Sandberg Tax: Fill & Download for Free

There are various types of stock options, grants and warrants that accrue in value as companies go IPO. There are also circumstances where the holder of such unsold and un-exercized securities are taxed for capital appreciation. It is quite common for C-level executives to have to sell some portion of their holdings to pay for taxes. This is the rationale behind predefined stock selling plans for executives, and I believe that's the type Sandberg used, i.e. her selling had nothing to do with timing or knowledge about future stock movements.

I can’t believe she didn’t do it sooner!Let’s be honest…it’s far more important to give tax cuts to people like this:than it is to create a sense of joy, accomplishment, purpose, and self-worth for kids like these:I have had the extraordinary privilege of working with special needs students for two decades and counting. The disdain, the contempt for those in need, the utter disregard for the humanity of all Americans shown by this move is so appalling as to be practically unbelievable.Until you remember whence it comes.Betsy DeVos and her family own 10 yachts.One of Betsy DeVos' yachts, a $40 million vessel, was vandalized in OhioSo tax cuts benefit people like her the most. But when there’s suddenly a shortfall of funding (who would have thought?), DeVos and her fellow cabinet members have to cut somewhere. So, why not cut from a program that doesn’t benefit people like you? What could go wrong?More about DeVos: When asked about technology, she said the following:“We are the beneficiaries of start-ups, ventures, and innovation in every other area of life, but we don’t have that in education because it’s a closed system, a closed industry, a closed market. It’s a monopoly. It’s a dead end. And the best and brightest innovators and risk-takers steer way clear of it. As long as education remains a closed system, we will never see the education equivalents of Google, Facebook, Amazon, PayPal, Wikipedia or Uber. We won’t see any real innovation that benefits more than a handful of students. Everyone knows that monopolies suffocate progress.”31 Incredibly Successful People Who Went to Public SchoolAnd yet Steve Jobs, Warren Buffet, Jeff Bezos, Larry Page, Sheryl Sandberg, Susan Wojcicki, Tim Cook, Michael Bloomberg, Jeff Immelt (all tech CEOs / founders / Presidents) all attended public schools. As did millions of successful Americans all across the country.Need more? This is a woman who spent decades in my home state of Michigan trying to undermine some of the most successful public schools in the country. Look at this graph:In 1990, Michigan was #13 in per pupil spending. By 2000, it was #10. And our scores were higher than the US average. That’s not surprising. And then the DeVos’s got to work.Today, Michigan is in the bottom half of spending. And, wouldn’t you know it, our scores have gone down.Shocker.Don’t speak this woman’s name in my presence. It is hard enough for me not to spit on the ground just at the thought of her.She’s the incarnation of a pestilence that has plagued our education system for decades. She seeks to pillage the public coffers and send that tax money to those she favors.It’s called public education for a reason - it is supposed to serve the entire public. DeVos’s vision of public education is racist, sexist, homophobic, and fundamentally damaging to this country.Want to help put an end to this? Visit War DonkeyRESIST. REMOVE. WAR DONKEY.

