Tim Sweeney: Tax bill would likely end founder control of independent companies
I think the comments here miss a couple of factors.<p>First, and primarily, Tim Sweeny states: &quot;If this tax scheme had been place, I’d have been forced to liquidate nearly my entire ownership.&quot; This is absolutely false.<p>The proposed law (legislative text available here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.finance.senate.gov&#x2F;chairmans-news&#x2F;wyden-unveils-billionaires-income-tax" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.finance.senate.gov&#x2F;chairmans-news&#x2F;wyden-unveils-...</a>) would not apply the tax scheme to Epic Games. At all.<p>See Section 491, which applies the new tax scheme to &quot;tradable covered assets&quot;, and Section 497 which defines &quot;Tradable Covered Assets&quot;. Those are defined assets traded on established securities markets or readily available on secondary markets. Epic Games is a privately held company, and not traded on established securities markets or readily available on secondary markets.<p>Additionally, the law allows each person to designate up to $1B of normally &quot;tradable covered assets&quot; as &quot;nontradable covered assets&quot;. Which means if this law <i>did</i> apply to Tim Sweeny, it wouldn&#x27;t have impacted his holdings by as much as he implies, as $1B of his assets is removed from his &quot;assets&quot; at the start of the calculation. This significantly reduces the amount of shares he would have to liquidate to cover his take burden.