Are you or do you know anybody...

[WillowTree]

By the way divecon, answer the question.

Does you employer pay for your health care? If he does all that he pays will be considered now as part of your paycheck, you will pay income tax on that money.

Are you claiming that exempt benefits will no longer be excluded from income, Willow? That certainly does not seem accurate.

I asked you a question blue asswipe. can you answer it or not?

 

[SFC Ollie]

All I know is that my fixed income stayed the same yet my taxes went up. And I also would like to remind everyone that one of the first tax increases under this administration was primarily on lower income people.

Yes, the tobacco tax.

 

[Madeline]

WillowTree wrote:

Give us one good reason why 50% of Americans paying Federal Income Tax should carry the other 50% who don't? One good reason. I can't think of any. cause in your words "we share a nation." well, no we don't if only 50% of us have a vested interest in providing for this nation.

Jesus H. Christ, everyone get bitchy time huh?

If "taxes are the price we pay for civilized society," to quote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., then April 15 is the day that bill comes due for every working American.

But that is no longer the case for a growing class of Americans for whom the price of civilized society has been reduced to zero because the tax code's generous credits and deductions completely erase their income tax liability.

And for many of these nonpayers, civilized society actually pays them a hefty refund, which is not much different from a welfare check except that it's run through the tax code instead of through the Department of Health and Human Services.

If tax year 2009, for which we are paying today, is anything like tax year 2008, then a record number of the nearly 142 million Americans who will file a tax return will get back every dollar that was withheld from their paychecks during the year. During 2008, more than a third of all tax returns resulted in complete nonpayment. Many got quite a bit more, turning Tax Day into a payday.

Over the past 15 years, politicians have been working overtime to create a blizzard of tax credits targeted to "help" the so-called "middle class."

They've created the child credit, which is different from the child care tax credit, unless you have a grown child and then you can use the education credit. And if you don't have a child, then you can get one using the adoption credit. If you don't care for a child, there's the credit for caring for granny instead.

But if you'd rather care for air than people, there's a credit for buying a hybrid vehicle, unless you'd rather put a solar panel on your roof, or simply replace all the windows in your house. Oh, don't have a house? Then there is the first-time homebuyer's credit.

The consequence of turning the tax code into a tool for social policy is that we now have a record 52 million filers off the income tax rolls. This means 36 percent of all so-called taxpayers actually pay zero in income taxes after taking their credits and deductions. But these figures don't include some 15 million people who work but don't earn enough to file a tax return. When these people are added to the non-payers, estimates the Tax Policy Center, the percentage of households who don't pay income taxes rises to 47 percent.

Why more Americans pay no income tax - CNN

I completely agree that the tax code should not be used to engineer social policy. The further away it wanders from its purpose of generating revenue, the more bad things happen. It is crappy governing, and we should lobby our representatives to stop it.

I don't agree that a person who works, has tax withheld and later is able to obtain a refund of the full amount "pays no federal taxes". For one thing, they have lost the time value of money during the year when the withheld amount was kept from them. Beyond that, look at a pay stub. WTF do you call all the other dozen or so deductions if not a "tax"? Social security, workers' comp, unemployment, etc. All these debits are, essentially, forms of taxation.

If you want to lobby Congress to end the adoption credit, green energy credit etc., I'll join you. Just be aware, your family's tax bill may rise as a result.

 

[Si modo]

....

Denying a charitable deduction from a tax sheltering device will not increase anyone's taxes.

 

[WillowTree]

WillowTree wrote:

Give us one good reason why 50% of Americans paying Federal Income Tax should carry the other 50% who don't? One good reason. I can't think of any. cause in your words "we share a nation." well, no we don't if only 50% of us have a vested interest in providing for this nation.

Jesus H. Christ, everyone get bitchy time huh?

If "taxes are the price we pay for civilized society," to quote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., then April 15 is the day that bill comes due for every working American.

But that is no longer the case for a growing class of Americans for whom the price of civilized society has been reduced to zero because the tax code's generous credits and deductions completely erase their income tax liability.

And for many of these nonpayers, civilized society actually pays them a hefty refund, which is not much different from a welfare check except that it's run through the tax code instead of through the Department of Health and Human Services.

If tax year 2009, for which we are paying today, is anything like tax year 2008, then a record number of the nearly 142 million Americans who will file a tax return will get back every dollar that was withheld from their paychecks during the year. During 2008, more than a third of all tax returns resulted in complete nonpayment. Many got quite a bit more, turning Tax Day into a payday.

Over the past 15 years, politicians have been working overtime to create a blizzard of tax credits targeted to "help" the so-called "middle class."

They've created the child credit, which is different from the child care tax credit, unless you have a grown child and then you can use the education credit. And if you don't have a child, then you can get one using the adoption credit. If you don't care for a child, there's the credit for caring for granny instead.

