Unconscionable” tax bill

[Lemuel]

The Internal Revenue Service has recently released new data on individual income taxes for calendar year 2014, showing the number of taxpayers, adjusted gross income, and income tax shares by income percentiles . . .

And you believe what the IRS reports?

I have a piece of property I’d love to sell you.

 

[o_mlly]

And you believe what the IRS reports?

I have a piece of property I’d love to sell you.

They have the data. The analysis is reasonable. One can make an FOIA request if one thinks the IRS is deceiving us.

Tell me about the property.

 

[Lemuel]

Five acres in Alabama. It has a buried treasure worth at least $10 million. I’m letting it go for $2 million.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Since we don’t know the final result, it seems to me this is premature.

But one thing we know for sure. No matter what it contains, the Dems will claim it hurts the poor and helps the rich, no matter what the actual result is.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

We can’t afford to give everyone a tax break - according to the GOP.

And you think we can afford to give everyone their special tax break? The GOP is correct.

I didn’t disagree with the GOP on this point. So I think they are correct too. My question was, in view of this statement, which everyone agrees with, why was it necessary to give billionaires any tax break at all? They seemed pretty happy and well-fed under the existing tax code. Why was it necessary to give them any reduction at all, especially if people at the low end of the income scale will have to pay for this twice - once because their taxes will go up, and again when we have to cut services they depend on to keep the budget under control?

So someone has got to lose to pay for the breaks for billionaires, who really really deserve them.

Hyperbole or just sarcasm to make a point?

A little of both…

Either way, the facts just do not support the claim. The IRS reports that “the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined.” It is quite impossible to cut taxes without cutting the taxes of those who actually pay the taxes.

Summary of the Latest Federal Income Tax Data, 2016 Update | Tax Foundation

I said billionaires, not the top 1%. There are about 540 billionaires in the US. That is the top 0.000167% of the US population - a very small part of the top 1%. Why should anyone below them sacrifice so they can have a tax reduction? Can you make a case for the current tax code for billionaires being grossly unfair to that downtrodden and unappreciated group?

 

[JonNC]

Why don’t we just limit government to its constitutional powers? We could get rid of 80 percent of the nonsense we have and the problem would solve itself.

Bingo!

Article 1. Section 8

 

[Lemuel]

I would add to that the 10th amendment.

 

[JonNC]

Why should anyone below them sacrifice so they can have a tax reduction? C

How is allowing them to keep more of their own money a sacrifice for anyone else?

 

[ProVobis]

I’d suggest getting rid of the Fed first as it clearly violates the Constitution but has never been challenged.

No borrowing money to pay for wars not associated with direct aggression.

Among other things.

 

[Lemuel]

I’d suggest getting rid of the Fed first as it clearly violates the Constitution but has never been challenged.

Amen. The Fed isn’t even a government agency.

No borrowing money to pay for wars not associated with direct aggression.

Because war is good for the economy

How about starting with no illegal wars? When was the last time congress declared war?

 

[ProVobis]

You’re right, we don’t know the final result yet, but I’ll bet you anything it will increase interest payment expenses for the future.

Maybe not a bad thing if you don’t mind higher interest rates on top of that.

 

[ProVobis]

(post withdrawn)

 

[Lemuel]

You took the out of my quote. I assume that you know I was being sarcastic?

 

[buffalo]

Billionaires are most likely paying capital gains when they sell a stock. Don’t sell a stock? No capital gains tax. Result - zero tax.

 

[o_mlly]

I said billionaires, not the top 1%. There are about 540 billionaires in the US. That is the top 0.000167% of the US population - a very small part of the top 1%. Why should anyone below them sacrifice so they can have a tax reduction

So far the federal government taxes only one’s income, not one’s capital. If the billionaires do not have a day job (earned income), hold their assets in non interest or dividend paying investments then the tax laws don’t matter. If they don’t sell their assets then no capital gains for the taxman either. Not much point in targeting 540 billionaires; you won’t get much if anything at all.

Can you make a case for the current tax code for billionaires being grossly unfair to that downtrodden and unappreciated group?

? Isn’t making that case part of your position in an effort to re-distribute their assets? Do you propose taxing capital or just plain legalizing the stealing of their wealth? Do you think the federal government is a better steward of redirecting that wealth to the poor?

 

[JonNC]

I’d suggest getting rid of the Fed first as it clearly violates the Constitution but has never been challenged.

No borrowing money to pay for wars not associated with direct aggression.

Among other things.

Agreed on the first. On the second, the constitution calls for a declaration of war, not something as vague as what you stated.

Pay off the debts. Pay off the obligations.
Free citizens on up on retirement and healthcare.
Let States handle schools.

 

[ProVobis]

Don’t sell a stock? No capital gains tax. Result - zero tax.

They are taxed on the dividends, which can be substantial given that’s much of what corporations are dishing out these days.

But even here they are given a break if the dividends are qualified as capital gains.

And you don’t necessarily have to sell a stock; it has to be a taxable event, as when companies file for bankruptcy or merge. If you own an EFT or mutual fund, these events are quite common within the fund itself.

 

[buffalo]

If you had it your way - what tax rate for the billionaires would satisfy you?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

I said billionaires, not the top 1%. There are about 540 billionaires in the US. That is the top 0.000167% of the US population - a very small part of the top 1%. Why should anyone below them sacrifice so they can have a tax reduction

So far the federal government taxes only one’s income, not one’s capital. If the billionaires do not have a day job (earned income), hold their assets in non interest or dividend paying investments then the tax laws don’t matter. If they don’t sell their assets then no capital gains for the taxman either. Not much point in targeting 540 billionaires; you won’t get much if anything at all.

You find one single billionaire who isn’t earning a substantial income from their investments!

Can you make a case for the current tax code for billionaires being grossly unfair to that downtrodden and unappreciated group?

? Isn’t making that case part of your position in an effort to re-distribute their assets? Do you propose taxing capital or just plain legalizing the stealing of their wealth? Do you think the federal government is a better steward of redirecting that wealth to the poor?

I’m not proposing any change at all. As for re-distributing wealth, all taxes do that to some extent. I’m not proposing that we do so any more than we are now. Since you are the one advocating for a change that will benefit billionaires, I think it is up to you to make the case that the change on their behalf is warranted. Show me the injustice currently suffered by these billionaires that justifies a change to the tax code in their favor.

 

[ProVobis]

(post withdrawn)