WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

Since it's tax day...

HotRod82

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,937
Reaction score
7,135
...and the Bundy Ranch saga is never going to be resolved on these boards.

Here is something to consider.


http://thebea.st/1n7S8JM

I like this one as well.

http://ctj.org/ctjreports/2014/04/who_pays_taxes_in_america_in_2014.php

Here is something I do not understand...Those critical of corps not paying their fair share seem to forget where the corps would get the money to pay those taxes. The corps would get it from their customers, so they would simply build the tax into the end user price resulting in the cost of their goods going up. Corps do not pay taxes.....their customers do. The corp tax rate should be ZERO, they should also be able to import ALL profits from overseas tax free. The money will be taxed eventually.....Pay it to the shareholders, it gets taxed. Pay it out in bonuses, it gets taxed. Pay it out in wages, it gets taxed. Buy new equipment for the factory, it gets taxed. So in conclusion, why not make the corp tax rate zero and tax those nasty unfair profits on the backside when they get paid out?
 

pronstar

President, Dallas Chapter
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
34,461
Reaction score
40,890
^^^ make all income tax go away, and just have consumption taxes on the shit we buy
 

Yellowboat

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2007
Messages
16,110
Reaction score
6,367
^^^ make all income tax go away, and just have consumption taxes on the shit we buy

So becuase I spend several hundred thousand a year on building materials, I should pay more then a paper pusher that produces nothing?
 

Roaddogg 4040

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2007
Messages
2,619
Reaction score
435
The biggest problem that I see with the flat/fair tax systems is that they start out with a number that is way to high.

Steve
 

RodnJen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
6,044
So what I am reading is that everyone should pay a reasonable amount as long as special interest aren't carving up the tax code? Consumption taxes are fine, but they tend to be regressive and where along the food chain do you start?
 

Racey

Maxwell Smart-Ass
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
21,307
Reaction score
45,373
The first link is no big surprise, publicly traded corporations are under legal obligation to maximize value, and mitigate losses, for the shareholders, this includes tax liability, So they use every available deduction and credit allowed, not to mention that any profit's that are left over are usually double taxed, first they are taxed via corporate income tax, then they are taxed as income or capital gains (depending on the circumstances) to the shareholders when they arrive as dividends. Or they can take the income and re-invest into the growth of the company and write it off....

Secondly many smaller companies will pay 100% of their left over 'profit' as salaries/bonuses to the executives to avoid double taxation, those people then end up paying their income bracket in taxes on those earnings, that's where the majority of the '50% of corporations pay no corporate tax' comes from. This is literally small business 101..... It's as basic as Asset vs Liability.

The second link pretty shows in black and white that the richest pay the vast majority of taxes, in total value, and percentage, any way you cut it, they are the ones supporting the system...

Personally i think most working people in this country spend to much on taxes, on all levels, and the tax code is a huge mess and complete obfuscation scam, but i will never fault anyone for doing everything in their power to mitigate their own tax liability, that's just being smart.
 

RCDave

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
9,953
Reaction score
15,825
Complete BS. I've been a corporate banker for over 25 years. Never seen ANY corporation not pay SUBSTANTIAL annual income taxes (typically 40-50%).

The power of distorted liberal media.
 

RodnJen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
6,044
Complete BS. I've been a corporate banker for over 25 years. Never seen ANY corporation not pay SUBSTANTIAL annual income taxes (typically 40-50%).

The power of distorted liberal media.

And all this time I thought you were a pension expert.:D
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
21,174
Reaction score
20,146
The second link is interesting.

If you read the footnote, taxes includes all taxes to include payroll taxes with respect to the articles analysis.

Payroll taxes are a specific levy, mandated contribution, or a mandatory savings plan for healthcare and retirement benefits when one retires. They are technically, not income taxes.

