ForumGarden

There are many sources that will verify that the Top Ten Percent pay 71% of the taxes and yet there are many that feel this is still not enough. This continual attack on this GREEDY 10 % (I'm not one of them) drives me nuts as do all attempts at trying to separate the population into "Have & Have Not's".

Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid 71 Percent of Federal Income Taxes

Heritage Foundation, Lon? Really? This is sorta like Jerry Falwell talking gay rights, isn't it? I see the page is filled with charts and very little in the way of definitions. What does "earned" mean? And how about actual numbers of earners and dollars instead of percentages.

Ahso!;1396080 wrote: Heritage Foundation, Lon? Really? This is sorta like Jerry Falwell talking gay rights, isn't it? I see the page is filled with charts and very little in the way of definitions. What does "earned" mean? And how about actual numbers of earners and dollars instead of percentages.


Picky, picky. picky---------------http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

Who's not paying federal income tax?

Who Pays Taxes? Not As Many As You Think : NPR

Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Lon;1396078 wrote: There are many sources that will verify that the Top Ten Percent pay 71% of the taxes and yet there are many that feel this is still not enough. This continual attack on this GREEDY 10 % (I'm not one of them) drives me nuts as do all attempts at trying to separate the population into "Have & Have Not's".

Top 10 Percent of Earners Paid 71 Percent of Federal Income Taxes
This!

Accountable;1396093 wrote: This!


I don't get the "This!!"

Lon;1396098 wrote: I don't get the "This!!"
Yeah. It feels like he said half of something. I felt he would be happy with the topic, though. Seems happy enough.

Lon;1396098 wrote: I don't get the "This!!"


AnneBoleyn;1396101 wrote: Yeah. It feels like he said half of something. I felt he would be happy with the topic, though. Seems happy enough.


We're lucky we didn't get his"THAT!!!"

From this one:

Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Most of the people who pay neither federal income tax nor payroll taxes are low-income people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability, or students, most of whom subsequently become taxpayers. (In years like the last few, this group also includes a significant number of people who have been unemployed the entire year and cannot find work.)


Interesting

YZGI;1396102 wrote: We're lucky we didn't get his"THAT!!!"
You are hilarious!

YZGI;1396102 wrote: We're lucky we didn't get his"THAT!!!" I'm quietly relieved I didn't get his other.

For the bloody foreigners, what is Federal Tax as opposed to Income tax ?

Bruv;1396118 wrote: For the bloody foreigners, what is Federal Tax as opposed to Income tax ?


Federal Tax is the Income Tax

I could easily see how those making more money would have to be aware of how it is handled to avoid ethical dilemmas regarding taxes. I learned very early on that I'm not an employee kind of guy, so I started my little one person company to contract out my services. Because of the tax laws, I formed a corporation because it gave me more advantages in planning for retirement.

By law, my taxes have to be done by a CPA. It is also common to use the services of a tax planner to make adjustments in the way things are done at the beginning of each tax year. The primary job of these professions is to avoid paying any more taxes than are necessary and they are very good at what they do.

Some of the strategies they have suggested over the years conflicted with my personal sense of ethics, but all are perfectly legal. For example, since I live in a state with a relatively high corporate tax rate, it was suggested that I incorporate in Nevada or Delaware as well, since they have no state corporate taxes. The Nevada or Delaware corporation would own all of the intellectual property that I use to produce solutions for clients and the California corporation would pay a hefty fee to that corporation for its use, thus reducing taxable income. All it would take is a phone call and a signature.

A variation on this uses the Bahamas as the location of the dummy corporation owning the intellectual property rights to whatever I think. Again, all it would take is a phone call. I would, of course, have a credit card for the bank in the Bahamas. The tax guy said that "everyone was doing it" and that it was perfectly legal. For a couple of hundred bucks more I could have dual citizenship.

One of the other strategies suggested was to let my little corporation own my house, my vehicle, my furniture, etc.

With such strategies being pushed as "normal", I could see how it would be a challenge for someone who was actually wealthy to actually investigate and make decision based on their own ethics. Oh, and the strategies I mentioned were some of the more mild suggestions made by the pros.

