 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Time for Tax Reform
|
|
|
Subject: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 05 Feb 09 - 11:30 PM Yet another Obama appointee has tax problems in the news. The husband of Hilda Solis paid (duplicate-paid, he thinks) a tax lien on a business he owns. Washington Post article. So at some point is someone finally going to get the message? Read the writing on the wall? Taxes aren't easy. Have those new in the administration listened to the ads for H&R Block out now? "Four out of five returns prepared by other people (not H&R Block, obviously) had mistakes." I've had several years when I didn't get back as much as I thought I would because some formula or rule I thought I was following correctly didn't actually apply to me. (I wonder if they say anything if the mistake was in the favor of the tax payer?) Taxes can be expensive to have prepared, so a lot of people do the work themselves. I do them myself most years because I want to keep track of my personal expenses, including taxes. And even if you have them prepared professionally, you'll note that there is a line on the 1040 for the tax preparer to sign also. They want to know who did the math. This, along with repairing the Medicare drug benefit (written during the Republican administration by and for the drug companies, specifically prohibiting negotiating for lower prices), are two things I haven't heard the Obama folks talk about yet, but they should. They're losing good people because of the appearance of sloppiness, when it is the SYSTEM that is a mess. (And before someone comes along and casts aspersions against this party, we're not hearing about Republican tax difficulties ONLY because they're not the party in power.) Simplifying the tax code would save people time and money, and probably save the government time and money. Why are all of the loopholes and exclusions in there? Because people with influence wanted them in there so they could avoid taxes. If everyone paid their fair share and didn't have to jump through a gazillion hoops to figure out what that amount might be, we'd all be in better shape. My two cents. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: DougR Date: 06 Feb 09 - 12:38 AM Yes, SRS, it IS time for tax reform, but not for the reasons you state. Those individuals chosen by the President to serve in his cabinet are seasoned politicians. They know that they MUST pay their taxes. They are touted (particularly the Secretary of the Treasury)as among the smartest people in the United States, and should need NO simplification of the tax code. They avoided filing taxes, and they broke the law! Do you seriously believe that the former Majority Leader in the United States Senate, Tom Dashel (SP) finds the tax code too difficult to comprehend? Give me a break. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Barry Finn Date: 06 Feb 09 - 02:54 AM Yes Doug, I don't think Tom D does his own taxes, matter of fact NPR already addressed that issue. I agree with SRS, the Tax code is way beyond most of those who don't study this ever changing field. My mother went to the IRS to get her tax rebate for her buying a Prius, they couldn't help her, she never got it but I did. WHenthe people that made the code hire themselves out as pro's to help other wade throught the mine field & they get bombed who's to blame for the fuck up? When a whole grade of school kids consistently fail their class it may not be the class that's at fault. Better go back & check the texts, the teacher, the subject matter & what level they think they're teaching to, and if the subject matter's just to hard for the ordinary seaman to navigate then it's the whole ship that's in trouble, not just the crew running it. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: artbrooks Date: 06 Feb 09 - 06:37 AM And, of course, the sins of the husbands are always visited upon the wives. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: JohnInKansas Date: 06 Feb 09 - 08:35 AM Personally I've always found the parts of the tax code that are applicable to me completely and perfectly transparent, although you do need to actually read the code to get to that point. It's the idiots at the tax office (the official government one) who don't seem willing to try to understand it. Surveys (with test calls) in recent years have found that the "advice" given at the IRS lines is wrong more than half the time. (Of course they may have picked "trick questions" for the surveys?) I learned years ago that when you have a question, you call them (it make take multiple tries and long waits) and pose your question, and then you rebut their answer and tell them what's right. They of course will tell you you don't know what you're talking about. But when you call back three days later, they will have had an "office meeting" and you'll very likely be told exactly what you explained to them on the first call (if you were right). (And you need to call back again about a week later to make sure they remember, and keep a copy of the code sections you quoted to them in the beginning.) The two most commonly "difficult" parts of tax regulations come up only if you have