Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
And in the case of the corporation, they are not double taxed. They pay tax on their income. Their shareholders pay the tax on the dividends. You understand the difference? Double taxation is a flippin damn myth concocted by the very same people that are busy convincing you that a free market is free from government interference, that the rich already pay enough in taxes, and that corporations always pass on tax increases to consumers. Lies, nothing but lies.Right there you are wrong! You are not double taxed on your entire income when you go to the store.
Just on the amount you spent. So for a simple example: six pack beer (figure you be beer drinker) $6.00.
Tax in your state maybe 8% BUT it is NOT Federal tax... state tax!
Understand the difference or is that too complicated for you?
You realize the American people have trillions of dollars in pension funds and 401ks invested in these corporations right? Do you want government to take the profits or keep them in your pension and 401k?Talk about not paying their fair share, hell, they ain't even contributing enough to be considered a good tip.
Can you explain how any income is unearned? If you went to work and got paid hourly it was earned. If you saved some and invested it somewhere it was earned. How is any income not earned?Double taxation is HORSESHIT. Hell, we all suffer from double taxation. I get my paycheck, it was taxed. I go spend the money at the store, damn, it is taxed again. And then the store makes a profit off that money, and holy shit, it is taxed yet again. Only a sheer FOOL would make the claim that only dividends are double taxed. You fools are SUCKERS, and the powers that be have been conning your asses for years.
And do tell me, why the hell should UNEARNED, you got that, UNEARNED income be taxed lower than earned income? How the hell does that make sense. Why should a doctor pay a higher tax rate on the money he makes doctoring, than the money his ass makes playing in the stock market? That make any sense to you? Why would you encourage him to "speculate" instead of do what he was trained to do?
Here's a fact fool, the top 10% already pay 71% of the taxes so shove your 'fair share' BS up your ass okay. Without corporations you mooching deadbeats would be fighting in the streets over scraps of food.And in the case of the corporation, they are not double taxed. They pay tax on their income. Their shareholders pay the tax on the dividends. You understand the difference? Double taxation is a flippin damn myth concocted by the very same people that are busy convincing you that a free market is free from government interference, that the rich already pay enough in taxes, and that corporations always pass on tax increases to consumers. Lies, nothing but lies.
The corporation pays taxes, which lowers what can be paid out to investors, who then pay taxes on that left over portion.And in the case of the corporation, they are not double taxed. They pay tax on their income. Their shareholders pay the tax on the dividends. You understand the difference? Double taxation is a flippin damn myth concocted by the very same people that are busy convincing you that a free market is free from government interference, that the rich already pay enough in taxes, and that corporations always pass on tax increases to consumers. Lies, nothing but lies.
The wealthiest one percent own 50% of the stocks. And why would they hold those stocks in a 401K? The capital gains tax rate is lower than their income tax rate, which is what they would have to pay if they pulled money from a 401K. Just another example of how the system is tilted against the common person. You just trotting out one of those dead horses that your masters have trained you to trot out. So, to answer your question, I would rather they tax those profits than the income of those people in the middle that are investing in those 401K's, then maybe they could be investing in a ROTH instead of a 401K tax bomb.You realize the American people have trillions of dollars in pension funds and 401ks invested in these corporations right? Do you want government to take the profits or keep them in your pension and 401k?
The IRS classifies income as earned or unearned, depending on the source. Sorry that is over your head.Can you explain how any income is unearned? If you went to work and got paid hourly it was earned. If you saved some and invested it somewhere it was earned. How is any income not earned?
And you are conflating the income tax and the corporate tax. And I hear you about the top ten percent paying 71% of the taxes. But they are pulling one over on you. They might pay more of the total taxes, but the percentage of their income they pay is less than it was when they paid a lower share with a higher rate. What does that tell you? That now, they also garnish a higher percentage of the total income. If you want to solve that problem, increase their marginal tax rate. Those wealthy ten percent no more want to do that than they want a hole in the head. So they are playing you for a fool as you repeat another one of their dead horse arguments.Here's a fact fool, the top 10% already pay 71% of the taxes so shove your 'fair share' BS up your ass okay. Without corporations you mooching deadbeats would be fighting in the streets over scraps of food.
