are making more than $500k, you should already have a tax adviser - who can teach you that... although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates.
- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
Assumes United States tax rates (no country specified, but dollar sign ($) used in question)
What is wrong
Your biggest problem is that you have $100 in short term capital gains. Avoid those when you can, since you don't seem to currently have existing losses to realize against them.
Hold everything (that you can) 12 months so you are paying the long term capital gains rate instead of the short term rate.Creating a loss to offset a gain is almost always a bad idea.
Yes, I saw that the dividend offsets the loss - doesn't change my advice.You don't specify that you'll buy the dividend in time to get the good rate.
37% is too high for your assumption.
(If you are adding your state income tax rate to get up to this number... you shouldn't)
37% is probably 60%-70% higher than the rate you should be using.- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
(22 is 67% less than 37). - If you are making more than $200k, you should probably have a tax adviser
your income is still less than half way to the max 37% marginal tax rate. - If you are making more than $500k, you should already have a tax adviser - who can teach you that... although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates.
- If you make $100k with $10 in itemized deductions your overall rate is in the low 20%'s
answered Apr 12 at 16:39
J. Chris ComptonJ. Chris Compton
1,165212
1,165212
6
"although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates." But the OP is discussing an attempt to avoid tax liability by cancelling, which by definition refers to the marginal tax rate.
– Acccumulation
Apr 12 at 16:58
3
Why shouldn't he add in his State income tax rate? And see Accumulation's explanation for why only marginal tax rates matter when you are comparing strategies.
– David Schwartz
Apr 12 at 17:11
Whether state tax should be considered depends on whether the state taxes dividends less than ordinary income. California does not, so converting ordinary income to dividend does not impact state tax.
– Ross Millikan
Apr 13 at 5:02
@RossMillikan Thanks for that! Also the question is useful to more people if state tax is not included in the rate.
– J. Chris Compton
yesterday
add a comment |
6
"although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates." But the OP is discussing an attempt to avoid tax liability by cancelling, which by definition refers to the marginal tax rate.
– Acccumulation
Apr 12 at 16:58
3
Why shouldn't he add in his State income tax rate? And see Accumulation's explanation for why only marginal tax rates matter when you are comparing strategies.
– David Schwartz
Apr 12 at 17:11
Whether state tax should be considered depends on whether the state taxes dividends less than ordinary income. California does not, so converting ordinary income to dividend does not impact state tax.
– Ross Millikan
Apr 13 at 5:02
@RossMillikan Thanks for that! Also the question is useful to more people if state tax is not included in the rate.
– J. Chris Compton
yesterday
6
6
"although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates." But the OP is discussing an attempt to avoid tax liability by cancelling, which by definition refers to the marginal tax rate.
– Acccumulation
Apr 12 at 16:58
"although you are actually in the 37% tax bracket... you aren't paying that much overall because the fist $500k is taxed at lower rates." But the OP is discussing an attempt to avoid tax liability by cancelling, which by definition refers to the marginal tax rate.
– Acccumulation
Apr 12 at 16:58
3
3
Why shouldn't he add in his State income tax rate? And see Accumulation's explanation for why only marginal tax rates matter when you are comparing strategies.
– David Schwartz
Apr 12 at 17:11
Why shouldn't he add in his State income tax rate? And see Accumulation's explanation for why only marginal tax rates matter when you are comparing strategies.
– David Schwartz
Apr 12 at 17:11
Whether state tax should be considered depends on whether the state taxes dividends less than ordinary income. California does not, so converting ordinary income to dividend does not impact state tax.
– Ross Millikan
Apr 13 at 5:02
Whether state tax should be considered depends on whether the state taxes dividends less than ordinary income. California does not, so converting ordinary income to dividend does not impact state tax.
– Ross Millikan
Apr 13 at 5:02
@RossMillikan Thanks for that! Also the question is useful to more people if state tax is not included in the rate.
– J. Chris Compton
yesterday
@RossMillikan Thanks for that! Also the question is useful to more people if state tax is not included in the rate.
– J. Chris Compton
yesterday
add a comment |
With stocks of individual companies, except for REIT's and BDC's, a dividend earned in one year but with a payment date in the next year is then taxed in the year paid. So buy this situation the day before the ex-dividend date and sell on the ex-dividend date as expecting the security to drop by the amount of the dividend. A capital-loss is realized in the current year while the dividend earned is realized in the next year.
However, buying a security the day before the ex-dividend date and selling on the ex-dividend date is a significant bet on the next day's market open.
This is WRONG for US (which this Q is); see pub 550 under 'Dividends received in January'
– dave_thompson_085
2 days ago
Read the last paragraph of this article: investopedia.com/terms/s/spillover_dividend.asp . Also, I have experience with REIT dividends in the U.S.