fairly large investments in multiple kinds of "instruments," each of which may be subject to different (sometimes conflicting) rules, or when you hire people to work in your home. It appears that most of the appointees having problems do fall into one or both of these categories, although I haven't seen enough details to be sure. Having known a dozen or so people (including a couple of CPAs and a lawyer or two who were partners/owners) who worked in commercial "tax offices" - like H&R Block, I'd send the government a blank check before I'd let one of them touch my return, althought the "tax return programs" they (and others) publish have generally been "vetted" by enough lawyers to be safely used at home if you read the instructions and follow them carefully. Only people rich enough to need to have an accountant full time should be in danger of "overlooking" something important; and the more accountants one has, the more likely they'll all think "somebody else" should have caught the omission(s). And while the "Ceasar's wife" principle does, and should, apply to persons being proposed for high office, as a standard business practice if the penalty for late payment is less than the rate of return on an investment, many "tax advisors" do suggest (subtly and discreetly of course) that you sometimes can afford to pay later and profit by doing so. It's not something that one can do indefinitely; but it's not an uncommon business practice in some lines of business ("large" investments in particular). Someone not anticipating marrying Ceasar might easily be caught, since before the "proposal" the rules were different. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Rapparee Date: 06 Feb 09 - 08:49 AM Many of the workers in the IRS offices are temps, hired for the tax season and laid off afterward. Yes, they might have degrees in accounting and they might have done the work last year but the tax code changes annually and they might not be "up" on the latest changes. (I know this because when I lived in the Cincinnati orbit it was a Big Thing for unemployed professionals to hear "the IRS is hiring!".) Why not a simple code? No deductions for anything for anyone -- not for kids, not for churches, nothing for nobody. You pay, say, 10 or 15% of everything over $10,000 (to help the truly poor, kids with lemonade stands, etc.). No cap -- you make a million over 10 grand, you pay $150,000 in taxes. During a declared war the amount paid can be adjusted upwards, and the increase stops when the war ends. It would be a truly graduated tax -- the poor pay less than the rich. It would be understandable, it would allow people to plan ahead, and it would put tax preparers and accountants out of business. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: JohnInKansas Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:31 AM Rapaire - Your simple tax works quite nicely as long as everyone works for someone else on a fixed wage and with a regular paycheck - and gets to go to work for the same 8 hours per day 261 days per year (US average). It's total CRAP for people who attempt to operate a business, because there IS NO INCOME until after the supplies are bought, the employees are paid, the machinery is worn out and replaced or the oil is pumped out of the ground, the well goes dry and you've plugged the hole. The deductions are how you figure out whether you've got enough NET INCOME to go to the grocers - and to pay your FAIR share of taxes. You also apparently need to learn the difference between deductions and exemptions. They're two different things, that serve different purposes. But don't feel bad, 'cause apparently most of our "lawmakers" don't have much of a grasp on it either. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: GUEST,Susu's Hubby Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:47 AM Let's stop making excuses for the politicians. It they were republican, you'd be calling for their heads but now that it's a dem.....oh...the tax code is too hard! Well, it doesn't say much for dems that you take that stance. But, Whatever. These guys at least, overlooked, what they had to pay. But when you are dealing with amounts owed to the IRS that are more than what the average joe makes in a year, all I have to say is........... COME ON....YOU CAN'T BE SERIOUS? This is getting just plain comical now. Conan O'Brien doesn't have a chance upside these clowns. But SRS, maybe you are right......maybe they just need more skoolin'. