Business
Trump eyes end of capital gains tax in 2025
MxM News
Quick Hit:
In a historic announcement that rattled markets and reignited debate over tax policy, President Donald Trump revealed plans to eliminate the capital gains tax starting in 2025. The unprecedented move would allow Americans to retain all profits from asset sales—whether in stocks, real estate, or other investments. Supporters tout it as a bold pro-growth measure, while critics warn it may cause budget strain and market instability.
Key Details:
-
President Trump announced the elimination of capital gains tax effective 2025, describing it as a move to reward success and promote wealth-building.
-
Currently, capital gains are taxed at rates up to 20%, with additional surcharges for high earners.
-
The announcement caused a major rally across financial markets, though critics claim the change favors the wealthy and could disrupt the economy.
Diving Deeper:
At a press conference on Monday, President Trump laid out a sweeping proposal to eliminate the capital gains tax in its entirety, calling it a “long-overdue correction” to what he described as a punitive tax on prosperity. “Why should you be punished for building wealth?” he asked. “This is America—we reward success.” If enacted, the change would allow investors to retain 100% of profits from the sale of assets such as stocks, homes, and businesses, with zero tax liability.
This proposal marks a sharp departure from decades of entrenched U.S. tax policy. Currently, long-term capital gains are taxed at rates ranging from 0% to 20%, with potential surcharges including the 3.8% Net Investment Income Tax for high earners. Trump’s plan would zero out those liabilities entirely starting in the 2025 tax year.
Conservative economists and market analysts have lauded the move as potentially the most transformative supply-side reform since the Reagan era. They argue that removing the tax will unshackle trillions of dollars currently locked in unrealized gains, spurring investment, entrepreneurship, and broader economic dynamism. “This is a game-changer,” said one pro-growth advocate. “It sends a clear message that America is back to being the most investment-friendly nation on Earth.”
Predictably, left-wing critics erupted. One Democratic senator labeled the measure a “grenade” that would detonate the federal budget and widen the wealth gap. Others warned of asset bubbles and increased volatility as investors rush to dump assets ahead of the reform’s implementation. These concerns, however, do not seem to have spooked the markets—at least not yet.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average jumped nearly 600 points following the announcement, while cryptocurrencies surged on expectations of tax-free gains. Real estate portals and trading platforms like Robinhood and E*TRADE saw surges in activity as users began strategizing around the policy’s timing. Online, the announcement triggered a wave of memes and commentary. The hashtag #NoCapGains began trending on X (formerly Twitter), with some calling it a “wealth liberation act” and others denouncing it as “Robin Hood in reverse.”
Legislation to formalize the proposal is expected to hit Congress within weeks. While Republicans have largely expressed support, Democrats are preparing for a fierce battle. It’s unclear whether some establishment Republicans—many of whom have been resistant to bold reform under Trump—will help move the bill forward or slow-walk it in favor of more moderate compromises.
Until the law is officially passed, financial advisors are urging caution. “The promise of zero capital gains tax is tempting,” one planner said, “but don’t bet the farm until it’s signed, sealed, and delivered.”
Still, with the 2025 tax season approaching fast, the stakes are enormous. If passed, Trump’s plan would not only mark one of the most dramatic tax overhauls in modern history—it would redefine the very incentives that drive American investment and wealth accumulation.
Artificial Intelligence
Lawsuit Claims Google Secretly Used Gemini AI to Scan Private Gmail and Chat Data
By Ken Macon
Whether the claims are true or not, privacy in Google’s universe has long been less a right than a nostalgic illusion.
|
When Google flipped a digital switch in October 2025, few users noticed anything unusual.
Gmail loaded as usual, Chat messages zipped across screens, and Meet calls continued without interruption.
Yet, according to a new class action lawsuit, something significant had changed beneath the surface.
We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.
Plaintiffs claim that Google silently activated its artificial intelligence system, Gemini, across its communication platforms, turning private conversations into raw material for machine analysis.
The lawsuit, filed by Thomas Thele and Melo Porter, describes a scenario that reads like a breach of trust.
It accuses Google of enabling Gemini to “access and exploit the entire recorded history of its users’ private communications, including literally every email and attachment sent and received.”
The filing argues that the company’s conduct “violates its users’ reasonable expectations of privacy.”
Until early October, Gemini’s data processing was supposedly available only to those who opted in.
Then, the plaintiffs claim, Google “turned it on for everyone by default,” allowing the system to mine the contents of emails, attachments, and conversations across Gmail, Chat, and Meet.
The complaint points to a particular line in Google’s settings, “When you turn this setting on, you agree,” as misleading, since the feature “had already been switched on.”
This, according to the filing, represents a deliberate misdirection designed to create the illusion of consent where none existed.
There is a certain irony woven through the outrage. For all the noise about privacy, most users long ago accepted the quiet trade that powers Google’s empire.
They search, share, and store their digital lives inside Google’s ecosystem, knowing the company thrives on data.
The lawsuit may sound shocking, but for many, it simply exposes what has been implicit all along: if you live in Google’s world, privacy has already been priced into the convenience.
Thele warns that Gemini’s access could expose “financial information and records, employment information and records, religious affiliations and activities, political affiliations and activities, medical care and records, the identities of his family, friends, and other contacts, social habits and activities, eating habits, shopping habits, exercise habits, [and] the extent to which he is involved in the activities of his children.”
In other words, the system’s reach, if the allegations prove true, could extend into nearly every aspect of a user’s personal life.
