Most of their income is controllable. The rich all use personal corporations. They pay themselves when they determine they can use other accounting tricks to offset it and pay nothing.
Obama to propose $1.5 trillion in new tax revenue
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
That's depressing.
Although it does remind me that I have strawberry cheesecake in the fridge.
Absolutely!
And it's only going to cost the American taxpayer 1.5 trillion. Small price to pay.
No I think the answer is going to be very painful. I think it will be necessary to make cuts and it is time to start looking very hard at debt.
Soon it will be too costly to ship goods from places like India and China with fuel prices having nowhere to go but up.
Therefore it is time to revisit trade agreements and doing what is best for North America. Of course none of this will happen under Obama's watch.
@ retired CCF
""But, IF he gets it through, and the uber rich have to pay more, he might be advised not to partake in a motorcade through Dallas in an open car""
Never said they would have to. Read the above again. Get your 3rd grade teacher to point out the "if" in the sentence. Or have someone read it to you. You keep moving your lips.
The last part of the sentence was a small attempt at humour, which, as usual, is completely lost on you.
Nice troll, though. Keep trying.
""But, IF he gets it through, and the uber rich have to pay more, he might be advised not to partake in a motorcade through Dallas in an open car""
Never said they would have to. Read the above again. Get your 3rd grade teacher to point out the "if" in the sentence. Or have someone read it to you. You keep moving your lips.
The last part of the sentence was a small attempt at humour, which, as usual, is completely lost on you.
Nice troll, though. Keep trying.
They still have to take income out for personal use. Also, every corp has to pay as well on the income generated, so the scenario that you paint shows an opportunity for the IRS to collect twice on that money.
Guys like Buffet handily suggest that they don't pay as much tax as 'their secretary', but the reality is that when Buffet wants 5 or 10 million for his own personal use, all he needs to do is donate that amount to a charitable org (recognized by the IRS) and the his "income" is offset and not taxed.
If Buffet was to take on that same amount of income without an offsetting donation, he would be subject to Federal, State and Muni taxes that would likely exceed 50% (depending on State/Muni jurisdiction).
Make no mistake, Obama is playing on the lack of knowledge of the average taxpayer and lying to them to garner some form of support.
I thought you had me on ignore?
What's it gonna be?
Look dude you can't have it both ways. If you ignore someone, you really have to ignore them and I'm cool with that, but keep in mind ignoring someone does not insulate you from being criticized for making a ridiculous post.
Or a poor attempt at humour.
Look at balance sheets and find all the goodwill that goes up during the lean times and comes off the books in the good times while the income is a repayment of shareholders loans. I know a wealthy real estate investor who never claims more than 25k a year in taxable income, but he manages to travel the world three months of the year staying in one or three of his many properties.
And these rich guys keep talking about being the job creators. Jobs are primarily created by the housing market. When housing is going good every "Joe The Plumber" is working. Jesus Christ couldn't save the housing market right now. The rich have been exporting jobs to Asia for decades.
I can see the angle you but I don't think it's that straight forward or easy. It sounds like you are familiar with accounting rules and the CRA / IRS... That said, at present (ie. outside this proposed legislation), if the authorities review a circumstance wherein an individual is living way past their means (ie income) and showing assets/expenditures that are excessive, they run a strong chance of getting a state-sponsored anal probe courtesy of the IRS.
The transactional reference you make to shareholder loans is interesting. The rules surrounding that component of corporate life are very strong and deliberate. The authorities are quick to view questionable activities as 'kiting' if it doesn't pass the initial smell test.
That said, I can see how your real estate friend might be able to free up income on a tax-free basis via taking on new mortgages as they are able to pay-off previous ones. As long as they have a tenant that will service the mortgage, they can do whatever they want with the cash.
The Republicans don't dispute there are enough loopholes to drive a truck through it, however their argument is "class warfare" and that taking money out of the hands of the "job creators" is bad for the economy. My argument is they don't create jobs they export jobs. Perhaps they look at it from creating jobs by spending disposal money. I think they'll buy their toys no matter how it's sliced.
As I have written on this forum enough times already, no new taxes are needed to pay off the deficit. All Obama needs to do is to develop the b@lls to call in the $20 trillion sheltered overseas in tax free accounts. He has the authority, now get the fůcking thing done.
Eagle - thank you for not deliberately misquoting me and accusing me of saying,
BLAME BUSH!
BLAME BUSH!
BLAME BUSH!
BLAME BUSH!
BLAME BUSH!
BLAME BUSH!
Why shouldn't the super rich pay their fair share of taxes? Really. I admire Warren Buffet for standing up and stating that they should. That said, there isn't a hope in hell that this will fly.