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Rapparee Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:48 AM Nope. I know the different, and system I proposed is based up NET income. I apologize if I used the wrong term -- it's early and I need to get to work. Everybody lives in the country and receives the country's benefits pays toward those benefits. Granted that someone could run their net income to under the lower $10,000 limit, but in the long run that sorts itself out. As for oil depletion, why should you get a tax break for something you've already made a profit upon? You drill for the oil (yes, it's taking a risk but so is any business venture), you pump it out, you sell the oil, and from the amount of the sale you deduct your costs. That leaves you with your net income. A dry hole, or one that's pumped out, produces no oil, hence no sales and no income. The guy who works on the oil rig, like his boss, pays 15% of anything over 10 grand. I would allow deductions -- for tools, if not provided, for example. For education needed for the job or to get another job. Business mileage for a salesman who needs to travel in a personal vehicle. Average (mean) commercial airfare for other business travel (also figured as the basis for deduction on corporate airplanes). But because company cars or airplanes exist for the convenience of the company I would NOT allow a deduction for deterioration. Machinery, too -- replace it with more efficient machinery and your profit base goes up AND you can deduct the cost when figuring your net, which encourages more efficient machinery. If it doesn't work towards increasing the "bottom line" why would you want to do it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Greg F. Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:06 AM And of course no Douged-In-The-Wool, Hubby-Bubby Republican ever screwed up his/her return, found they owed back taxes or (GASP!) cheated on their taxes. A real non-issue, being exploited by the usual NeoCon blatherskates because they can't find anything else to whine about- at the moment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: beardedbruce Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:09 AM Greg F. When they did, they were jumped on here by Anti-Bushites. But that was OK... so, you can't find anything else to whine about- at the moment? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: JohnInKansas Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:22 AM Rap - You're still thinking in terms of wage earners only. for tools, if not provided - provided by whom? I would NOT allow a deduction for deterioration. Machinery, too So if I have to have a computer to do editing for a customer who's a book publisher, it's machinery and I can't deduct it from what the customer pays me? And what's the difference between depreciation and a flat deduction for materials I have to buy to do the job? Depreciation is exactly the same thing as a flat deduction for a required tool, except that you pay it at the same rate that the tool wears out and loses value. If I buy land that I'm pretty sure has oil under, it's worth quite a bit more than if it's already had the oil pumped out. The difference is a cost of pumping the oil out. There are good arguments that the "depletion allowance" is at the wrong rate, but it is a legitimate expense and deserves to be an offset on NET/TAXABLE INCOME. I think you're just trying to put all the small businesses out of business by your thinking that everybody gets paid by the hour and everybody works for an enormous enterprise with a fat-cat CEO. You're also a bit out of touch it seems, since $10,000 net income per year (less than $5/hour for a full time worker after Social Security and Medicare withholding) is below poverty level in most parts of my country. I know quite a few people who pay out almost that much just for medical coverage for one person (which is optional, of course) plus auto insurance for one car (which is required by law). Of course to have insurance (and a car) one needs to have significantly more than $10K per year in income - but only a little more if you sleep in the car to avoid paying rent. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Riginslinger Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:36 AM I don't know of anyone who's been in business who doesn't end up with some kind delinquent tax, form time to time, but when I was doing it, the IRS would send notice after notice before the amount owed turned into a "tax lein." They normally give the tax payer quit a long time to set the record straight, if the tax payer thinks there's something wrong with the claim. The Obama appointees are for the most part in politically powerful positions, and it seems like the IRS is treating them with kid-gloves. When they finally act, they are hard and ruthless--I've experienced that too. And I'm left with the feeling that these appointees have not been treated like those of us who are unconnected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 06 Feb 09 - 11:34 AM You see? It isn't easy. I expected Doug, SuSu's spouse and BB to jump in as they did; I discount their remarks as political blather. They'll be trying to get licks in wherever they can, they always do. Taxes are a mess. I am a single parent, employed in one job, I have a grown and a minor child, a mortgage, I made charitable donations during the year. I pay into medical insurance, etc. I have a retirement account and some savings. You'd think it wouldn't be that difficult, but as I wend my way through the forms there are countless worksheets to navigate to determine if I qualify for this discount or that credit. I have to remember to pour over my paystubs to be sure I've included the extra I pay for health for myself and the kids (but not taking a deduction for what my employer pays). . . The only reason we're not hearing about Republican tax problems is because most of them aren't under the microscope right now. But it isn't any easier for them either. I started this from the point of illustrating with political appointees--but I also mentioned the medicare drug plan. Both are a mess. No thoughts on that? The drug companies are making like bandits and those numerous plans are absurd, there is no need for them. It was put in place intentionally to gouge on prices and to confuse users. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: GUEST,mg Date: 06 Feb 09 - 12:32 PM Absolutely there should be a simpler tax code plus reform. But it is not too much to expect public leaders to have their taxes done by the best CPAs around...especially those who are taking money from various groups. to be on the safe side they should have them double checked by another agency. If someone is being vetted, she should have hers triple, quadruple checked by someone she did not choose. Daschle made millions of dollars and certainly he should have protected himself, although this sounds like an ignorant but innocent mistake. Anyone should. There is absolutely no excuse for him if he actually did his own taxes. None whatsoever. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Rapparee Date: 06 Feb 09 - 12:33 PM Under that assumption, JiK, farmers should get a depletion allowance for certain crops and pay taxes on fertilized fields: if I grow corn it depletes the soil (depletion allowance), but if I fertilize the field (even with the manure from my cows) I make it possible to keep the field in production longer and so I should pay on it. And how do I determine the depletion allowance for my cattle manure? It's a salable product.... Actually, I don't think that ANY tax system is fair to everyone. It can't be. We can only do our best. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 06 Feb 09 - 01:05 PM No excuse for making mistakes, Mary? That is a contradiction in terms. Mistakes by definition happen unintentionally. And "experts" also make mistakes. That's my point. We're losing access to some good people because of taxes. If those weren't part of the picture, would they have made it through the vetting process? Maybe not. But taxes are a handy tool for those who want to flog the party in power right now. Knowing that they aren't under than microscope. Very convenient, but it also should be viewed as writing on the wall. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: JohnInKansas Date: 06 Feb 09 - 01:06 PM Rap - The farmer may deplete the field, but it's something that can be restored, and the farmer gets to deduct the cost of the fertilizer and the fuel to spread it with - because it's a cost of doing business that has to be deducted from his gross income in order to come up with what he actually has left to pay his taxes with. He also can deduct (depreciate) the tractor to plow the cow manure back into the fields if he wants a more organic fertilizer. "Simplifying the calculations" of costs vs gross income to come up with the net/taxable income is inherently unfair if the business itself is in any way more complex that slitting the envelope to read your paycheck. If you can't handle the tax return - or hire someone competent to help you - then you shouldn't be in business. And it's only fair that the help you hire to get the tax return done should be, and is, deductible as a cost of doing business, even if your only business is spending the check you pull out of the envelope every week or so. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Riginslinger Date: 06 Feb 09 - 01:09 PM A simpler tax code is way past due, but the fact remains. Back taxes do not turn into liens without months and months of warnings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: GUEST,mg Date: 06 Feb 09 - 01:33 PM No excuse for a man making millions of dollars, taking stuff perhaps in trade, maybe not, not hiring the best professionals around to do this for him, and then having it checked by an outside party. No excuse. He knows how complicated it is surely. He knows how this can cause scandals and there are all sorts of things to be overlooked, like nanny taxes etc. It was stupid. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Bill D Date: 06 Feb 09 - 02:37 PM "If they were republican, you'd be calling for their heads ..." Don't kid yourself...there are many Republicans out there who are delinquent in taxes...they just aren't getting the scrutiny right now. Since there are many MORE Republicans making big money in business & lobbying, etc., tax dodges are not unknown to them. *I* am making no excuses for carelessness, and Daschle, who is widely regarded as honest, has withdrawn to quiet things down.... he paid the money. The tax code? Yeah...it has been overblown for many years now, but much of it was written during REPUBLICAN administrations and is designed to favor rich folks who can afford clever accoutants. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: heric Date: 06 Feb 09 - 03:36 PM I think Rapaire is talking about (the beauty of) depreciating appreciating assets (like rental property.