Wandrin;1396128 wrote: I could easily see how those making more money would have to be aware of how it is handled to avoid ethical dilemmas regarding taxes. I learned very early on that I'm not an employee kind of guy, so I started my little one person company to contract out my services. Because of the tax laws, I formed a corporation because it gave me more advantages in planning for retirement.

By law, my taxes have to be done by a CPA. It is also common to use the services of a tax planner to make adjustments in the way things are done at the beginning of each tax year. The primary job of these professions is to avoid paying any more taxes than are necessary and they are very good at what they do.

Some of the strategies they have suggested over the years conflicted with my personal sense of ethics, but all are perfectly legal. For example, since I live in a state with a relatively high corporate tax rate, it was suggested that I incorporate in Nevada or Delaware as well, since they have no state corporate taxes. The Nevada or Delaware corporation would own all of the intellectual property that I use to produce solutions for clients and the California corporation would pay a hefty fee to that corporation for its use, thus reducing taxable income. All it would take is a phone call and a signature.

A variation on this uses the Bahamas as the location of the dummy corporation owning the intellectual property rights to whatever I think. Again, all it would take is a phone call. I would, of course, have a credit card for the bank in the Bahamas. The tax guy said that "everyone was doing it" and that it was perfectly legal. For a couple of hundred bucks more I could have dual citizenship.

One of the other strategies suggested was to let my little corporation own my house, my vehicle, my furniture, etc.

With such strategies being pushed as "normal", I could see how it would be a challenge for someone who was actually wealthy to actually investigate and make decision based on their own ethics. Oh, and the strategies I mentioned were some of the more mild suggestions made by the pros.


What you have said is true and interesting, but how does it relate to the original post?

Lon;1396129 wrote: What you have said is true and interesting, but how does it relate to the original post?


I guess I should have been more clear. I don't think it is necessary to raise the tax rates on the upper brackets if those in those brackets would not try so hard to avoid paying the current rate. The number of options for those in the lower brackets to avoid paying taxes are very limited. For those in the upper brackets, there is a seemingly endless set of options to avoid paying taxes.

Wandrin;1396133 wrote: I guess I should have been more clear. I don't think it is necessary to raise the tax rates on the upper brackets if those in those brackets would not try so hard to avoid paying the current rate. The number of options for those in the lower brackets to avoid paying taxes are very limited. For those in the upper brackets, there is a seemingly endless set of options to avoid paying taxes.


Now I gotcha------thanks, and I agree. There is as they say, a big difference between Tax Avoidance and Tax Evasion. One of course is illegal and the other not. Nothing at all wrong in my opinion of taking full advantage of existing tax laws. If some have a problem with that then they need to change the tax laws not condemn those that use it to their advantage.

Lon;1396098 wrote: I don't get the "This!!"


Gee whiz. I bolded and colored it. Attempts at trying to separate the population into "Have & Have Not's" drives me nuts.

Accountable;1396144 wrote: Gee whiz. I bolded and colored it. Attempts at trying to separate the population into "Have & Have Not's" drives me nuts.


Saw the bolded color but still don't get the THIS. Am I thick or are we not communicating very well?

Lon;1396082 wrote: Picky, picky. picky---------------http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

Who's not paying federal income tax?

Who Pays Taxes? Not As Many As You Think : NPR

Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy PrioritiesHave you read those articles? You disagree with abolishing the marriage penalty and increase in the child tax credit?

Lon;1396147 wrote: Saw the bolded color but still don't get the THIS. Am I thick or are we not communicating very well?He's telling you "this" thread contributes to "haves & have-not" discussions. Anyway, that's how I understand any of his "this", "that" and "WTFs".

Ahso!;1396170 wrote: Have you read those articles? You disagree with abolishing the marriage penalty and increase in the child tax credit?


Ha----you are changing the subject-----thought we were talking about who pays the bulk of the taxes.

