13 replies to this topic

[questionmark]

www.nytimes.com said:

Like most Americans (though not Mitt Romney, who got an extension), I filed my 2011 tax returns this week and paid my five layers of income tax: federal, state, local, self-employed and something called the metropolitan commuter tax (even though I live in New York City and don't commute).When I first looked at the returns, I was incredulous.  

My adjusted gross income was higher than 2010. Yet my overall tax rate went down. My alternative minimum tax also went down. Read more...

  

Yeh, like we did not know that....

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

So the more you earn, the less you pay? Can I do my taxes through the American system please?

[conspiracybeliever]

Of course the poor pay more. The working poor. People who work and have nothing pay the most. If you have a house there are deductions for that. There are lots of things that you purchase where you can get tax deductions. If you work and can't afford to buy these things you just pay. The working poor pay more for everything. The less you make the higher your interest rates if you do buy something. Overall the less you have the more you pay to live. That's just a fact. This country thrives on poverty. It creates it. The rich own our prisons and social services. Those are huge businesses. We gotta help the children! They're paying the rent!

[Rafterman]

Which is why we should have a 15% flat tax - no deductions and no capital gains taxes at all.  Everyone pays the same rate on INCOME.

[Gummug]

Rafterman, on 21 April 2012 - 12:35 PM, said:

Which is why we should have a 15% flat tax - no deductions and no capital gains taxes at all.  Everyone pays the same rate on INCOME.

I agree...either that or the fair tax. One of the benefits, with the fair tax, we could eliminate the IRS thus saving millions if not billions of dollars per year.

[ninjadude]

Rafterman, on 21 April 2012 - 12:35 PM, said:

Which is why we should have a 15% flat tax - no deductions and no capital gains taxes at all.  Everyone pays the same rate on INCOME.

right, so then the very rich would get a huge tax break. Good thinking. NOT. I suggest you read up on the value of marginal tax rates.

[ninjadude]

Gummug, on 21 April 2012 - 06:20 PM, said:

I agree...either that or the fair tax. One of the benefits, with the fair tax, we could eliminate the IRS thus saving millions if not billions of dollars per year.

You're wrong. Who would you pay this "fair tax" to? The IRS would not be eliminated. And a flat tax would give the rich a huge tax break.

Edited by ninjadude, 21 April 2012 - 08:37 PM.

[and then]

If the problem is that the rich are paying almost no tax due to their ability to find loopholes, then closing those and forcing them to actually pay the 15% would cause them to pay MORE, not less.  The overall effect would be more tax raised from everyone I think.  But it won't happen because the "progressive" system we have now is designed to give power to the government to control aspects of our lives that they could not normally touch.

[Rafterman]

ninjadude, on 21 April 2012 - 08:35 PM, said:

right, so then the very rich would get a huge tax break. Good thinking. NOT. I suggest you read up on the value of marginal tax rates.

And that's really what it's all about to you, isn't it?  Sticking it to the rich and income redistribution.

Careful, your Little Red Book is showing.

[conspiracybeliever]

Rafterman, on 22 April 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

And that's really what it's all about to you, isn't it?  Sticking it to the rich and income redistribution.

Careful, your Little Red Book is showing.

There is a reason those people ended up with all that money and it's not because they are geniuses or hard workers. It's because they own our courts, our judicial system, our social services and our politicians. That money isn't theirs.

[questionmark]

Rafterman, on 22 April 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

And that's really what it's all about to you, isn't it?  Sticking it to the rich and income redistribution.

Careful, your Little Red Book is showing.

So according to your little brown book it is OK that the government takes 30% from you and lets those who earn millions keep 85%? Well, if that is the case they should increase your taxes to pay for the deficit. Cause most of it is due to people getting breaks that the poor did not get.

[ninjadude]

Rafterman, on 22 April 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

And that's really what it's all about to you, isn't it?  Sticking it to the rich and income redistribution.

Not at all. It has to do with facts. Since you won't look it up, I'll post some here

Quote

In a jurisdiction with a flat tax  on earnings, every taxpayer pays the same percentage of income,  regardless of income or consumption. Some proponents of this system  propose to exempt a fixed amount of earnings (such as the first $10,000)  from the flat tax. In a revenue neutral situation in jurisdictions with  progressive taxation regimes, where imposition of a "flat tax" would  target neither an increase nor decrease in the total tax revenue, the  net effect of the flat tax would be to shift a significant portion of  the tax burden from wealthier tax brackets to less wealthy tax brackets.

My link

Read that again. A flat tax would shift the burden of taxation from those who are most able to pay to those who do not. Do you think that is a workable solution?

[Marks_Thoughts]

ninjadude, on 21 April 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

You're wrong. Who would you pay this "fair tax" to? The IRS would not be eliminated. And a flat tax would give the rich a huge tax break.

The problem with the current tax system is that is has been 'tweaked' so much that it takes tens of thousands of pages to print the code, it costs American businesses thousands of man-hours every year per business to remain in compliance and to take advantage of all of the 'incentives' (we see these as loopholes), and requires an army of IRS agents to enforce, as well as real law enforcement agents. Consider a simpler plan, not necessarily a true Flat Tax.
The plan would look similar to what you and I see, essentially some few deductions to fill out a relatively simple return. I don't know what the percentage really should be, let's just accept 15%. It would work like this: Tax rate is the same for all users and is levied against income from wages, capital gains, and similar. Every user gets a personal deduction (intent should be to make up for the various consumption taxes low-income earners pay to local and state when they purchase necessary items).
I would argue that if you want businesses to hire the folks that you give the corporations a deduction for each full-time employee (a full 40 hours a week employee - not part-timers combined hours). The point of this would be to remove the trend for part-time employees, which enables companies to not pay benefits, and to create and retain full-time workers. In effect, you have those at the bottom of the income scale able to stay ahead of the local and state taxes to survive. It also allows businesses and high-earners to hire and not be non-competitive internationally.
I would eliminate all other deductions, loans to businesses by local, state or federal agencies, tax abatements would be removed (all this really does is pit communities against each other) and allow businesses that are innovative and able to grow to do just that. Government should NOT be in the world of business at all. The role of government should be clear: Keep a fair playing field - Keep work conditions as safe as is practicable - Keep the environment as clean as is practicable. Taken to the full this would largely eliminate the bulk of tax attorney and accountant expenses, IRS agents - and reduce the paperwork businesses are currently required to file. I hear that large corporations that are complex in nature file returns that are as much as 50,000 pages each year! Who reads that crap and delves into all of the arcane tax deductions, etc. to see if it was correct? Why do we waste so much time in court litigating those arcane deductions and similar? It's just plain nuts. Keep it simple, keep it sane, and keep it low to allow businesses to grow.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Rafterman, on 21 April 2012 - 12:35 PM, said:

Which is why we should have a 15% flat tax - no deductions and no capital gains taxes at all.  Everyone pays the same rate on INCOME.

I think 10% would be easier to work with, quite easy to quickly calculate 10% of anything (dividing by ten is easily amongst the simplest form of division to teach and use in every day life). And 10% isn't that much of a loss for anyone, 10 cents in a dollar.