Handguns
Subscribe
Digital Now Included!
Current Subscribers Click Here.
Current Subscribers Click Here.
All Florida Sportsman subscribers now have digital access to their magazine content. This means you have the option to read your magazine on most popular phones and tablets.
To get started, click the link below to visit mymagnow.com and learn how to access your digital magazine.
Replies
"The TPC said that its analysis was preliminary and that many of the aspects of Trump's tax plan were still up in the air, since its principles haven't yet been crafted into legislation."
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Meanwhile, the bottom percent will still get a larger refund than they paid in all year. It just might not be a 1000$ more than the year before.
Statements issued by most of the media are worthless, they appeal to the idiocy of their audiences.
The rate I used was just as an example..........I do not have a staff of economists/lawyers to fill in the details for the purposes of a forum discussion. But in your example, that $15K taxes would have just been part of your overall loss - another business expense that hopefully you accounted for in your business model/planning. If one is planning on continuous losses - particularly not enough revenue to cover their costs - then maybe they need to revisit their business model.
I'm also not about punishing honest companies either rather eliminating the loopholes and legal chicanery that benefits lawyers/accountants most which - with the ultimate irony - are in turn written off as a legitimate business expense further reducing the tax liability for the business in question. Just because depreciation on a $60K truck is allowable doesn't mean it should be when a $40K truck would have gotten the job done. When such extravagances can no longer be written off, better business decisions will be made.
If a company doesn't want to play by the rules so moves offshore - then an import tax of their products would be appropriate. I already think that should be done for goods manufactured in countries without environmental/workers's protections.
BTW - I don't mind a spirited debate. I actually think that is what is missing most in our current political/civil environs. I am an accountant and have worked in finance/business operations with Fortune 500 companies over 30 plus years so please stop making personal judgments. I'm just trying to think outside the box - while you are apparently fighting to stay in it.
I can't believe any accountant would make that argument. There is no fair way to tax a business on gross revenue. I still say you have no clue what you are talking about, accountant or not.
I doubt any company would hire you if you told them they should pay taxes on the wages they were paying you. Did you ever make that presentation to the companies you worked for?
Former Mini Mart Magnate
I am just here for my amusement.
OK I learned something about SSI today. Now explain why earned tax credits are fair. The government is taking tax money from someone and returning it to someone else.
Did I say they were fair? They are just a way for lower middle income people to get welfare without being considered on welfare.
Former Mini Mart Magnate
I am just here for my amusement.
The EITC grew out of the 1960s debates over the negative income tax (NIT) and the early 1970s debate over the Nixon administration’s Family Assistance Plan (****).4 Both the NIT and **** would have operated through the income tax system to provide an income floor. Congressional opposition (primarily from Sen. Russell Long) and opposition from the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO) essentially “zapped” **** and the idea of a negative income tax as a replacement for the welfare system.5
The EITC has changed since it was first enacted in 1975. The Tax Reform Act of 1986, signed by President Reagan, indexed the maximum earned income and phase-out income levels to inflation. Congress has further made it more generous, with the maximum credit for a worker with three children increasing from $400 in 1978 (about $1,400 in 2012 dollars) to $5,891 in 2012. Low-income workers with no children are also eligible for the EITC, but the maximum credit ($475 in 2012) is just a small fraction of that for families with children.
"The EITC is work-oriented in that the amount of the credit is based on earnings. Earnings include wages and salaries as well as self-employment income, but do not include income that is not connected with employment (e.g., interest, dividends, capital gains, and income from social welfare programs). The amount of the credit first increases as earnings increase, reaches a plateau, and then falls as earnings increase. For example, for a couple with two children (see the third data column in Table 1), the credit is equal to 40 percent (the credit rate) of the first $13,090 in earnings. The maximum credit of $5,236 is received by taxpayers with earnings between $13,090 and $22,300. The credit phases out at a rate of 21.06 percent (that is, it is reduced by 21.06 cents for every additional dollar of earnings) for earnings over $22,300 and is zero for taxpayers with earnings over $47,162."
http://www.epi.org/publication/ib370-earned-income-tax-credit-and-the-child-tax-credit-history-purpose-goals-and-effectiveness/
The earned income tax credit actually encourages work for low to middle income families. Where I live, they are the majority.