The plaintiffs argue that Gemini’s analytical capabilities allow Google to “cross-reference and conduct unlimited analysis toward unmerited, improper, and monetizable insights” about users’ private relationships and behaviors.
The complaint brands the company’s actions as “deceptive and unethical,” claiming Google “surreptitiously turned on this AI tracking ‘feature’ without informing or obtaining the consent of Plaintiffs and Class Members.” Such conduct, it says, is “highly offensive” and “defies social norms.”
The case invokes a formidable set of statutes, including the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the California Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, the Stored Communications Act, and California’s constitutional right to privacy.
Google is yet to comment on the filing.
|
|
|
|
Reclaim The Net is reader-supported. Consider becoming a paid subscriber.
|
|
|
|
Business
Nearly One-Quarter of Consumer-Goods Firms Preparing to Exit Canada, Industry CEO Warns Parliament
Standing Committee on Industry and Technology hears stark testimony that rising costs and stalled investment are pushing companies out of the Canadian market.
There’s a number that should stop this country cold: twenty-three percent. That is the share of companies in one of Canada’s essential manufacturing and consumer-goods sectors now preparing to withdraw products from the Canadian market or exit entirely within the next two years. And this wasn’t whispered at a business luncheon or buried in a consultancy memo. It was delivered straight to Parliament, at the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry and Technology, during its study on Canada’s underlying productivity gaps and capital outflow.
Michael Graydon, the CEO of Food, Health & Consumer Products of Canada, didn’t hedge or soften the message. He told MPs, “23% of our members expect to exit products from the Canadian marketplace within the next two years, because the cost of doing business here has just become unsustainable.”
Unsustainable. That’s the word he used. And when the people who actually make things in this country start using that word, you should pay attention. These aren’t fringe players or hypothetical startups. These are firms that supply the goods Canadians buy every single day, and they’re looking at their balance sheets, their regulatory burdens, the delays in getting anything approved or built, and concluding that Canada simply doesn’t work for them anymore.
What makes this more troubling is the timing. Canada’s investment levels have been falling for years, even as the United States and other competitors race ahead. Businesses aren’t reinvesting in machinery or technology at the rate they once did. They’re not modernizing their operations here. They’re putting expansion plans on hold or shifting them to jurisdictions that move faster, cost less and offer clearer rules. That’s not ideology; it’s arithmetic. If it costs more to operate here, if it takes longer to get a permit, and if supply chains back up because ports and rail lines are jammed, investors will choose the place that doesn’t make growth a bureaucratic mountain climb.
Graydon raised another point that ought to concern anyone who cares about domestic production. Canada’s agrifood sector recorded a sixty-billion-dollar trade surplus last year, one of the brightest spots in the national economy, but according to him that potential is being “diluted by fragmented interprovincial trade and logistics bottlenecks.” The ports, the rail corridors, the entire transport network—choke points everywhere. And you can’t build a productive economy on choke points. Companies can’t scale, can’t guarantee delivery, can’t justify the costs. So they leave.
This twenty-three percent figure is the clearest evidence yet that the problem isn’t theoretical. It’s not something for think-tank panels or academic papers. It is happening at the level that matters most: the decision whether to continue doing business in Canada or move operations somewhere more predictable. And once those decisions are made, they’re very hard to reverse. Capital doesn’t boomerang back out of patriotism. It goes where it can earn a return.
For years, Canadian policymakers have talked about productivity as if it were a moral failing of workers or a mystical national characteristic. It’s neither. Productivity comes from investment—real money poured into equipment, technology, training and expansion. When investment stalls, productivity collapses. And when a quarter of firms in a major sector are already planning their exit, you are not looking at a temporary dip. You are looking at a structural rejection of the business environment itself.
The fact that executives are now openly warning Parliament that they cannot afford to stay is a moment of clarity. It is also a test. Either this country becomes a place where people can build things again—quickly, affordably, competitively—or it continues down the path that leads to empty factories, hollowed-out supply chains and consumers who wonder why the shelves look thinner every year.
Twenty-three percent is not just a statistic. It’s the sound of a warning bell ringing at full volume. The only question now is whether anyone in charge hears it.
Richmond Mayor Warns Property Owners That The Cowichan Case Puts Their Titles At Risk
Bondi and Patel deliver explosive “Clinton Corruption Files” to Congress
ATA Collect $72 Million in Dues But Couldn’t Pay Striking Teachers a Dime
Lack of adequate health care pushing Canadians toward assisted suicide
Federal budget: It’s not easy being green
Sluggish homebuilding will have far-reaching effects on Canada’s economy
A picture is worth a thousand spreadsheets
-
Agriculture2 days agoFederal cabinet calls for Canadian bank used primarily by white farmers to be more diverse
-
Daily Caller16 hours agoDemocrats Explicitly Tell Spy Agencies, Military To Disobey Trump
-
Addictions1 day agoActivists Claim Dealers Can Fix Canada’s Drug Problem
-
Alberta1 day agoEdmonton and Red Deer to Host 2027 IIHF World Junior Hockey Championship
-
Business23 hours agoClimate Climbdown: Sacrificing the Canadian Economy for Net-Zero Goals Others Are Abandoning
-
Indigenous17 hours agoTop constitutional lawyer slams Indigenous land ruling as threat to Canadian property rights
-
Daily Caller2 days ago‘Holy Sh*t!’: Podcaster Aghast As Charlie Kirk’s Security Leader Reads Texts He Allegedly Sent University Police
-
Uncategorized1 day agoCost of bureaucracy balloons 80 per cent in 10 years: Public Accounts