But if you'd rather care for air than people, there's a credit for buying a hybrid vehicle, unless you'd rather put a solar panel on your roof, or simply replace all the windows in your house. Oh, don't have a house? Then there is the first-time homebuyer's credit.

The consequence of turning the tax code into a tool for social policy is that we now have a record 52 million filers off the income tax rolls. This means 36 percent of all so-called taxpayers actually pay zero in income taxes after taking their credits and deductions. But these figures don't include some 15 million people who work but don't earn enough to file a tax return. When these people are added to the non-payers, estimates the Tax Policy Center, the percentage of households who don't pay income taxes rises to 47 percent.

Why more Americans pay no income tax - CNN

I completely agree that the tax code should not be used to engineer social policy. The further away it wanders from its purpose of generating revenue, the more bad things happen. It is crappy governing, and we should lobby our representatives to stop it.

I don't agree that a person who works, has tax withheld and later is able to obtain a refund of the full amount "pays no federal taxes". For one thing, they have lost the time value of money during the year when the withheld amount was kept from them. Beyond that, look at a pay stub. WTF do you call all the other dozen or so deductions if not a "tax"? Social security, workers' comp, unemployment, etc. All these debits are, essentially, forms of taxation.

If you want to lobby Congress to end the adoption credit, green energy credit etc., I'll join you. Just be aware, your family's tax bill may rise as a result.

That's just bullshit and you know it. We gave fucking "rebate" checks to people who had paid zero in Federal taxes. zero. And so what if they pay into ss? they are going to get that back too.
DUmmie,

 

[Madeline]

....

Denying a charitable deduction from a tax sheltering device will not increase anyone's taxes.

A tax shelter, such as an IRA, pays no tax on current income. Ergo, you cannot enlarge its tax burden by denial of a charitable deduction. If the tax attributes of the shelter are reported by the owner, then such a deduction might could be taken against OTHER income and would have value. (Though there is a terrible tax policy at work if nontaxable income streams can generate deductions to be used against other, taxable income IMO.)

Sorry, did not mean to be less than clear.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I freely admit I'm not an economist, CG. However, I do know something about taxes. It is crappy tax policy to use the Income Tax Code to advance any policy; it is best suited to raising revenues, period. And we have experience with trickle down, remember? Know any economists who regard it as a past success? I don't.

It's bigger than the Income Tax Code, Mad. When you're looking at this stuff, you really can't just look at bits of it, you need to look at the whole picture.... how one part impacts another... and the effect of other parts of economic issues on other economic issues. That's why I tend to go with the view of actual experts. Far too many people, who don't actually know all that much about economics, think only of one part. No offense, but, I know lots of Economists - I write about economics for a living.... I'm certainly not an expert... But I work with people who are.... global experts... and economics is a global issue. We tend to forget that.

You write about economics for a living? Really? Link us to a dozen published pieces you've done.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Regardless of weather I know someone or not, taking billions out of the economy during a recession ;in the private sector; isn't rocket science; it's plain short sighted and dumb and why even Democrats are beginning to rethink letting them expire.

We don't have a revenue problem as much as we have had a spending problem and I blame BOTH Parties, not just one.

Revenue has been down for several years.

 

[Madeline]

WillowTree wrote:

Give us one good reason why 50% of Americans paying Federal Income Tax should carry the other 50% who don't? One good reason. I can't think of any. cause in your words "we share a nation." well, no we don't if only 50% of us have a vested interest in providing for this nation.

Jesus H. Christ, everyone get bitchy time huh?

If "taxes are the price we pay for civilized society," to quote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., then April 15 is the day that bill comes due for every working American.

But that is no longer the case for a growing class of Americans for whom the price of civilized society has been reduced to zero because the tax code's generous credits and deductions completely erase their income tax liability.

And for many of these nonpayers, civilized society actually pays them a hefty refund, which is not much different from a welfare check except that it's run through the tax code instead of through the Department of Health and Human Services.

If tax year 2009, for which we are paying today, is anything like tax year 2008, then a record number of the nearly 142 million Americans who will file a tax return will get back every dollar that was withheld from their paychecks during the year. During 2008, more than a third of all tax returns resulted in complete nonpayment. Many got quite a bit more, turning Tax Day into a payday.

Over the past 15 years, politicians have been working overtime to create a blizzard of tax credits targeted to "help" the so-called "middle class."

They've created the child credit, which is different from the child care tax credit, unless you have a grown child and then you can use the education credit. And if you don't have a child, then you can get one using the adoption credit. If you don't care for a child, there's the credit for caring for granny instead.

But if you'd rather care for air than people, there's a credit for buying a hybrid vehicle, unless you'd rather put a solar panel on your roof, or simply replace all the windows in your house. Oh, don't have a house? Then there is the first-time homebuyer's credit.

