The $8.3 billion does assume reinvestment of dividends and distributions ( too many variables to consider taxes that have changed over the last 35 years). However, the value alone of the $200MM index fund in 1982 would be alomost $3 billion. (S&P @140 in 1982 and 2000 today).
I've said it before, but given that much money and becoming a billionaire is not impressive, but inevitable.
Copy of Sean Hannity's bracket just got leaked
I am not an accountant but as a taxpayer if this was my situation I would not pay taxes on the original investment of $200MM. Taxes would only apply to the returns of $31.8MM. And the ARR for the S&P 500 over the last 33 years (2015-1982 when Trump took over) has been closer to 11.5% not 15%.Thats an average annual rate of return of 15.9% ((2000/140)^-18) = 1.159 $200mm x 1.159 = $231.8mm
$231.8mm x 0.15 (investment income tax rate) = $34.77mm
$231.8mm - $34.77mm = $197.03 for a negative rate of return of (200 - 197.03)/200 = 0.01485 or -1.485%. I'm sure if you employed sufficiently expensive accountants to create tax dodges based in notorious tax havens such as, say, the Caymans you could improve this rate of return but if you actually pay taxes you're not becoming a billionaire that way
From excel assuming reinvestment of returns after taxesYou're right, I mistakenly included the principal in my calculations. It may or may not have been a factor only the first year depending on how they transferred the money. That fact that the growth rate of the money was so low should have clued me in but I was tired. The ARR was calculated off the figures you initially gave in the post I quoted (140 initial 2000 endpoint, 1982 to 2000). Using your numbers:
$200mm x 1.115 = $223mm $23mm x 0.15 = $3.45mm(15% tax rate) (223 - 3.45)/200 = 1.132 or 13.2% after tax return
(1.132 ^ 33) = 59.83 x $200mm = $1.196bb so you do (just barely) make it to a billion in the much longer (33yrs as opposed to 18yrs) period now used.
Since Forbes says Trump is now worth $4.5bb, he has far exceeded the growth rate of the S&P after tax returns which was the point I wished to make relative to your implication that he hadn't done all that well with the family fortune. Obviously his tax rate was probably lower than 15% but that info isn't easily obtained from public documents
End of Year | Start of year balance | End of year balance (pre tax ) | Tax | End of year balance (post tax) | |||
Inititial Investment | $ 200,000,000.00 | 1982 | $ 200,000,000.00 | $ 223,000,000.00 | $ 3,450,000.00 | $ 219,550,000.00 | |
ARR | 11.5% | 1983 | $ 219,550,000.00 | $ 244,798,250.00 | $ 3,787,237.50 | $ 241,011,012.50 | |
Tax Rate | 15% | 1984 | $ 241,011,012.50 | $ 268,727,278.94 | $ 4,157,439.97 | $ 264,569,838.97 | |
1985 | $ 264,569,838.97 | $ 294,995,370.45 | $ 4,563,829.72 | $ 290,431,540.73 | |||
1986 | $ 290,431,540.73 | $ 323,831,167.92 | $ 5,009,944.08 | $ 318,821,223.84 | |||
1987 | $ 318,821,223.84 | $ 355,485,664.58 | $ 5,499,666.11 | $ 349,985,998.47 | |||
1988 | $ 349,985,998.47 | $ 390,234,388.29 | $ 6,037,258.47 | $ 384,197,129.82 | |||
1989 | $ 384,197,129.82 | $ 428,379,799.75 | $ 6,627,400.49 | $ 421,752,399.26 | |||
1990 | $ 421,752,399.26 | $ 470,253,925.17 | $ 7,275,228.89 | $ 462,978,696.29 | |||
1991 | $ 462,978,696.29 | $ 516,221,246.36 | $ 7,986,382.51 | $ 508,234,863.85 | |||
1992 | $ 508,234,863.85 | $ 566,681,873.19 | $ 8,767,051.40 | $ 557,914,821.79 | |||
1993 | $ 557,914,821.79 | $ 622,075,026.29 | $ 9,624,030.68 | $ 612,450,995.62 | |||