You don't see the good that it does for hard working families like I do. You only hear and read about the abuses of which there are many.
I see the abuses as well and don't like it any more than anybody else. Other than the abuses, the problem that I have with the earned income credit is that it is refundable. As the document stated above it was made refundable initially to help offset payroll taxes for the low income taxpayer. We would be better served to do away the earned income credit and have a 0 tax rate for the low income taxpayer, thus doing away with the abuse. Also, as Cadman has said more than once and I have said before on here as well,we need to decrease the Social Security tax rate and make all earned income subject to social security tax. The alternative minimum tax is a monster that was originally enacted to make sure that "millionaires" paid their tax in spite of certain loopholes. Now, it's not the millionaires that pay it, it's the middle to upper middle class, usually because a 1 time occurrence.
As for the estate tax, I don't really care about it one way or the other. If they do away with it, they will also do away with the step up in basis. As someone alluded to above, with a minimum of tax planning, wealthy taxpayers can minimize if not avoid all estate taxes.
Lastly, a tax on gross income is a terrible idea. Take a grocery store for instance, probably average 2% net profit. It would put them out of business.
"Winners take responsibility, losers blame others"
Megyn Kelly
For how long ? Are we going to write a tax code around the continued PROMISE of a 3% GDP ? That is ludicrous..
And please don't write I am Strong to the LEFT... I could care less about many of the silly things, or how I feel about them that the left fight for. I am about the working family. Not the single retired guy with a great retirement package and so much to say. Or, the guy who is doing great, has money (like my wife and I) and could care less about the world, and other people. You have got to have some humanity inside yourself to be a part of any normal debate. No one person should even look at things as if ME, and only me (that is what counts) Screw everyone else.
Why ? Because we need the country as a whole to run well, all the lower working class people need money, they cant all be that shot in the dark that makes it. They need to be able to work two jobs, pay their bills on salaries from walmart dist. center (material handler) and Office Manager- with 2 kids in public school, 2 cars, and normal bills. This by fact is a family I know, neither smoke, do drugs, eat out excessively, they go to church, family functions and so on. Been watching them since they were a 15 year old couple back in 2000. They struggle, she worked at the local college and they would not pay her enough to stay, even with the degree she received from there. He has no degree, but moved up and has capped out at 62K. This is a job I know would pay 95K 20 years ago. Now, what does he do, this is it for them. She is barely pulling down 30K. These are numbers from 1995 (22 years ago) That is what me and my wife made as a Steel plant lead electrician and Admin assistant. Her with degree, me without...
I could care less about who is in charge, and frankly, nothing changed from 2008 - 2016. If I was hard left, I would be jumping up and down about how great the economy got better and not telling the truth in saying, not much changed. Once again, via reuters, last months wage increase was "0" and they keep removing things relevant from inflation when calculating it... Fuel, counts, food counts... If all you count in inflation are THINGS, well, no, prices have remained fairly steady for 20 years because each time the price increased on a product, it was sent overseas's to decrease it... Out of necessity.
It amazes me to watch people turn on the TV, watch a guy with hands the size of a barbie tell lie after lie about a tax code change and they repeat what he says as if true. "It won't help me" My dumb **** brother in law did it last night. He is nothing more than a follower and can't think for himself. He cares about his family only, screw everyone else.... All those type are going to be so sorry when we have yet another crash and they cant internet chat anymore, their life's work.
Glad to read some of the good stuff here.... And yes, 2K is nothing to a working class guy, let me refrain, it is nothing to a working class guy when backdoored by other costs that negate that 2K
The shadow Box fence panels at Home Depot have double in cost since 2004 13 years and doubled. Your wage would have to do the same to keep up with doubling of costs. Hard to believe anyone can see a GOOD AMERICA unless looking thru small glasses. it really is too bad we have all become so self centered...
Whyis it ludicrous? Since 1947, the U.S. has average 3.2% GDP. It would be a good thing to write the tax code and balance the budget based on the average GDP. That way when things go above average, we pay down the debt with the surplus and when we get into a recession we can borrow without massive debt being there. The problem is, politicians never look at the entire picture, but just want to do tax cuts to look good and get re-elected.