The data shows the lower end paying this big number in "taxes" when in reality, the total payroll contributions for a person earning 14,000 per year is not anywhere near enough to support the healthcare and the retirement benefits they get when they reach the age where they are eligible to receive benefits, let alone income taxes. Factually, if you only earn 14,000, one pays nothing in income taxes and ends up receiving an earned income credit, resulting in negative income taxes. Yet in this article and it's table, it assumes that contributions toward one's medicare and social security, is income tax.

Basically, the article is a propaganda piece about how the lower end pays a lot towards all of government when in reality, they do not even contribute enough to cover their own expected medicare and social security costs let alone a portion of other government costs.

But then again, we're just re-arranging the deck chairs with this type of debate.
 

Paul65k

Schiada Baby.......Yeah!!
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
13,512
Reaction score
6,916
Breaking personal update on income tax filing;

I just received a notice that my tax return for 2012 is being audited by the IRS.

They are questioning how many dependents I claimed.
I guess it was because of my response to the question: "List all dependents?"

I replied:

12 million illegal immigrants; 3 million crack heads;
42 million unemployed people on food stamps,
2 million people in over 243 prisons;
Half of Mexico ; and 535 persons in the U.S. House and Senate."
1 useless President.


Evidently, this was NOT an acceptable answer.

I KEEP ASKING MYSELF . . . WHO THE HELL DID I MISS?
 

RodnJen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
6,044

pronstar

President, Dallas Chapter
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
34,461
Reaction score
40,890
FANTASTIC article. Good luck taking away Medicare and social security from some of the Tea Party supporters. They did pay into it, aren't they "entitled"?

I'm not clear what the point is of your post?
Just a random jab?

While it's lumped into the "entitlement" category, SSI isn't an entitlement when you are withdrawing less money out of it, than you paid into it. It's a retirement insurance plan that, theoretically, you fund thru payroll deductions wether you want to or not.

When SSI coffers and my taxes are raided to pay other entitlement benefits to people who don't contribute anything into it, never plan to, and never will...I gotta think even you aren't super stoked about that?

I'm all for a "hand-up". Lord knows there are people going thru tough times even though they are willing to work.

I'm not really for a "hand-out" for people who just want to game the system and have no desire to work.
 

mjc

Retired Neighbor
Joined
Jan 3, 2008
Messages
11,768
Reaction score
8,772
FANTASTIC article. Good luck taking away Medicare and social security from some of the Tea Party supporters. They did pay into it, aren't they "entitled"?

I paid for those things all my working life(over 40 years )If they give me all of what me and my employers put in over those years I wouldn't ask for anything else from them.
 

koenig

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
4,650
Reaction score
648
I'll bet the U.S implements a federal national sales tax before it increases taxes on the rich and corporations.
 

RodnJen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
6,044
I'm not clear what the point is of your post?
Just a random jab?

Not a random jab, the article was a bit righteous.

I paid for those things all my working life(over 40 years )If they give me all of what me and my employers put in over those years I wouldn't ask for anything else from them.

It is a social program, not a retirement program you likely won't see all that was put in on your behalf.

I'm all for a more efficient system and reducing abuse.
 

Paul65k

Schiada Baby.......Yeah!!
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
13,512
Reaction score
6,916
I'll bet the U.S implements a federal national sales tax before it increases taxes on the rich and corporations.
Yeah you're probably right.........no way we could possibly look at taxing the 49% of the people that pay no personal income tax at all.......:hmm
 

Racey

Maxwell Smart-Ass
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
21,307
Reaction score
45,373
I'll bet the U.S implements a federal national sales tax before it increases taxes on the rich and corporations.

That's exactly why i can't support a national sales tax, or VAT, we'll end up like europe and the UK, where you end up paying income AND sales tax....

They won't increase corporate taxes, we already have the highest corporate taxes in the 1st world, and big companies already set up offshore subsidiaries to take the tax burden out of the US. They send it to Ireland, Switzerland, The Netherlands, the Carribean. Small companies pay out their end of year profits as bonuses to avoid paying corporate AND personal income taxes.

