OT Tax rant.

0.) I'm a liberal weenie snowflake. 1.) I'm all for corporate tax reform, close all the credits/ loopholes and let everyone pay at ~20% with no net change in revenue. 2.) I don't understand all this pass through stuff, but if people can become corporations/ LLC's then the maximum tax rate for people and corps should be the same. 3.) Why do no tax talks include payroll taxes? Last I checked I pay ~30% to the fed's ~1/2 in payroll taxes. (and of course only 1/2 of my payroll taxes are on my W-2, my employer is responsible for the other half.) It all just seems disgusting, I want a flat tax where the rich pay as much as me.

end rant.

George H.

Reply to
George Herold
Loading thread data ...

Um, the rich (Trump and his cronies) are in power, you think they are going to tax their buddies?

John :-#(#

Reply to
John Robertson

Of course not. (with apologizes to my Trump liking friends) I figure what ever T says the opposite is true.

George H.

Reply to
George Herold

By payroll taxes, I assume you mean Social Security taxes. If so the reason no one is including them is that Social Security is separate from income tax. If they ware included, nothing would get done.

Dan

Reply to
dcaster

Right, SS, medicare, other-smaller stuff. To me it's all part of the total taxes I send to the fed.

You stop paying SS/ payroll taxes at some point. (I'm not sure where that point is now) But payroll taxes seem big to me.. only ~1/2 of wage earners pay income tax. Everyone (up to a point) has 'payroll' taxes.

Which is a bigger part of total revenue?

George H.

Reply to
George Herold

Yet you want everyone to pay a flat tax (20%). Those who don't pay income tax aren't going to like you but I think it's a *great* idea.

It doesn't matter.

Reply to
krw

I'd refer you to detailed analysis which says you are wrong, but I won't waste my time. ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      | 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Thompson

When you stop having income, or die.

I'm receiving SS payments and paying back into the system simultaneously. And I must take taxable dollars out of my 401K as I'm still putting untaxed money into it.

Only an army of CPAs can figure this mess out... for a big fee.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

It's a well know fact that rich people get sad very easily. That's why they need beautiful yachts, incredible and well architected mansions, private jets, luxurious choppers, nookie rooms and amazing resorts. Also, poor people smell bad and often use coarse insensitive language. If you tax rich people, it becomes difficult for them to maintain the lifestyle they deserve and avoid interaction with the unwashed masses.

formatting link

--
Grizzly H.
Reply to
mixed nuts

:
.

Probably because no such detailed analysis exists. There will be superficia l nonsense on some right-wing web-site which will have selected some rare o ccasion where Trump told the truth (probably by accident) and Jim will have been bowled over by that, but there's a great deal more evidence that Trum p is a persistent liar, mainly because he invents his "facts" that suit his current story.

He doesn't seem to know enough to realise that he's actually lying. Presuma bly he really thinks that more people came to see his inauguration than Oba ma's because his vanity won't let him think anything else, so when he made that claim he didn't see himself as lying.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

As far a Social Security, you get to stop paying Social Security when you have earned $127,200. But the company gets to keep paying Social Security tax. And you and the company get to keep paying Medicare tax regardless of your wages.

Dan

Reply to
dcaster

OK thanks Dan. I thought it all went away above ~$127k. My mistake.

George H.

Reply to
George Herold

I consider SS a disability insurance program and a retirement program. I see no reason that a worker should not contribute to those. They are directly for the workers benefit. I used to not like being forced to contribute to SS, I could and would have did a better job at investing and growing it. On the other hand if we didn't have it forced, we would end up supporting those that didn't invest it (most) with our tax dollars. There would have been no contribution from those that weren't forced to pay SS. Plus I'm of the age where I could start collecting, so I like the idea of keeping it funded. The "trust is on track to be depleted in 2034" at which point the payout will drop to 75%, unless other changes are made. That's only 16 years, I expect to still be collecting, although they may install some means testing and could test me out of benefits. (Not Fair) Mikek

Reply to
amdx

Right, that's how it was set up. But there is no 'lock box' with all our SS money in it. It's all being spent as it comes in. (and then some) So to me it all just looks like money going to the government in my name. People have different views which is fine.

I think something like only 1/2 of wage earners pay income taxes now. And that number will go lower if the current tax plan raises the standard deduction and child tax credit.

George H.

Reply to
George Herold

Yup, kinda sucks doesn't it. I'm very near it, good income but lots of deductions to get me close to 0%. I suspect if the tax bill passes I'll be paying more. Itemizers are even going to lose their tax preparer deduction! (as it now reads) Mikek

Reply to
amdx

George Herold wrote on 11/30/2017 8:51 PM:

How is that related to taxes? Are they taxing liberalism these days?

Good luck with eliminating deductions of nearly any kind other than ones that benefit the middle class. There was talk of removing the deduction on a second home. Now that I have mine, that's ok with me.... lol I never thought the second home tax break was a good idea, but the one obviously intelligent person in Congress manage to convince the many others of the brilliance of the idea. Translate that to "some special interest benefited from the bill and put a lot of pressure on Congress".

The pass through tax entity is simple. The company exists for purposes that are not tax related, such as limitation of liability. The owners are required to draw a reasonable salary and then any money left over (profits) are their income rather than the company's income. The company doesn't really have income, it is all the owner's income.

As someone already explained, "payroll" taxes are FICA which largely go to fund Social Security and are not part of the general treasury funds like income and excise taxes. They are set to cover the current expenses and hopefully set some aside to cover future expenses. Surely you have heard about the eminent failure of SS when the expenses so outweigh the tax income that the reserve is exhausted and the checks stop. Like fusion it is always

30 years out to paraphrase someone's recent post.
--
Rick C 

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms, 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
rickman

I know you are talking about the cap so that any income above some dollar figure is not further taxed for FICA, but someone mentioned you only stop paying FICA when you die. It's worse than that. Once you start drawing SS and you continue to work, you will continue to pay into SS. But as you pay into SS your draw no longer increases.

That does make sense in a way. SS is not an investment pool. What you draw does not match exactly what you pay into it. This is just another way that shows it is not an investment, it is a fund not entirely unlike insurance where your payments may be wildly different from what you pay into it.

--
Rick C 

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms, 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
rickman

You have a strange way of viewing finances. If SS was invested in a stock portfolio would you consider that to be "spent" by the businesses? The SS funds are *loaned* to the government and collects interest.

Where did you get that number? I'd like to know the source rather than repeat *stuff* people "hear" from various places. Is this like Romney's "47%" who were on the dole?

--
Rick C 

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms, 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
rickman

That's just plain mean!

--
Rick C 

Viewed the eclipse at Wintercrest Farms, 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
rickman

Quick search... you ca ndo your own

formatting link

GH

Reply to
George Herold

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.