Who here pays ZERO taxes?

[Skull Pilot]

Really? Who? I was a waitor for 12 years, most of them under Bush. I earned minimuim wage plus tips. I never got a tax refund bigger than what I paid in taxes and I had the best CPA in NYC.

you must have been waiting tables at some fancy restaurant to be able to afford "the best CPA in NYC" why aren't you still there if the money was so good?

 

[GigiBowman]

GigiBowman wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There isn't a single thing this American girl does that does not involve paying taxes except for what I might do under the table
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Isn't that taxing?

It can be taxing....it depends if I'm in NY State or Jersey

 

[Jon]

you must have been waiting tables at some fancy restaurant to be able to afford "the best CPA in NYC" why aren't you still there if the money was so good?

Seriously, and what restaurant pays minimum wage to tip-earners? Most receive much less than minimum wage.

 

[Care4all]

To correct you, Dave

While the total contribution is about 14-15%, the employee contribution to Fica is 6.2% and the Medicare is about 1.5%

You employer pays the rest. So in reality only about 7.7% is actually taken out of an employee's paycheck.

simply not true skull...

the employer considers this money as part of your total compensation.... so does every chart and analysis out there on taxes...they all say this is money the employer has alotted for you in your salary, but uses it for the fica bill on you.

i was an executive with a corporation...every year i got a total compensation record from my employer at the end of the year and they included what they paid for me in FICA as part of my total compensation, along with bonuses, stocks, life insurance policies and their portion of my healthcare policy etc...ALL was considered my compensation.

care

 

[Skull Pilot]

simply not true skull...

the employer considers this money as part of your total compensation.... so does every chart and analysis out there on taxes...they all say this is money the employer has alotted for you in your salary, but uses it for the fica bill on you.

i was an executive with a corporation...every year i got a total compensation record from my employer at the end of the year and they included what they paid for me in FICA as part of my total compensation, along with bonuses, stocks, life insurance policies and their portion of my healthcare policy etc...ALL was considered my compensation.

care

The employer contribution is NOT taken out of the employee's paycheck as Dave stated. You can call it part of total compensation if you want but it is NOT taken out of the employees paycheck.

On my taxes it is listed as employer contribution not employee compensation. just because a company might use their employer contribution in a cost benefit calculation on how much to pay an employee, does not mean that the employee is responsible for paying that tax from his paycheck. What the "employer" considers this tax to be is irrelevant because the government calls it a tax to be paid by the employer.

 

[Red Dawn]

Every citizen of Alaska gets a 1000 dollar check every year, courtesy of the State government making the oil companies pay royalties.

Talk about wealth redistribution.

I wonder why poor Sarah never made a move to eliminate Alaska's oil wealth redistribution scheme?

 

[Jon]

simply not true skull...

the employer considers this money as part of your total compensation.... so does every chart and analysis out there on taxes...they all say this is money the employer has alotted for you in your salary, but uses it for the fica bill on you.

i was an executive with a corporation...every year i got a total compensation record from my employer at the end of the year and they included what they paid for me in FICA as part of my total compensation, along with bonuses, stocks, life insurance policies and their portion of my healthcare policy etc...ALL was considered my compensation.

care

The current FICA rate is 7.65%. Employers MATCH this when they pay taxes. The company may calculate the additional 7.65% THEY pay as a cost of having that employee on staff, but it is not included in the employee's taxes when they are filed.

And, also David, you don't fill out W-2's when you start working. You fill out W-4's. W-2's are what the employer gives to you to show your income for the year and the taxes withheld.

 

[Care4all]

The current FICA rate is 7.65%. Employers MATCH this when they pay taxes. The company may calculate the additional 7.65% THEY pay as a cost of having that employee on staff, but it is not included in the employee's taxes when they are filed.

And, also David, you don't fill out W-2's when you start working. You fill out W-4's. W-2's are what the employer gives to you to show your income for the year and the taxes withheld.

right, it is not, but they put the FICA money they pay for you, in your name...

with the SSA...after 10 years working, they start sending you a statement where SSA lists how much has been contributed to SS in your name ....both what you gave and what they gave for you and what your payout will be at specific age cutoffs if you decide to draw on it at 62, X amount, at 65 X amount more, at 67 X amount more at 70 X amount more as your monthly payment...

and all studies show this amount is actually money that would have been given you in your salary if this was not done the way it is with them paying this portion of your FICA....

well, that is what is being said....i can see how one might think otherwise though, and see it as something the employers would not justly compensate you with if FICA payments for you were all of a sudden abolished for them....

care

 

[Turboswede]

The current FICA rate is 7.65%. Employers MATCH this when they pay taxes. The company may calculate the additional 7.65% THEY pay as a cost of having that employee on staff, but it is not included in the employee's taxes when they are filed.