The consequence of turning the tax code into a tool for social policy is that we now have a record 52 million filers off the income tax rolls. This means 36 percent of all so-called taxpayers actually pay zero in income taxes after taking their credits and deductions. But these figures don't include some 15 million people who work but don't earn enough to file a tax return. When these people are added to the non-payers, estimates the Tax Policy Center, the percentage of households who don't pay income taxes rises to 47 percent.

Why more Americans pay no income tax - CNN

I completely agree that the tax code should not be used to engineer social policy. The further away it wanders from its purpose of generating revenue, the more bad things happen. It is crappy governing, and we should lobby our representatives to stop it.

I don't agree that a person who works, has tax withheld and later is able to obtain a refund of the full amount "pays no federal taxes". For one thing, they have lost the time value of money during the year when the withheld amount was kept from them. Beyond that, look at a pay stub. WTF do you call all the other dozen or so deductions if not a "tax"? Social security, workers' comp, unemployment, etc. All these debits are, essentially, forms of taxation.

If you want to lobby Congress to end the adoption credit, green energy credit etc., I'll join you. Just be aware, your family's tax bill may rise as a result.

That's just bullshit and you know it. We gave fucking "rebate" checks to people who had paid zero in Federal taxes. zero. And so what if they pay into ss? they are going to get that back too.
DUmmie,

Yes, people without any income tax liability were eligible for "tax credit" checks. It is absolutely horrendous social policy and a complete perversion of the tax code IMO.

Happy now? I can keep repeating this if you like....the tax code should never be used for anything other than generating income IMO. And BTW, this is exactly why I'm not a fan of the capital gains tax. If it's income, tax it...period. There should not be "favored" types of income.

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. The current top tax rate of 35% applies to your TAXABLE income over $373,650

2. The 35% rate ONLY applies to the money you make over that 373 thousand number. The rest of the money you make is taxed at the lower rates.

3. If your taxable income was 400,000, you would only pay the 35% rate on the 26,000 over the above number.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
That's just bullshit and you know it. We gave fucking "rebate" checks to people who had paid zero in Federal taxes. zero. And so what if they pay into ss? they are going to get that back too.
DUmmie,

So, would you recommend that Republicans run on raising taxes for lower income Americans?

 

[WillowTree]

I freely admit I'm not an economist, CG. However, I do know something about taxes. It is crappy tax policy to use the Income Tax Code to advance any policy; it is best suited to raising revenues, period. And we have experience with trickle down, remember? Know any economists who regard it as a past success? I don't.

It's bigger than the Income Tax Code, Mad. When you're looking at this stuff, you really can't just look at bits of it, you need to look at the whole picture.... how one part impacts another... and the effect of other parts of economic issues on other economic issues. That's why I tend to go with the view of actual experts. Far too many people, who don't actually know all that much about economics, think only of one part. No offense, but, I know lots of Economists - I write about economics for a living.... I'm certainly not an expert... But I work with people who are.... global experts... and economics is a global issue. We tend to forget that.

You write about economics for a living? Really? Link us to a dozen published pieces you've done.

You may take her for a fool, but I don't. That would provide you with her real name. Idiot.

 

[WillowTree]

[
That's just bullshit and you know it. We gave fucking "rebate" checks to people who had paid zero in Federal taxes. zero. And so what if they pay into ss? they are going to get that back too.
DUmmie,

So, would you recommend that Republicans run on raising taxes for lower income Americans?

I recommend that Republicans run on a FAIR TAX that's would I recommend. Get the fuck rid off this "progressive tax" it's more regressive than progressive.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Are you or do you know anybody who is going to have to pay more taxes when Bush's class warfare tax cut for the wealthy expires as per the law he signed?

In other words are you bringing down over a quarter million dollars a year.

I'm sure the RepubliCONs are very worried about the Wall Streeters and the Movie Stars and the Pro atheletes (poor Manny Ramirez), and the like.

Oh dear!. What about Warren Buffet? Why this is terrible!

I got to go now, I have to figure out if I can get new tires on the front of my work truck AND buy my son new shoes for school.

Poor Warren Buffet!

When the bush tax cuts expire I will be paying an additional 3% in federal income taxes. I make a 5 figure salary well under the 250k mark.

It could be worse. I could be making under $34,000/year and have my federal income tax burden go up by 5% instead.

EGTRRA(bush tax cuts) created six tax rate brackets--10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35%, based on income levels. If no extension is passed and signed into law, then the pre-2001 tax rates will go back into effect starting in tax year 2011. The 10% bracket would disappear, and those taxpayers would move up to the 15% bracket, which would apply to all incomes below $34,550. The other tax rates would increase to 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6% for the highest earners making more than $379,650.