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stringsinger Date: 06 Feb 09 - 04:28 PM Corporate execs know how to game the system so that they don't pay much tax. They don't have "mea culpas" like Daschle. They just cheat the taxpayer. Under Bush the IRS stood for Internal Robbery System. It needs to be reformed drastically. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:33 PM The fact that so many relatively low-income wage-earners have to go through so many steps in order to get back money means a lot of them may not know or bother to do it. The complicated forms are probably quite profitable for the government, off-setting the lack of taxes collected from the colossally rich. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Riginslinger Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:38 PM "The complicated forms are probably quite profitable for the government, off-setting the lack of taxes collected from the colossally rich." Especially, apparently, well connected Democrats! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: bald headed step child Date: 07 Feb 09 - 01:37 AM Obama has mentioned in several speeches in the last year that the tax code is too complicated, and needs to be simplified. It is on his radar, there just seem to be a few things a little higher on the priority list. Incidentally, those who favor HR Blockhead should know a few things about them. The offices in the town where I live are the largest in a several state region, and have absolutely no CPA's on their payroll. The reason they are so willing to go with you for an audit is because around 70% of the people audited by the IRS actually owe less tax than they thought. Among businesses that number flips with the majority owing more than they thought. A friend of mine several years ago had them do his taxes on his trucking business, 1 truck owner operator. He was not satisfied with the numbers they gave him so he had a CPA go through everything again at a cost of a few hundred dollars. The difference in the tax owed was around $17,000. I don't know about you, but in my opinion that is a pretty big chunk of change. As for the Republicans and their taxes. It seems most of them make enough that they don't have to pay any taxes under the current rules. Most of us in the middle class pay a larger percentage of our income on various taxes than the top 2% pay on theirs, while they reap the most benefit from the infrastructure that we pay for. The ultra rich in this country already enjoy the lowest tax rates of any developed country on the planet, and all they can do is call for more tax cuts. THAT IS WHAT CAUSED THIS MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE!!! BHSC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Bobert Date: 07 Feb 09 - 07:51 AM There's nothing wrong with the tax code for most folks because they don't make enough money to worry much about deductions... Where the tax code gets tricky is for the upper 10% of wage earners because it is filled with tricky loopholes that other rich people, i.e. Congress, have put in to help themselves and their big donors... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Greg F. Date: 07 Feb 09 - 09:28 AM Per: BB so, you can't find anything else to whine about- at the moment? Nothing that can compare to the latest puerile & assnine BuShite NeoCon whining about Obama taking his suit jacket off in the Oval Office. My god, what is the mental age of these imbeciles? Are they forver stuck at 12 years old? Did they never get out of the Seventh Grade? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 07 Feb 09 - 11:50 AM Weekend Edition Saturday clip Scott Simon nailed it on this tax code mess. Give him a "10" for perfect illustration of the problem. Bobert, I don't know about your taxes, but I don't earn much and I have to jump through a whole bunch of hoops for this credit and that deduction, etc., every year. I don't earn enough to take my taxes to a preparer unless there is a complication (like doing estate stuff), and I want to know what is going on with them. And what is going on is a complicated mess, on the part of the government. Rube Goldberg couldn't have designed a more idiotic, complex set of forms to have to prepare. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: bald headed step child Date: 07 Feb 09 - 12:22 PM Bobert, I have to respectfully disagree. I am a LONG way from the top 10%. Last year the difference between hiring a qualified accountant and just filling it out and sending it in was the difference between $56k and $28k in actual taxable income. If that puts me in the top 10%, I feel sorry for the other 90. All of that involved a lot of paperwork and forms and programs I had never heard of and I doubt that you have either. The tax code is a real problem. BHSC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 09 Feb 09 - 10:10 PM About Those Taxes is an essay by Michel Martin on a program called Tell Me More we're now getting on KERA-FM out of Dallas. You can listen to it or read it at the link. It starts: A few years ago, a friend of mine went to work in the Clinton White House. It wasn't one of the big-name jobs, but it was a big deal to him. He was a not-very-well-off kid raised by a hard-working single mom. He had gotten