– S Spring
2 days ago
No, I can't go against the IRS 550. I'll have to revise the post.
– S Spring
2 days ago
Here is a link of information: ibkr.info/node/911
– S Spring
2 days ago
I revised the post. The Investopedia article is confusing and shouldn't be relied-on.
– S Spring
2 days ago
add a comment |
With stocks of individual companies, except for REIT's and BDC's, a dividend earned in one year but with a payment date in the next year is then taxed in the year paid. So buy this situation the day before the ex-dividend date and sell on the ex-dividend date as expecting the security to drop by the amount of the dividend. A capital-loss is realized in the current year while the dividend earned is realized in the next year.
However, buying a security the day before the ex-dividend date and selling on the ex-dividend date is a significant bet on the next day's market open.
This is WRONG for US (which this Q is); see pub 550 under 'Dividends received in January'
– dave_thompson_085
2 days ago
Read the last paragraph of this article: investopedia.com/terms/s/spillover_dividend.asp . Also, I have experience with REIT dividends in the U.S.
– S Spring
2 days ago
No, I can't go against the IRS 550. I'll have to revise the post.
– S Spring
2 days ago
Here is a link of information: ibkr.info/node/911
– S Spring
2 days ago
I revised the post. The Investopedia article is confusing and shouldn't be relied-on.
– S Spring
2 days ago
add a comment |
With stocks of individual companies, except for REIT's and BDC's, a dividend earned in one year but with a payment date in the next year is then taxed in the year paid. So buy this situation the day before the ex-dividend date and sell on the ex-dividend date as expecting the security to drop by the amount of the dividend. A capital-loss is realized in the current year while the dividend earned is realized in the next year.
However, buying a security the day before the ex-dividend date and selling on the ex-dividend date is a significant bet on the next day's market open.
With stocks of individual companies, except for REIT's and BDC's, a dividend earned in one year but with a payment date in the next year is then taxed in the year paid. So buy this situation the day before the ex-dividend date and sell on the ex-dividend date as expecting the security to drop by the amount of the dividend. A capital-loss is realized in the current year while the dividend earned is realized in the next year.
However, buying a security the day before the ex-dividend date and selling on the ex-dividend date is a significant bet on the next day's market open.
edited 2 days ago
answered Apr 12 at 21:41
S SpringS Spring
91913
91913
This is WRONG for US (which this Q is); see pub 550 under 'Dividends received in January'
– dave_thompson_085
2 days ago
Read the last paragraph of this article: investopedia.com/terms/s/spillover_dividend.asp . Also, I have experience with REIT dividends in the U.S.
– S Spring
2 days ago
No, I can't go against the IRS 550. I'll have to revise the post.
– S Spring
2 days ago
Here is a link of information: ibkr.info/node/911
– S Spring
2 days ago
I revised the post. The Investopedia article is confusing and shouldn't be relied-on.
– S Spring
2 days ago
add a comment |
This is WRONG for US (which this Q is); see pub 550 under 'Dividends received in January'
– dave_thompson_085
2 days ago
Read the last paragraph of this article: investopedia.com/terms/s/spillover_dividend.asp . Also, I have experience with REIT dividends in the U.S.
– S Spring
2 days ago
No, I can't go against the IRS 550. I'll have to revise the post.
– S Spring
2 days ago
Here is a link of information: ibkr.info/node/911
– S Spring
2 days ago
I revised the post. The Investopedia article is confusing and shouldn't be relied-on.
– S Spring
2 days ago
This is WRONG for US (which this Q is); see pub 550 under 'Dividends received in January'
– dave_thompson_085
2 days ago
This is WRONG for US (which this Q is); see pub 550 under 'Dividends received in January'
– dave_thompson_085
2 days ago
Read the last paragraph of this article: investopedia.com/terms/s/spillover_dividend.asp . Also, I have experience with REIT dividends in the U.S.
– S Spring
2 days ago
Read the last paragraph of this article: investopedia.com/terms/s/spillover_dividend.asp . Also, I have experience with REIT dividends in the U.S.
– S Spring
2 days ago
No, I can't go against the IRS 550. I'll have to revise the post.
– S Spring
2 days ago
No, I can't go against the IRS 550. I'll have to revise the post.
– S Spring
2 days ago
Here is a link of information: ibkr.info/node/911
– S Spring
2 days ago
Here is a link of information: ibkr.info/node/911
– S Spring
2 days ago
I revised the post. The Investopedia article is confusing and shouldn't be relied-on.
– S Spring
2 days ago
I revised the post. The Investopedia article is confusing and shouldn't be relied-on.
– S Spring
2 days ago
add a comment |
protected by JoeTaxpayer♦ Apr 13 at 19:10
Thank you for your interest in this question.
Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).
Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?