Former Mini Mart Magnate
I am just here for my amusement.
*politicians just want tax cuts AND more spending. We have a govt spending problem, not just taxation...
If a government can not survive on 3.4 trillion dollars a year, something is terribly wrong.
There is a lot the government needs to change.
I agree on cracking down on disabilities. They jumped during the recession due to people unable to find jobs. This indicatesd a lot fo them are not really disabled, but took the last resort due to no jobs.
Enforce welfare to work rules. These were relaxed during the recession and we need to get back on track. if you are under 65 and able to work, then you must be employed to receive any benefits.
Freeze spending at current levels for all departments funded by general revenue for the next five years.
The goal should be to get spending down to 18% of GDP and keep it there except during a recession or war.
We should also set revenue at 18% of GDP and quit trying to cut taxes to make people happy unless the debt is paid off.
Fix social security so that general funds are not needed to support the program.
Former Mini Mart Magnate
I am just here for my amusement.
That's somewhat true, but if your household, business, or government was in a deficit spending situation, why would you deliberately make it worse by voluntarily reducing your own income?
Tax reform, not just cuts for the sake of cuts, is what's needed, and the reformed taxes need to be at least revenue neutral, without this silly anticipation that the cuts will lead to increased growth.
And the spending cuts require entitlement (SS and Medicare) reform. We are aging into a real crisis that will drastically affect future generations.
Where are all the deficit hawks when we need them?
If there is a revenue reduction then there should be a spending reduction. There are plenty of things that can be cut or eliminated. As I have posted before google the numbers of agencies, departments and offices and you will see that over half are either redundant or totally useless or obsolete.
I agree that tax reform is mostly needed. But at the same time reductions in business taxes is needed too. After all, it is the consumer that pays them in the end.
Agree. The DEA could be eliminated entirely and the military could take a 25% reduction and still have a budget exceeding the next 5 or so largest spending countries in the world.....COMBINED (which includes both China and Russia). Those cuts alone would shore up the deficit, Social Security, and Medicare/caid.
I don't see why as a business person you wouldn't like to know up front what your expenses are going to be........with consistency and relative certainty. The fact that there is a rather large industry whose sole function is to minimize tax liability should be indicator that something is out of whack. And BTW - if businesses were all so honest/above board - why was there the need for a financial bailout by the Feds of the credit unions, auto industry, big banks, etc......................and why is the Big 6 accounting firms now the Big 4?
Military should pull out of every country around the world, unless said country wants to foot the bill for every last thing it takes for us to operate in said country.
Also IMHO, people should quit wanting the government to help them with everything. 2/3's of our population would die if it were 100 years ago.
I know what my expenses are up front for the most part. Sales and revenue are the factors that change quarterly and yearly. Taxes are not an expense unless you make a profit and then a percent of that. Thankfully I did not have to pay taxes on gross revenue during the recession or I would likely be bankrupt today. But you don't care about business people since you feel we are all evil.
What large industry has the sole function of minimizing tax liability?
The bailouts had nothing to do with dishonesty. It has everything to do with a revenue shortfall due to the recession.
The accounting firms were the big 8, then through mergers became the big six, then the big five, then Enron collapsed and it became the big 4.
Former Mini Mart Magnate
I am just here for my amusement.
Maybe in some businesses you know what your yearly expenses are. But in my line of work(trucking) fuel, drivers and tires are all unknown expenses and extremely difficult if not impossible to plan on.
As far as those bailouts you mentioned, they were done to buy votes. Pure and simple.
This is going to get ugly.
Going to be just like the healthcare Bill. So bad, no one on one side will touch it. THey will attempt to cheat the vote, pay off those that disagree, and in the end pass it and call it great for all, an accomplishment of Biblical proportion that took team work, hard work and strong ethics. 'This is great for everyone, but doesn't help the RICH at all" They should be doubling their tax and hard working people between 25K and 100K a year should be cut in half. Would work out to even tax and that would stimulate the economy to a 5% GDP... THey want a 3% and the gains to go up.
They will push it through with money. Better do it before the 4 years is up, no chance of winning another election...
That isn’t a problem for many that are brainwashed into believing they have no ability to raise themselves up. And those people will continue to vote for the very policies that keep them in a victim mentality.