a good education on scholarships and dreamed of doing something to give back, to make life better for kids and for families like the one he'd grown up in. He saw the job as a way he could do his bit and, sure, see a bit of the glamorous side of Washington. The problem was his friends, one in particular whom I also knew, who had no idea why his old buddy was no longer so available for impromptu barbecues and golf games and long chinwags on the phone. The old friend had never held a high-pressure job, certainly not in the White House. "He can't be that busy," he would grumble. Well, actually, I tried to explain, he is that busy. I had covered the previous administration, so I knew a bit about the job our mutual friend was doing, and I knew about the days that started as the sun was coming up, the 200 phone messages he would have gotten by lunchtime and the phone calls to friends and family that would end with a "gotta go" instead of a "goodbye" when his boss walked into the room. I have been thinking about this as I have been thinking about the last couple of weeks' arguments over executive pay and the tax foibles that have undone the president's nominees. [snip] SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Riginslinger Date: 10 Feb 09 - 09:30 PM SRS - Michel Marin is one of those people I normally sit up and pay attention to. And I think she's right to a point, but there are some problems with this. Nancy Killifer was liened for not paying a Washington DC unemployment tax on domestic help. I'm assuming this has something to do with DC not being a state, so they handle unemployment compensation a little differently, but how did it get to the point where her real property was liened. That seems pretty weird to me. Maybe her illegal help was illegally in the country, and she didn't want that to surface. I don't know, but it seems really strange. As far as Tom Daschle is concerned. It's believable that he didn't know the other party was writing the car off as an expense. If the other party was simply absorbing the cost, there would be no liability to Daschle, but he must have gotten notices over and over from the IRS--I've been through this; I know how it works--and he simply ignored them. That too is hard to explain. In the end, the Killifer thing is the most puzzling. One can only wonder if there was something more there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: dick greenhaus Date: 10 Feb 09 - 10:35 PM Maybe someone will explain to me why dividends and interest are taxed at a lower rate than earned income? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Riginslinger Date: 10 Feb 09 - 10:54 PM If they are held for a certain period of time, they are taxed at a capital gains rate rather than earned income. I think they are taxed at the same rate if they are simply turned over. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: DougR Date: 11 Feb 09 - 12:32 AM Well, Greg F., I have never been informed by the IRS that I have failed to file or pay income tax ever. Are you excusing the current Secretary of the Treasury simply because he is a Democrat? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 11 Feb 09 - 12:37 AM Did you fail to pay taxes, DougR, and is this remark telling the world that they didn't catch it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Liz the Squeak Date: 11 Feb 09 - 05:12 AM Speaking as an employee of the Tax Office (albeit one in the UK, not the US), we will get you... eventually... but we will get you! You can escape everything except death and taxes. :D (Maybe if they didn't keep changing the wretched codes and working practices in a vain attempt to 'streamline' services and 'rationalise productivity' (i.e., get more work out of fewer people for less money) then everyone might have a better chance of working with them! That is, if your IRS is anything like our HMRC....) LTS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Greg F. Date: 11 Feb 09 - 09:19 AM Doug, can you at least TRY from time to time not to act like a complete idiot? Even should you not succeed, the experience might be worth the effort. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Feb 09 - 09:23 AM Greg F. You could at least try to attack the point that Doug makes, rather than attack Doug. That is, if you think that you have a valid point, and are not a complete idiot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Greg F. Date: 11 Feb 09 - 11:07 AM Ah, but you see, B-B, Douggie ISN'T MAKING ANY POINT AT ALL. He, like his idol Rush Limbaugh, thinks he's being amusing and clever. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Feb 09 - 11:10 AM He is making the point that some of us DO pay our taxes and expect that those who seek to govern us will do the same. You think you are being amusing and clever, but fail to do so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Greg F. Date: 11 Feb 09 - 03:38 PM Is THAT what he's doing, Bruce? Well. thanks for the interpretation- and I'm sure that Douggie thanks you as well- even tho that's not even remotely close to what he actually said. Are you two speaking in some sort of secret BuShite code, only intelligible to NeoCon initiates? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: beardedbruce Date: 11 Feb 09 - 03:50 PM If I talked Shite, I am certain YOU would understand. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 11 Feb 09 - 04:19 PM People who do pay their taxes regularly and on time may or may not be paying all their owe, but more likely, they're not getting back all that they might recover if they know that forms to file. It's a mess. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Feb 09 - 02:27 PM I deleted a number of messages from the end of this thread because they were insults or responses to insults. I should probably delete more, but they're not as nasty as the ones I deleted. Try being nicer, people. Don't call people names - that's childish. Now, how about talking about tax reform? I deducted my contribution to Mudcat one year, because Max thought he was going to get it qualified for tax deductions. As it turned out, I don't think I made enough money that year to have to pay taxes, anyhow. Does that mean I'm not eligible for a political appointment? A lot of tax items are arguable. I tend to take deductions that are to my advantage, even though I know they might be questioned in an audit. I've never been audited. Maybe I'll be more careful if I get on the audit list. As for property tax and other tax liens, they often aren't an indication that the taxpayer is a deadbeat - they're just fodder for negotiation. I've reviewed hundreds of taxpayer records on government appointees. Oftentimes, the government's demand is pure speculation until the matter has been settled in court or dealt with by agreement between the taxpayer and auditor. Time and time again, I had to deal with tax liens from the State of California that were totally invalid and speculative. Don't be too quick to call the taxpayer a deadbeat or tax evader. If it hasn't been proved in court, he/she isn't. Most of the political appointee clearances I did were in 1981, at the beginning of the Reagan Administration. Reagan took a lot of people who had worked for him when he was governor of California. Since I was the investigator in charge in Sacramento, I got to do the more important cases. Yes, there were a few (mostly wealthy) political appointees who did some outrageous things with their taxes, but most were fine or just had minor discrepancies. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: akenaton Date: 12 Feb 09 - 03:56 PM The point is surely the one made by Hubby, that the Obama supporters on this thread are hypocrits. They would certainly have crucified any administration of Bush's in which so many turned out to be crooks. The trouble is that these people have started to believe their own propaganda, having transfered the euphoria they feel for Mr Obama to a party which is just like its opposite number....full of corrupt politicians..... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: akenaton Date: 13 Feb 09 - 03:36 PM In the UK, the tax ststem is heavily slanted against employed people. These folks pay tax weekly on a "Pay as you earn" basis, the tax rate being layered according to status, they have virtually no way of affecting the amount of tax they pay. Income Tax for a married couple with no children is over 20% of earnings. The very high earners, although on a slightly higher tax rate are able to manipulate their high income to avoid tax. The self employed have expenses to set against tax and use thr "black economy" extensively. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Teribus Date: 14 Feb 09 - 07:15 AM Flat rate tax of 10% on earnings which everybody pays VAT at 10% on everything sold No tax on savings No Death Duties or Inheritance Tax |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: pdq Date: 14 Feb 09 - 12:51 PM I was looking at a CD on eBay yesterday and noticed the statement that sales tax was 10.5% This applies only to residents of the state in which the item is being sold, at least for now. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: bald headed step child Date: 15 Feb 09 - 06:50 AM That is part of the problem in many state budgets. Sales tax revenues are down because a cd that was once purchased in a store and generated sales tax, is now purchased online with no tax. Add up all the items now purchased online and you come up with a big chunk of change. Some states charge the seller their rate even if they can't collect it from the buyer, so they have to sell for more to make up the difference. Not really a level playing field. BHSC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 15 Feb 09 - 12:52 PM The point is surely the one made by Hubby, that the Obama supporters on this thread are hypocrits. Ake, you've (deliberately) missed the point, as did SH. The only reason we're not hearing about Republicans who are no doubt equally entangled in tax discrepancies is because most of them aren't coming under the public spotlight. But they have the same problems. There are lots of loopholes but there are also lots of pitfalls in the tax codes that just plain aren't fair. They need to be simplified and corrected to more adequately reflect the life and activities of wage earners and investors. Every time someone proposes another