The best thing that could be done in the US is to just do away with the Corporate income tax... but in some ways the damage is done, because companies will be too scared to repatriate capital knowing that at any time, at the whim of some politicians, it could all be taken away again.... Uncertainty about the future business landscape has a lot to do with those decisions.
 

pronstar

President, Dallas Chapter
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
34,461
Reaction score
40,890
That's exactly why i can't support a national sales tax, or VAT, we'll end up like europe and the UK, where you end up paying income AND sales tax....

They won't increase corporate taxes, we already have the highest corporate taxes in the 1st world, and big companies already set up offshore subsidiaries to take the tax burden out of the US. They send it to Ireland, Switzerland, The Netherlands, the Carribean. Small companies pay out their end of year profits as bonuses to avoid paying corporate AND personal income taxes.

The best thing that could be done in the US is to just do away with the Corporate income tax... but in some ways the damage is done, because companies will be too scared to repatriate capital knowing that at any time, at the whim of some politicians, it could all be taken away again.... Uncertainty about the future business landscape has a lot to do with those decisions.

Funny thing about corporate taxes...guess who ultimately pays them?
Consumers, its baked-into the cost of the good we buy.
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
21,174
Reaction score
20,146
I have been the chairman of the audit committee for three public companies. We would spend all sorts of time on transfer pricing so that our US taxable income was as legally low as possible. We would spend literally millions of dollars in fees minimizing our US taxes. In one company we would have 200 million in cash, none of it in the US so we would have to borrow in the US because if we repatriated it, we would owe tax. it is a colossal waste of resources and talent.

I have spent a lot of time during three separate trips meeting with congressmen talking about the issue with other public company directors. Repeatedly all of us would say the tax revenue was simply rate times base. Lower the rate to something less than what we were paying in other jurisdictions, the base would grow, and the collections would come in. In addition, capital would come back to the US and we could grow the US base even more.

Most of the republicans get it. The democrats to a man and woman would say that the rate had to be at a "fair" number period. Math did not matter. I always thought the goal was to get taxes collected? I was always wrong.

So, the democrats, sticking to a thought about fairness that defies sixth grade math, create a system where the US ends up with less revenue, less jobs and less investment.

To this day I do not get it, but I guess I am just a dumb bean counter.
 

530RL

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
21,174
Reaction score
20,146
Yeah you're probably right.........no way we could possibly look at taxing the 49% of the people that pay no personal income tax at all.......:hmm

Come on Paul, that is no way to get elected..........
 

Old Texan

Honorary Warden #377 Emeritus - R.I.P.
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
24,479
Reaction score
25,978
I have been the chairman of the audit committee for three public companies. We would spend all sorts of time on transfer pricing so that our US taxable income was as legally low as possible. We would spend literally millions of dollars in fees minimizing our US taxes. In one company we would have 200 million in cash, none of it in the US so we would have to borrow in the US because if we repatriated it, we would owe tax. it is a colossal waste of resources and talent.

I have spent a lot of time during three separate trips meeting with congressmen talking about the issue with other public company directors. Repeatedly all of us would say the tax revenue was simply rate times base. Lower the rate to something less than what we were paying in other jurisdictions, the base would grow, and the collections would come in. In addition, capital would come back to the US and we could grow the US base even more.

Most of the republicans get it. The democrats to a man and woman would say that the rate had to be at a "fair" number period. Math did not matter. I always thought the goal was to get taxes collected? I was always wrong.

So, the democrats, sticking to a thought about fairness that defies sixth grade math, create a system where the US ends up with less revenue, less jobs and less investment.

To this day I do not get it, but I guess I am just a dumb bean counter.

If nothing else, the Dems and Libs were very well trained. Their stance does not falter in the face of truth, fact, or common sense calculations. They have their own science to back their theories and have removed mathematics completely as it doesn't lie to suit their needs.:rolleyes
 
Top