Child Tax Credit
One major provision that will expire at the end of 2010 is the child tax credit, which EGTRRA doubled from $500 to $1,000 per child. Unless Congress votes to extend the child tax credit, the maximum amount will revert back to $500 for tax year 2011, and the number of families eligible for that amount will be much less as tougher eligibility standards that existed prior to EGTRRA will go back into effect.

How Will The Expiring Bush Tax Cuts Affect You? - Forbes.com

I hope now you understand what exactly the tax cuts expiring entails. I understand you most likely were misled by some dishonest media outlets which led to your misleading orignial post. I hope I've helped.

 

[johnrocks]

Regardless of weather I know someone or not, taking billions out of the economy during a recession ;in the private sector; isn't rocket science; it's plain short sighted and dumb and why even Democrats are beginning to rethink letting them expire.

We don't have a revenue problem as much as we have had a spending problem and I blame BOTH Parties, not just one.

Revenue has been down for several years.

And spending has been up; waaaaay up. I'm not blaming Obama and the Democrats only, the GOP spent like crack whores on the corner of Rodeo' Dr. when they were in control too.

 

[Skull Pilot]

....

Denying a charitable deduction from a tax sheltering device will not increase anyone's taxes.

A tax shelter, such as an IRA, pays no tax on current income. Ergo, you cannot enlarge its tax burden by denial of a charitable deduction. If the tax attributes of the shelter are reported by the owner, then such a deduction might could be taken against OTHER income and would have value. (Though there is a terrible tax policy at work if nontaxable income streams can generate deductions to be used against other, taxable income IMO.)

Sorry, did not mean to be less than clear.

An IRA is NOT a tax shelter. It is a tax deferral.

The government dictates when you have to withdraw the money from and IRA and exactly how much so it can recoup all the deferred taxes.

 

[Madeline]

[
That's just bullshit and you know it. We gave fucking "rebate" checks to people who had paid zero in Federal taxes. zero. And so what if they pay into ss? they are going to get that back too.
DUmmie,

So, would you recommend that Republicans run on raising taxes for lower income Americans?

I recommend that Republicans run on a FAIR TAX that's would I recommend. Get the fuck rid off this "progressive tax" it's more regressive than progressive.

Willow, a tax is only regressive if it is imposed on lower income taxpayers at a higher rate than on high income taxpayers. Many pundits see such things as sales taxes, sin taxes etc. as "regressive" because a poor person pays a high percent of income for the taxed goods than a high income taxpayer. We have no "regressive income tax".

"Fair Tax" seems to refer to a proposal made by Boortz and Linder in a book by that name, and contemplates a complex interchange of various taxation systems.

A flat tax is a proportionate tax on all taxpayers. Regardless of income, everyone pays at the same rate. It has advantages, but a pure flat tax is not possible; we cannot take 15 or 20% of the income of someone without the means to buy food.

What we have now is a progressive income tax; it is what we have had ever since the US adopted an income tax. The vast majority of pundits (including Adam Smith, author of the great 18th century economics bible "The Wealth Of Nations") believe a progressive tax is most fair and most suitable. Disagreement usually focuses on just how steeply a tax rate should rise, but not on whether there should be a variance of any sort.

 

[Madeline]

A tax shelter, such as an IRA, pays no tax on current income. Ergo, you cannot enlarge its tax burden by denial of a charitable deduction. If the tax attributes of the shelter are reported by the owner, then such a deduction might could be taken against OTHER income and would have value. (Though there is a terrible tax policy at work if nontaxable income streams can generate deductions to be used against other, taxable income IMO.)

Sorry, did not mean to be less than clear.

An IRA is NOT a tax shelter. It is a tax deferral.

The government dictates when you have to withdraw the money from and IRA and exactly how much so it can recoup all the deferred taxes.

To defer tax is to shelter income. I did not mean to suggest IRAs are sleazy.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A tax shelter, such as an IRA, pays no tax on current income. Ergo, you cannot enlarge its tax burden by denial of a charitable deduction. If the tax attributes of the shelter are reported by the owner, then such a deduction might could be taken against OTHER income and would have value. (Though there is a terrible tax policy at work if nontaxable income streams can generate deductions to be used against other, taxable income IMO.)

Sorry, did not mean to be less than clear.

An IRA is NOT a tax shelter. It is a tax deferral.

The government dictates when you have to withdraw the money from and IRA and exactly how much so it can recoup all the deferred taxes.

To defer tax is to shelter income. I did not mean to suggest IRAs are sleazy.

Sheltering income implies one pays no tax on that income. Tax will be collected on every penny in an IRA.

 

[Madeline]

Yes, income (and sometimes principal) in an IRA will be taxed eventually. If you are somehow offended by referring to a tax deferral device as a "tax sheltering device", okie dokie.