Well if the IRS says so it must be true. Can you explain how an investment made is unearned? Or better yet explain what defines earned and unearned. I’d like to see this.The IRS classifies income as earned or unearned, depending on the source. Sorry that is over your head.
It is NOT a myth! You idiot! You show NOTHING to prove your statement.And in the case of the corporation, they are not double taxed. They pay tax on their income. Their shareholders pay the tax on the dividends. You understand the difference? Double taxation is a flippin damn myth concocted by the very same people that are busy convincing you that a free market is free from government interference, that the rich already pay enough in taxes, and that corporations always pass on tax increases to consumers. Lies, nothing but lies.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/business-people-talking-in-meeting-56a437b45f9b58b7d0d5e692.jpg)
Investment income is passive income. Earned income requires active participation. Earned income is received in exchange for your time. Investment income usually requires an upfront allocation of capital, it also should come with risk.Well if the IRS says so it must be true. Can you explain how an investment made is unearned? Or better yet explain what defines earned and unearned. I’d like to see this.
Attempt to deflect. Again the working class has TRILLIONS of dollars of pension and 401k money invested in the corporations you are attacking. So do you want government to have the profits or the working class?The wealthiest one percent own 50% of the stocks. And why would they hold those stocks in a 401K? The capital gains tax rate is lower than their income tax rate, which is what they would have to pay if they pulled money from a 401K. Just another example of how the system is tilted against the common person. You just trotting out one of those dead horses that your masters have trained you to trot out. So, to answer your question, I would rather they tax those profits than the income of those people in the middle that are investing in those 401K's, then maybe they could be investing in a ROTH instead of a 401K tax bomb.
No dummy I'm trying to get it through the 4 inches of your left wing Neanderthal skull that we in the top 10% already pay 71% of the actual taxes paid so what are you mooching losers bitching about? Isn't 71% a 'fair share'? You are bloviating the 'rate' BS lets talk actual tax dollars paid, the top 10% paid 71% of them. Sorry to burst your 'rate' BS bubble. Now get a job and pay YOUR fair share.And you are conflating the income tax and the corporate tax. And I hear you about the top ten percent paying 71% of the taxes. But they are pulling one over on you. They might pay more of the total taxes, but the percentage of their income they pay is less than it was when they paid a lower share with a higher rate. What does that tell you? That now, they also garnish a higher percentage of the total income. If you want to solve that problem, increase their marginal tax rate. Those wealthy ten percent no more want to do that than they want a hole in the head. So they are playing you for a fool as you repeat another one of their dead horse arguments.
The key part of your "definition", "two parties". So how is paying a sales tax with after tax money not also "double taxation"? The myth of double taxation is merely an attempt by the wealthy and powerful to get the benefits of the corporate shield without paying for them. Don't want to pay taxes on income distributed to partners, then form a partnership. Then the assets of the partners are subject to liability claims. A corporation has limited liability, the shareholders are protected by the "corporate shield". The corporate tax is the cost of that corporate shield, and at the moment, corporations and their shareholders are getting that protection on the cheap.It is NOT a myth! You idiot! You show NOTHING to prove your statement.
I show the link!
The term "double taxation" describes how taxes on what seems like the same income
are imposed on two parties.
It most commonly applies to corporate shareholders and their corporations.
The corporation is taxed on its earnings or profits,
then the shareholders are taxed again on dividends they receive from those earnings.
THAT IS what is called "DOUBLE TAXATION". And I've substantiated. YOU zero. Get some proof beforeWhat Is Double Taxation?
Double taxation is when the same source of income is taxed twice. This happens in a few situations. Find out when and how it can sometimes be avoided.www.thebalancesmb.com
you spout off!
Refers to the imposition of taxes on the same income, assets or financial transaction at two different points of time.double taxation
www.law.cornell.edu
A common example is the taxing of shareholder dividends after taxation as corporate earnings.
67,400,000 results "Double Taxation"!
