Thank you president Obama

[Ravi]

I've been waiting for this to happen and am very glad it finally did.

Section 179 deduction. Under Section 179 of the Internal Revenue Code, a business can elect to "expense" the cost of qualified property placed into service during the year, subject to a maximum limit and a phaseout for amounts above a specified threshold. For 2012, the maximum deduction was set at $125,000 (inflation-indexed to $139,000) with a $500,000 threshold (inflation-indexed to $560,000). The new law restores the previous limits of a $500,000 maximum deduction and a $2 million threshold through 2013, retroactive to 2012. It also permits expensing of up to $250,000 of the cost of qualified leasehold improvement property, restaurant property, and retail improvement property, as was allowed under prior law.

New Tax Law Emerges Beyond the Fiscal Cliff | AccountingWEB

 

[Ravi]

I've been waiting for this to happen and am very glad it finally did.

Section 179 deduction. Under Section 179 of the Internal Revenue Code, a business can elect to "expense" the cost of qualified property placed into service during the year, subject to a maximum limit and a phaseout for amounts above a specified threshold. For 2012, the maximum deduction was set at $125,000 (inflation-indexed to $139,000) with a $500,000 threshold (inflation-indexed to $560,000). The new law restores the previous limits of a $500,000 maximum deduction and a $2 million threshold through 2013, retroactive to 2012. It also permits expensing of up to $250,000 of the cost of qualified leasehold improvement property, restaurant property, and retail improvement property, as was allowed under prior law.

New Tax Law Emerges Beyond the Fiscal Cliff | AccountingWEB

This saved me $25,000 on my taxes.

Woooooooofuckinghooooooooooooooooo!

 

[Valerie]

I've been waiting for this to happen and am very glad it finally did.

Section 179 deduction. Under Section 179 of the Internal Revenue Code, a business can elect to "expense" the cost of qualified property placed into service during the year, subject to a maximum limit and a phaseout for amounts above a specified threshold. For 2012, the maximum deduction was set at $125,000 (inflation-indexed to $139,000) with a $500,000 threshold (inflation-indexed to $560,000). The new law restores the previous limits of a $500,000 maximum deduction and a $2 million threshold through 2013, retroactive to 2012. It also permits expensing of up to $250,000 of the cost of qualified leasehold improvement property, restaurant property, and retail improvement property, as was allowed under prior law.

New Tax Law Emerges Beyond the Fiscal Cliff | AccountingWEB

This saved me $25,000 on my taxes.

Woooooooofuckinghooooooooooooooooo!

Wow, that's great Rav... I bet you could probably buy the whole trailer park with that kind of dinero!

 

[Freemason9]

GREAT. Yet another way "small businesses" can avoid paying taxes. Small businesses (and especially farmers) are humongous rip-offs to American taxpayers these days, thanks to well-funded lobbying groups.

 

[Ravi]

GREAT. Yet another way "small businesses" can avoid paying taxes. Small businesses (and especially farmers) are humongous rip-offs to American taxpayers these days, thanks to well-funded lobbying groups.

How is it a rip off to not have to pay taxes on capital equipment?

 

[Freemason9]

Why should "capital equipment" be tax exempt? Who decided that was a sound idea?

 

[dblack]

GREAT. Yet another way "small businesses" can avoid paying taxes. Small businesses (and especially farmers) are humongous rip-offs to American taxpayers these days, thanks to well-funded lobbying groups.

How is it a rip off to not have to pay taxes on capital equipment?

It's a ripoff whenever the tax code is used to hand out special favors to a select few. The entire system of incentives and penalties implemented via taxation is simply an end run around Constitutional limits on government, allowing them to manipulate behavior and exercise the power of the state in ways that have very little to do with collecting revenue.

 

[Ravi]

Why should "capital equipment" be tax exempt? Who decided that was a sound idea?

I asked you how it was a rip off. Please explain. Why would a business need to pay a tax on items it purchases to do business?

 

[Ravi]

GREAT. Yet another way "small businesses" can avoid paying taxes. Small businesses (and especially farmers) are humongous rip-offs to American taxpayers these days, thanks to well-funded lobbying groups.

How is it a rip off to not have to pay taxes on capital equipment?

It's a ripoff whenever the tax code is used to hand out special favors to a select few. The entire system of incentives and penalties implemented via taxation is simply an end run around Constitutional limits on government, allowing them to manipulate behavior and exercise the power of the state in ways that have very little to do with collecting revenue.

How is it a special favor?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ravi, a 1%'er not paying her fair share...I'm fucking shocked

 

[Valerie]

Why should "capital equipment" be tax exempt? Who decided that was a sound idea?

she can now use that twenty five grand to hire a part time employee rather than give the money to the government. why are you against businesses keeping their own money?

 

[dblack]

How is it a rip off to not have to pay taxes on capital equipment?

It's a ripoff whenever the tax code is used to hand out special favors to a select few. The entire system of incentives and penalties implemented via taxation is simply an end run around Constitutional limits on government, allowing them to manipulate behavior and exercise the power of the state in ways that have very little to do with collecting revenue.

How is it a special favor?

