I think winning that argument would require understanding the loophole. How well do you understand it? I freely admit my grasp of it is quite poor. I’d welcome insight from others.
If they work for the fantasy equivalent of the IRS, they probably understand tax law better than the dragon does.
If youre asking how well I understand the dragon’s argument, its basically arguing that until the assets are actually sold, their value is theoretical and therefore not taxable. While implying that they cant collect tax from the dragon anyway even if it could be taxed because it is hoarding said unsold assets not currency/gold with a well defined value which is a “thats the dragon’s problem not ours” situation.
I think winning that argument would require understanding the loophole. How well do you understand it? I freely admit my grasp of it is quite poor. I’d welcome insight from others.
If they work for the fantasy equivalent of the IRS, they probably understand tax law better than the dragon does.
If youre asking how well I understand the dragon’s argument, its basically arguing that until the assets are actually sold, their value is theoretical and therefore not taxable. While implying that they cant collect tax from the dragon anyway even if it could be taxed because it is hoarding said unsold assets not currency/gold with a well defined value which is a “thats the dragon’s problem not ours” situation.
Dragon murders adventuring party.
Dragon builds a hoard with the funds from selling the magical items
Dragon loans this hoard to another dragon for it to gestate it’s whelplings.
Dragon approaches lich with request for a loan with the lease, horde itself, and location of the whelplings as collateral.
Dragon is granted loan.
Dragon files for bankruptcy. As it is “thousands of gold in debt”.
Kings vizer (also a dragon in disguise) assesses lair for taxable revenue, “it’s lookin like a rummage sale.”
It ain’t me
It ain’t meee
I ain’t no fortunate son.
I love the smell of dragon fire in the morning