Are you aware of the fact that most millionaires are Republican, but most billionaires are Democrats?Let’s look at the facts. According to the left-leaning Politifact:We cross-checked the Open Secrets list of the top 100 individuals donating to outside spending groups in the current election against the Forbes list of the world’s billionaires and found that, as of June 19, there were 22 individuals on the Open Secrets list who were billionaires. Of those 22 billionaires, 13 -- or more than half -- gave predominantly to liberal groups or groups affiliated with the Democratic Party. The other nine gave predominantly to conservative groups. (A list of billionaires and how much they donated can be found here.)The New York Times even even offered in October 2016 that 45% of households making over $100,000 were voting for Democrat Hillary Clinton, but only 28% were Republicans voting for Trump. The skew was even more pronounced above $250,000 with Clinton taking 53% of the vote to Donald Trump’s 25%.[1][1][1][1]Vanity Fair couldn’t help but gloat about the fact that Democrats, once vilifying the 1% only a few short years ago… now seem to be quite comfortable there. [2][2][2][2]There's a saying that “the Republicans are the party of the Middle Class, while the Democrats are the party of everyone else” with good reason. Think about Silicon Valley. The culture is socially and economically far Left, as one of its most famous billionaires, Mark Zuckerberg, is showing presidential aspirations on a far Left Democratic Socialist platform. Considering that, and considering that the question is still true, that the very rich and powerful do get more of their policies through and that most people don't like it, why is it that you're blaming Conservatives?Likely, it's that this question frames the argument in a way that leaves one to believe this imbalance of popular power is due to greedy rich Republicans. This mirrors popular Left leaning assumptions and conspiracy theory around names like the nefarious Koch brothers, but these assumptions forget or ignore people like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Larry Ellison the three wealthiest people in America and major sponsors of the Democratic party. This is also not to mention Mark Cuban, Oprah Winfrey, George Soros, or Sheryl Sandberg who showed up to bat for Hillary Clinton in big ways.The fact of the matter is that most Republicans don't command the type of deep power to affect the sorts of change this question alludes to. Your standard Republican aspires to be of upper Middle Class, which presumes a net worth around 1 to 5 million dollars, rich enough to not be worried about money anymore, but not rich enough to not blend into the public, and not enough to establish any sort of multi-generational family dynasty. These people don’t own major corporations. At best, they are very successful employees with very reasonable savings and investment plans, or have ran a small business successfully for many years.Interestingly enough… these are the people paying far more than in taxes than anyone else.US tax code has a progressive tax structure that taxes the highest income earners the most. So those successful employees get hit the hardest. Second are the small business owners. The problem with these people? They are being strapped with overwhelming regulation that prevents them from growth.I have a friend who runs a small business with her husband. They’re very humble people, but I wager they fall in that 1–5M range. When they were trying to grow their business, they hit a brick road at around the 15 employee mark. They became completely inundated with regulation that destroyed their business and nearly ended their marriage. The strategy they adopted was to downsize, but focus on luxury end products in their industry. The net effect? They are doing much better now, along with hundreds of thousands like them that are forced to abandon providing services to the Middle Class, their own class, while providing more goods and services to the extremely wealthy because they themselves can’t run businesses at the level that supports the majority of Americans.The people who can afford to service most Americans are the household names such as major corporations too numerable to mention. The difference between them and my friend is that, while she is focused on running her business, large corporations can (and must) afford themselves large bureaucracies of accountants and lawyers on staff to manage the regulations. Have you ever wondered how we can always seem to be faced with the contradiction of knowing that over two thirds of the United States federal taxes are paid by the top 10% of earners, while stories abound of mega corporations paying almost nothing in corporate taxes?That’s because the majority of taxes paid aren’t paid by corporations, but by individuals. This seems radically inconsistent with progressive mantra, but remember, more billionaires are Democrat. When they say, “tax the rich”, they make no distinction between rich individuals and wealthy corporations, one which they actually do target, and the other which they don’t and haven’t for quite some time.The end result is that the burden for federal and state income does fall on the wealthiest individuals while skipping over most corporations altogether. As you can see, this isn’t a new phenomenon in the slightest, as it seems to have started as a wartime initiative coinciding almost exactly with the start of World War II and also coinciding with the middle of one of the most Progressive presidencies in US history, that of Franklin D. Roosevelt.So whether by default or design, the American tax structure obviously burdens the owners of large corporations far less than it does your average Joe or Jane who starts a modest business or, ironically, is an upper level manager of said large business. It also affords those corporations much more power to affect change politically than it affords the wealthy middle class. Given that small and growing businesses are where the majority of American jobs have traditionally come from, and that these small businesses working en masse are greater drivers of innovation than a few mega-corporations pricing out competition, we have to realize… this is not what Conservatives would have built.This isn’t free market capitalism. The word for this is instead Corporatism. It isn’t to say that our economy is really a corporate oligarchy. No, the people have more power than that, but does seem to create a system that forces the slightly rich to pay for everyone, while the mega rich call all of the shots.Given again that the majority of American billionaires are Democrat, by way of these low tax mega corporations which, as you said, usually get what they want, and given that your average college Progressive continues the duel mantras of “tax the rich” and “pay their fair share”, it should seem odd that Conservatives are to blame for injustice. When it’s the 10% of the nation’s wealthiest individuals from mostly the American middle class paying 71% of the taxes, with precious little help from the obscenely wealthy, why anyone thought that Conservatives deserved the blame is beyond me.This answer isn’t bashing corporations. They have their place and purpose, but since this question was pointed rather accusingly at conservatives, I ask why it happens so much that young progressives demand that corporations pay their fair share in college, but by the time they have power, their policies so often ignore the corporations and focus instead on taxing wealth which might befall the shrinking Middle Class to pay for goods and services of everyone else.***Thank you for reading. If you liked this answer, please upvote and follow The War Elephant. If you want to help me make more content like this, please visit my Patreon Support Page to learn how. All donations greatly appreciated!Footnotes[1] The Rich Vote Republican? Maybe Not This Election[1] The Rich Vote Republican? Maybe Not This Election[1] The Rich Vote Republican? Maybe Not This Election[1] The Rich Vote Republican? Maybe Not This Election[2] Why Democrats Are Becoming the Party of the 1 Percent[2] Why Democrats Are Becoming the Party of the 1 Percent[2] Why Democrats Are Becoming the Party of the 1 Percent[2] Why Democrats Are Becoming the Party of the 1 Percent