> if BTC is negative, then you’d be paying negative taxes on it

Nouriel Roubini implies that carbon tax could mean a negative value. Contrary to income tax, a carbon tax wouldn't be a "negative" tax.

afaik the IRS doesn't pay you on losses. It does balance your revenue and business expenses, but interestingly regulations on crypto investments make them a category on their own. So if you have 0 overall revenue in a year, but earned say 100k from salaried/contract labor employment, but lost 100k on BTC because it reached zero, you still owe the IRS taxes on your 100k revenue. Taxes are so absurd when looking a them more closely. Corporate entities get to offset expenses, only the net profit incur corporate tax on profit; but human entities have all their expenses ignored from the equation. So, buy BTC, and that's the same as gambling or have a serious drug addiction in term of expenses, make a profit and you end up having to pay the crypto tax, and also having to cover the cost of tracking all the transactions that may have occurred between btc and other tokens if you were adventurous and loved experimenting with the overall digital token market.