credit, I wince. Like offering to give back money at the end of the year if some impoverished family will cough up the cash all year long to buy mandated private (for profit) health insurance. This is the Republicans saying "let the private insurance companies continue to take their profits first and provide stingy care with the rest, and then let the federal government lose tax revenues by offering a credit to those individuals who paid into private insurance companies for those mandated services." It's ludicrous, it is obvious, but somehow, it kept getting proposed. The reason people came down so hard on Hillary when Bill was first in office and she started examining health care was that she didn't want the private for-profit companies in there calling the shots. So those companies slammed her every way they could think of, and people in general didn't catch on that it wasn't REALLY the public who objected to what she was doing, it was that they were manipulated by advertising and "study groups." People not paying close attention couldn't see through the insurance company propaganda and hear anything beyond the protests of idiot radio hacks like Limbaugh. So as a result the Bush administration tried to bolster plans that benefited private insurance companies (and didn't they do a brilliant job with the medicare drug plan that did go through, in which it was prohibited that any bargaining for lower drug prices could occur and confusion is the objective?) No doubt about it, the elders in this nation got phucked by Bush and the drug plans. The work that income taxes are being asked to do are mostly to obfuscate the stay-rich schemes of private industry and their Republican cronies in office. So now while there is at least a two-year period when Democrats are in control, they need to make a serious attempt to eliminate this outlandish behavior. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Susu's Hubby Date: 15 Feb 09 - 09:12 PM I don't think I missed the point at all. I do believe that tax reform is severely needed. But to help those that need it. Not so Obama's appointments can get the lavish positions that they want and not be held to the same standards by which their constituents are held. But that's my take on it. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 16 Feb 09 - 02:32 PM You will never "get it." Critical thinking is necessary, not your partisan regurgitation of talking points. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Riginslinger Date: 16 Feb 09 - 02:41 PM Personally, I think Ron Paul has the right idea on tax reform. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Susu's Hubby Date: 18 Feb 09 - 06:22 PM Rahm may need a little help as well....... Still....more change we can believe in? Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: bald headed step child Date: 19 Feb 09 - 05:29 AM If you want equality SH, we can go back and talk about the convicted felon from Alaska getting a standing ovation from his fellow Republicans on the floor of the Senate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Susu's Hubby Date: 19 Feb 09 - 07:14 AM Equality is not the problem, BHSC. Accountability is what's at stake here. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 19 Feb 09 - 12:39 PM The New York Post is about as yellow a rag as you can find out there. Great place [not] for authoritative sources, SH. I know of a lot of people with unusual housing arrangements in D.C. because of the high rent prices, particularly when one actually lives someplace else and maintains a mortgage and household there. This isn't news. SRS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Susu's Hubby Date: 19 Feb 09 - 05:04 PM That's funny. People used to say that about the National Enquirer, also. Ask John Edwards what he thinks about the N.E. now. Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 19 Feb 09 - 05:32 PM That doesn't make the Post any more authoritative, though, does it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Susu's Hubby Date: 19 Feb 09 - 08:02 PM We'll see..... Just keep watchin' and stay tuned..... Hubby |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: Stilly River Sage Date: 19 Feb 09 - 10:04 PM How about just "think for yourself." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Time for Tax Reform From: GUEST,Tasha Date: 19 Mar 09 - 05:27 AM At last Economic migrants and students coming to the UK from outside the EU will have to pay a £50 levy towards the costs of the public services instead of us paying for them. But the £70 million which it is expected the "migrant tax" will raise over the next two years was dismissed by a pressure group as "a drop in the ocean" compared to the sums of taxpayers' money spent on them. As usual the Government is risking anti-migrant sentiments from old hippies. On the other hand many are suggesting that immigrants place strains on schools, the police and the NHS and should pay for these services. |
|
Subject: Stupid Question From: GUEST,Lesceamshaw Date: 02 Apr 09 - 11:20 PM Hey everyone... how do I search for more than one word in other posts, so that it returns only posts with those two words?
-Joe Offer, Forum Moderator- |