Lon;1396181 wrote: Ha----you are changing the subjectNot at all. My question goes to why and how.

Lon;1396181 wrote: Ha----you are changing the subject-----thought we were talking about who pays the bulk of the taxes.Let's not forget that you cited all the sources in this thread.

Lon;1396147 wrote: Saw the bolded color but still don't get the THIS. Am I thick or are we not communicating very well?
Nah. It's a newspeak thing. It means I agree with you, especially the bolded part.

Accountable;1396215 wrote: Nah. It's a newspeak thing. It means I agree with you, especially the bolded part.


Thanks----now I gotcha------I need to brush up on Newspeak:-2

Ahso!;1396195 wrote: Let's not forget that you cited all the sources in this thread.


True, but the how and why has nothing to do with WHO PAYS THE BULK OF THE TAXES------in addition, don't forget that the wealthy, by virtue of their capacity to spend big, pay substantial state & county taxes in addition to substantial property taxes on their gigantic estates.

Lon;1396221 wrote: True, but the how and why has nothing to do with WHO PAYS THE BULK OF THE TAXES------in addition, don't forget that the wealthy, by virtue of their capacity to spend big, pay substantial state & county taxes in addition to substantial property taxes on their gigantic estates.Yes it does. A certain segment pushed for tax reduction and now that they've got their wish and more people now are paying no taxes, they're now complaining about that. Just can't please those folks, that's why it's not worth trying. You should read everything you linked in the thread. Heres something to chew on.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power

Ahso!;1396249 wrote: Yes it does. A certain segment pushed for tax reduction and now that they've got their wish and more people now are paying no taxes, they're now complaining about that. Just can't please those folks, that's why it's not worth trying. You should read everything you linked in the thread. Heres something to chew on.

Who Rules America: Wealth, Income, and Power


Do The Rich Really Not Pay Enough Taxes? This was the post heading. I do read the links that I post and none of your posts attempts to address the question, but instead deviate into side issues. So let me be clear and address the question directly to you. "Do The Rich Really Not Pay Enough Taxes?"

Lon;1396256 wrote: Do The Rich Really Not Pay Enough Taxes? This was the post heading. I do read the links that I post and none of your posts attempts to address the question, but instead deviate into side issues. So let me be clear and address the question directly to you. "Do The Rich Really Not Pay Enough Taxes?"Why do you cite sources that are not relevant to the discussion? Has anyone answered your question directly?

Ahso!;1396258 wrote: Why do you cite sources that are not relevant to the discussion? Has anyone answered your question directly?


Because your discussion is not relevant to the question.

Lon;1396278 wrote: Because your discussion is not relevant to the question.You should go back and reread the thread. I asked for some definitions and you cited other articles. Don't you wonder why nobody has answered your question?

Ahso!;1396280 wrote: You should go back and reread the thread. I asked for some definitions and you cited other articles. Don't you wonder why nobody has answered your question?


It was you that decided to change from answering a question to starting a discussion, and I'm crushed that no one has responded. I'll cry myself to sleep tonight over it.

I would support a flat tax on all income. I'm not sure that it would work though. I can't see someone making minimum wage and struggling to survive being taxed. But as soon as one exemption or deduction is allowed, the floodgates would open with every special interest group demanding that they be treated differently too - essentially the situation we have now. I don't have a solution, although I have a lot of questions.

Lon;1396288 wrote: It was you that decided to change from answering a question to starting a discussion,You weren't looking to discuss the topic? You only wanted yes or no based off a few skewed charts put together by the Heritage Foundation? You should have just done a poll offering two selections instead.

Ahso!;1396299 wrote: You weren't looking to discuss the topic? You only wanted yes or no based off a few skewed charts put together by the Heritage Foundation? You should have just done a poll offering two selections instead.


There are many ways the question could be addressed instead of just a yes or no. For those that would say yes to the question, they could explain why they feel the rich pay enough in taxes. And for those say no, they could explain why the rich are not paying enough. Pretty simple really, and it keeps the initial question on track without wandering off into areas that can be discussed in a fresh post.