Because it gives a special tax break to those who purchase new equipment, a tax break not received by those who make do with what they have. It's an 'incentive' to encourage business to blow money on shit they don't need, or otherwise wouldn't invest in if it weren't for the carrot.

 

[Ravi]

It's a ripoff whenever the tax code is used to hand out special favors to a select few. The entire system of incentives and penalties implemented via taxation is simply an end run around Constitutional limits on government, allowing them to manipulate behavior and exercise the power of the state in ways that have very little to do with collecting revenue.

How is it a special favor?

Because it gives a special tax break to those who purchase new equipment, a tax break not received by those who make do with what they have. It's an 'incentive' to encourage business to blow money on shit they don't need, or otherwise wouldn't invest in if it weren't for the carrot.

Let me give an example so we are talking about the same thing.

Say I rent out grocery carts. Last year I bought 20 carts and rented them out over the course of the year, paying income tax on my earnings.

Say I spent $10 each on the carts for a total outlay of $200.

If the cap on purchases is $100, I'd have to pretend the second $100 was income in my pocket and pay tax on it.

Instead, the cap is $200 so I don't have to pretend that an expenditure is income and therefore owe no tax on the second $100.

Is this what you consider unfair, and if so what would your solution be?

 

[Avorysuds]

I've been waiting for this to happen and am very glad it finally did.





New Tax Law Emerges Beyond the Fiscal Cliff | AccountingWEB

This saved me $25,000 on my taxes.

Woooooooofuckinghooooooooooooooooo!

Wow, that's great Rav... I bet you could probably buy the whole trailer park with that kind of dinero!

Why would he want to own the tailor park you live in?

 

[Rozman]

I thought you guy hated tax loopholes...

 

[Rozman]

So when Democrats take advantage of the tax code they are good Americans.
When Republicans do it they are lying cheating America hating scumbags.

 

[Freemason9]

Why should "capital equipment" be tax exempt? Who decided that was a sound idea?

she can now use that twenty five grand to hire a part time employee rather than give the money to the government. why are you against businesses keeping their own money?

In other words, you believe the government should be in the business of creating incentives for businesses to hire enough people to make their operations worthwhile.

So much for "free market" ideology.

 

[Freemason9]

How is it a special favor?

Because it gives a special tax break to those who purchase new equipment, a tax break not received by those who make do with what they have. It's an 'incentive' to encourage business to blow money on shit they don't need, or otherwise wouldn't invest in if it weren't for the carrot.

Let me give an example so we are talking about the same thing.

Say I rent out grocery carts. Last year I bought 20 carts and rented them out over the course of the year, paying income tax on my earnings.

Say I spent $10 each on the carts for a total outlay of $200.

If the cap on purchases is $100, I'd have to pretend the second $100 was income in my pocket and pay tax on it.

Instead, the cap is $200 so I don't have to pretend that an expenditure is income and therefore owe no tax on the second $100.

Is this what you consider unfair, and if so what would your solution be?

Nope. "Income" is revenue minus expenses, and the purchase of the equipment has already been expensed. You already don't pay income tax on that stuff. I have a real problem with depreciation schedules and such that often inflate non-cash charges as a way to avoid taxes. It's a big game with businesses and, especially, farmers.

 

[Ravi]

Because it gives a special tax break to those who purchase new equipment, a tax break not received by those who make do with what they have. It's an 'incentive' to encourage business to blow money on shit they don't need, or otherwise wouldn't invest in if it weren't for the carrot.

Let me give an example so we are talking about the same thing.

Say I rent out grocery carts. Last year I bought 20 carts and rented them out over the course of the year, paying income tax on my earnings.

Say I spent $10 each on the carts for a total outlay of $200.

If the cap on purchases is $100, I'd have to pretend the second $100 was income in my pocket and pay tax on it.

Instead, the cap is $200 so I don't have to pretend that an expenditure is income and therefore owe no tax on the second $100.

Is this what you consider unfair, and if so what would your solution be?

Nope. "Income" is revenue minus expenses, and the purchase of the equipment has already been expensed. You already don't pay income tax on that stuff. I have a real problem with depreciation schedules and such that often inflate non-cash charges as a way to avoid taxes. It's a big game with businesses and, especially, farmers.

Dude. Read the op. You must depreciate after certain levels of spending. So yes, you very well may pay on income stuff on that stuff.

 

[Freemason9]

Let me give an example so we are talking about the same thing.

Say I rent out grocery carts. Last year I bought 20 carts and rented them out over the course of the year, paying income tax on my earnings.

Say I spent $10 each on the carts for a total outlay of $200.

If the cap on purchases is $100, I'd have to pretend the second $100 was income in my pocket and pay tax on it.

Instead, the cap is $200 so I don't have to pretend that an expenditure is income and therefore owe no tax on the second $100.

Is this what you consider unfair, and if so what would your solution be?

Nope. "Income" is revenue minus expenses, and the purchase of the equipment has already been expensed. You already don't pay income tax on that stuff. I have a real problem with depreciation schedules and such that often inflate non-cash charges as a way to avoid taxes. It's a big game with businesses and, especially, farmers.

Dude. Read the op. You must depreciate after certain levels of spending. So yes, you very well may pay on income stuff on that stuff.

I don't think you know much about tax accounting. Your response is nonsensical.