this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
691 points (99.4% liked)
196
5686 readers
794 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
Also, when sharing art (comics etc.) please credit the creators.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What does this mean?
Keep in mind that this is far from my area of expertise, and only stood out to me in the news as one of those perverse legal-isms (like bees being fish) that has no notable effect on day-to-day reality.
Suppose you have a teller break a large bill for you... you give 'em a $100, and they give you 10x$10's. There is no income event that has occurred, because the value exchanged for value is equal.
Likewise, when you purchase a product from a store with a $100, the business deducts the cost of the product (not just the cost of their wholesale purchase of the product, but also the cost of their store, labor, etc) for tax purposes... supposing the sum of those costs to be $99, they are then taxed on only $1 of profit (thus paying only cents in tax).
As I recall, there was a high-profile court case where a tax protestor claimed they owed no taxes because their earnings exactly matched their cost in labor provided to their employer (making it an even exchange), and the IRS won the court case by admitting to the court that the time and effort one provides an employer has no value.