And, also David, you don't fill out W-2's when you start working. You fill out W-4's. W-2's are what the employer gives to you to show your income for the year and the taxes withheld.

Ok, I am actually say there is something wrong with the tax code, it’s a rare occurrence so everyone may want to pay attention.

The reason that FICA has an employer and an employee portion is that if there were simply an employee 15.4% rate and the employer was required to pay half of the employee’s FICA, then there would be imputed taxable income to the employee in the amount of the discharge of the employee’s tax liability.

Silly, it really is a tax on the employee but the rules are drafted so that the ½ the employer picks up won’t be considered additional income to the employee.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And, also David, you don't fill out W-2's when you start working. You fill out W-4's. W-2's are what the employer gives to you to show your income for the year and the taxes withheld.

I find it funny that in another thread DavidS said he owned a small business but he doesn't know the difference between a W4 and a W2 especially since he employs a "great deal of people"

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/60914-whos-buying-what-today.html#post837388

I'm an owner of a small business and I've studied Obama's plan carefully. I am responsible for the employment of a great deal of people and their livelyhoods, so I do not take this lightly.

Please, I'm all ears. Tell me how Obama will make my business smaller.

 

[indago]

jsanders wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------
The current FICA rate is 7.65%. Employers MATCH this when they pay taxes.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Edwin D. Lee was a farmer and a carpenter, and a member of the Old Order Amish. This Amish Order follows the dictates of the Bible, where it is said: "But if anyone does not make provision for his relations, and especially for members of his own household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." -- 1 Timothy 5:8

Mr. Lee, in the course of his business, employed other members of this Amish Order. In 1978, the Internal Revenue Service assessed Mr. Lee "in excess of $27,000 for unpaid employment taxes". It was noted in the 1982 United States Supreme Court case of US v Lee: "The Social Security Act and its subsequent amendments provide a system of old-age and unemployment benefits. 26 USC § 3101 et seq. (1976 ed and Supp III)... These benefits are supported by various taxes, including, relevant to this appeal, the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) taxes. FICA is a tax paid in part by employees through withholding, 26 USC § 3101..., and in part by employers through an excise tax. 26 USC § 3111... FUTA is an excise tax imposed only on employers. 26 USC § 3301... Both taxes are based on the wages paid to employees, and the recordkeeping and transmittal of funds are obligations of the employer. Only FICA is collected from self-employed individuals. In this case appellee failed to pay the employer's portion of FICA and FUTA taxes and failed to withhold his employee's contributions to FICA. An employer is liable for payment of the employee's share of FICA whether or not he withholds the required amount of the employee's contribution. 26 USC § 3102(b)..."

Barbara Armstrong, writing for the California Law Review, noted that the employer was "authorized" by the social security act to collect the employees portion of the total tax from his wages.

So, the tax is an excise tax, laid upon the employer, and the employer is responsible for the payment of the full amount of the tax.

 

[Turboswede]

jsanders wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------
The current FICA rate is 7.65%. Employers MATCH this when they pay taxes.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Edwin D. Lee was a farmer and a carpenter, and a member of the Old Order Amish. This Amish Order follows the dictates of the Bible, where it is said: "But if anyone does not make provision for his relations, and especially for members of his own household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." -- 1 Timothy 5:8

Mr. Lee, in the course of his business, employed other members of this Amish Order. In 1978, the Internal Revenue Service assessed Mr. Lee "in excess of $27,000 for unpaid employment taxes". It was noted in the 1982 United States Supreme Court case of US v Lee: "The Social Security Act and its subsequent amendments provide a system of old-age and unemployment benefits. 26 USC § 3101 et seq. (1976 ed and Supp III)... These benefits are supported by various taxes, including, relevant to this appeal, the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) and the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) taxes. FICA is a tax paid in part by employees through withholding, 26 USC § 3101..., and in part by employers through an excise tax. 26 USC § 3111... FUTA is an excise tax imposed only on employers. 26 USC § 3301... Both taxes are based on the wages paid to employees, and the recordkeeping and transmittal of funds are obligations of the employer. Only FICA is collected from self-employed individuals. In this case appellee failed to pay the employer's portion of FICA and FUTA taxes and failed to withhold his employee's contributions to FICA. An employer is liable for payment of the employee's share of FICA whether or not he withholds the required amount of the employee's contribution. 26 USC § 3102(b)..."

Barbara Armstrong, writing for the California Law Review, noted that the employer was "authorized" by the social security act to collect the employees portion of the total tax from his wages.

So, the tax is an excise tax, laid upon the employer, and the employer is responsible for the payment of the full amount of the tax.

Yes, because if not the employer would be seen to have discharged an amployee obligation and additional income in the discharged amount would be imputed to the employee.