View attachment 548459
I believe I already answered that question. I want the corporations to pay more in taxes. I fully expect the vast majority of the cost of those increased taxes to fall on the shareholders. But the benefits of those additional tax dollars will flow more to the middle class than the wealthy, which is kind of the point. Think about the debt. The wealthy have figured out it is better to loan the government money at interest than pay the government with taxes. Our economy functioned more effectively, and the middle class enjoyed a much greater percentage of the benefits of that economy, when the wealthy AND corporations were paying more in taxes. Again, you guys have all been conned. You are bringing up the same, tired, worn out arguments that just don't add up. Little more than trained parrots. Joe Sixpack has a 401k, he will pay taxes on his distributions as if it were earned income, yet it was passive income. And his holdings amount to a drop in the bucket. Total value of all 401K accounts in the US is 4.6 trillion dollars. Total stock market cap is 34 trillion.Attempt to deflect. Again the working class has TRILLIONS of dollars of pension and 401k money invested in the corporations you are attacking. So do you want government to have the profits or the working class?
What's wrong. Your handlers not give you an answer so you got to keep screaming the same shit. If one man made all the money you think he would bitch about paying all the taxes. Or worse, claim the people that didn't make any money should be paying some? What part of the fact that the rich are more than willing to pay most of the taxes if they don't have to pay as much of their income in taxes as they did when they paid less of the taxes do you not understand? You have no argument. The means to fix this "problem" is to raise the marginal tax rate on the wealthy. History has proven as much. I could explain why but if you can't grasp the big picture point I am making you will never understand the nuts and bolts of how this happened.No dummy I'm trying to get it through the 4 inches of your left wing Neanderthal skull that we in the top 10% already pay 71% of the actual taxes paid so what are you mooching losers bitching about? Isn't 71% a 'fair share'? You are bloviating the 'rate' BS lets talk actual tax dollars paid, the top 10% paid 71% of them. Sorry to burst your 'rate' BS bubble. Now get a job and pay YOUR fair share.
Oh, so now it’s not unearned it’s passive. All investments come with up front capital and come with all the risk. If you have a 401K you have invested your money and it’s at risk. But isn’t that how the rich kind of get rich? Just asking for a poor person with no investments wondering why rich people aren’t paying more for welfare.Investment income is passive income. Earned income requires active participation. Earned income is received in exchange for your time. Investment income usually requires an upfront allocation of capital, it also should come with risk.
And who believes YOU? NO links. No sources.The key part of your "definition", "two parties". So how is paying a sales tax with after tax money not also "double taxation"? The myth of double taxation is merely an attempt by the wealthy and powerful to get the benefits of the corporate shield without paying for them. Don't want to pay taxes on income distributed to partners, then form a partnership. Then the assets of the partners are subject to liability claims. A corporation has limited liability, the shareholders are protected by the "corporate shield". The corporate tax is the cost of that corporate shield, and at the moment, corporations and their shareholders are getting that protection on the cheap.
Unlike you I provided links to what I write!The key part of your "definition", "two parties". So how is paying a sales tax with after tax money not also "double taxation"? The myth of double taxation is merely an attempt by the wealthy and powerful to get the benefits of the corporate shield without paying for them. Don't want to pay taxes on income distributed to partners, then form a partnership. Then the assets of the partners are subject to liability claims. A corporation has limited liability, the shareholders are protected by the "corporate shield". The corporate tax is the cost of that corporate shield, and at the moment, corporations and their shareholders are getting that protection on the cheap.
You are destroyed lib drone. Your 'hate corporations' nonsense debunked. Go lick your wounds.What's wrong. Your handlers not give you an answer so you got to keep screaming the same shit. If one man made all the money you think he would bitch about paying all the taxes. Or worse, claim the people that didn't make any money should be paying some? What part of the fact that the rich are more than willing to pay most of the taxes if they don't have to pay as much of their income in taxes as they did when they paid less of the taxes do you not understand? You have no argument. The means to fix this "problem" is to raise the marginal tax rate on the wealthy. History has proven as much. I could explain why but if you can't grasp the big picture point I am making you will never understand the nuts and bolts of how this happened.