1994 | $ 612,450,995.62 | $ 682,882,860.11 | $ 10,564,779.67 | $ 672,318,080.44 | |||
1995 | $ 672,318,080.44 | $ 749,634,659.69 | $ 11,597,486.89 | $ 738,037,172.80 | |||
1996 | $ 738,037,172.80 | $ 822,911,447.68 | $ 12,731,141.23 | $ 810,180,306.44 | |||
1997 | $ 810,180,306.44 | $ 903,351,041.69 | $ 13,975,610.29 | $ 889,375,431.40 | |||
1998 | $ 889,375,431.40 | $ 991,653,606.01 | $ 15,341,726.19 | $ 976,311,879.82 | |||
1999 | $ 976,311,879.82 | $ 1,088,587,746.00 | $ 16,841,379.93 | $ 1,071,746,366.07 | |||
2000 | $ 1,071,746,366.07 | $ 1,194,997,198.17 | $ 18,487,624.81 | $ 1,176,509,573.35 | |||
2001 | $ 1,176,509,573.35 | $ 1,311,808,174.29 | $ 20,294,790.14 | $ 1,291,513,384.15 | |||
2002 | $ 1,291,513,384.15 | $ 1,440,037,423.33 | $ 22,278,605.88 | $ 1,417,758,817.45 | |||
2003 | $ 1,417,758,817.45 | $ 1,580,801,081.46 | $ 24,456,339.60 | $ 1,556,344,741.86 | |||
2004 | $ 1,556,344,741.86 | $ 1,735,324,387.17 | $ 26,846,946.80 | $ 1,708,477,440.37 | |||
2005 | $ 1,708,477,440.37 | $ 1,904,952,346.02 | $ 29,471,235.85 | $ 1,875,481,110.17 | |||
2006 | $ 1,875,481,110.17 | $ 2,091,161,437.84 | $ 32,352,049.15 | $ 2,058,809,388.69 | |||
2007 | $ 2,058,809,388.69 | $ 2,295,572,468.39 | $ 35,514,461.95 | $ 2,260,058,006.43 | |||
2008 | $ 2,260,058,006.43 | $ 2,519,964,677.17 | $ 38,986,000.61 | $ 2,480,978,676.56 | |||
2009 | $ 2,480,978,676.56 | $ 2,766,291,224.37 | $ 42,796,882.17 | $ 2,723,494,342.20 | |||
2010 | $ 2,723,494,342.20 | $ 3,036,696,191.55 | $ 46,980,277.40 | $ 2,989,715,914.14 | |||
2011 | $ 2,989,715,914.14 | $ 3,333,533,244.27 | $ 51,572,599.52 | $ 3,281,960,644.75 | |||
2012 | $ 3,281,960,644.75 | $ 3,659,386,118.90 | $ 56,613,821.12 | $ 3,602,772,297.78 | |||
2013 | $ 3,602,772,297.78 | $ 4,017,091,112.02 | $ 62,147,822.14 | $ 3,954,943,289.88 | |||
2014 | $ 3,954,943,289.88 | $ 4,409,761,768.22 | $ 68,222,771.75 | $ 4,341,538,996.47 | |||
2015 | $ 4,341,538,996.47 | $ 4,840,815,981.06 | $ 74,891,547.69 | $ 4,765,924,433.38 |
"Here's Donald Trump's campaign manager in the Tucson crowd grabbing the collar of a protester."
So unlike him.
https://twitter.com/JaxAlemany/status/711329895339536384
Wow. That is an amazing video by that policeman. Thanks for sharing.
The more I read/hear first-hand accounts of what is going on around Trump, but more I'm seeing how he is being slandered in the media. The real violent threats/rhetoric is coming from the oppose-Trump camp at about 100-1. Somehow it is being portrayed as the opposite.
Maybe he ought to sow that which he wishes to reap by not referring to Ted Cruz as "Lying Ted" every chance he gets.Take a guess about why he wants to open the laws to be able to hold them accountable.
I've never seen the media slander someone as hard as they have with him, especially with out right lies, not even cleverly manipulated half truths.
Maybe he ought to sow that which he wishes to reap by not referring to Ted Cruz as "Lying Ted" every chance he gets.
If Cruz can prove it isn't true that he is a liar perhaps he should sue The Donald for slander. THAT would be entertaining
Cruz is a lawyer, if he had a problem with it he could easily do something about it.
I think he still believes he has a chance of getting a cabinet position, so he's not going to go too far.
I doubt Hillary would offer any cabinet position to Cruz.Cruz is a lawyer, if he had a problem with it he could easily do something about it.
I think he still believes he has a chance of getting a cabinet position, so he's not going to go too far.