I Have the Solution!

[P31Woman]

fees aren't taxes. a tax is where we all pay. I don't fish , so I don't pay that fishing tax.

If your defination of tax was true all american would be paying Federal Income Taxes instead of only half of us.

 

[jasoncran]

it is , its just that our politicians have allowed it to not be that way.

 

[P31Woman]

But if the "average American" today pays over 50% (some say 57% and it's going up) in taxes, how can the Knotical Tax be enough?
Is it because the rich don't pay 10% now?

What do you mean the rich don't pay 10% now? I don't understand your comments at all?

Who says the average American is paying over 50% in taxes now?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

If your defination of tax was true all american would be paying Federal Income Taxes instead of only half of us.

His definition is true. Those who don't pay are either breaking the law, or have the deductions to avoid paying. Also, it isn't true that they don't pay "anything." Everybody pays something, and no one gets all their money from withholding or quarterly estimated tax payments back. It is just that they don't pay beyond what they've paid in, and some get part of it or a lot of it back.

 

[P31Woman]

His definition is true. Those who don't pay are either breaking the law, or have the deductions to avoid paying. Also, it isn't true that they don't pay "anything." Everybody pays something, and no one gets all their money from withholding or quarterly estimated tax payments back. It is just that they don't pay beyond what they've paid in, and some get part of it or a lot of it back.

Or they don't have taxable income that has to be reported. Some people don't even file income tax returns.

People who qualify for Earned Income Credit may get back thousands more than they paid in. I have and have had many employees whom I held O dollars out for withholding tax that qualified for EIC and got back thousands of dollars.

Believe it or not my State depends of that influx of EIC money to help keep our economy going.

 

[jasoncran]

well last year I got back some. this year I don't know. amt may hit me.

 

[Sparkey]

1,100,000,000,000 + 741,200,000,000 + 268,700,000,000 + 200,800,000,000 + 9,600,000,000 = 3,270,700,000,000
1.1 Trillion Income Taxes + 741.2 Billion Payroll Taxes + 268.7 Billion Other + 200.8 Billion Corporate + 9.6 Billion Gift = 3.2707 Trillion
~total tax collected (Source: Tax Policy Center, Credit: Lam Thuy Vo / NPR)

The income numbers are for total cash income, rather than adjusted gross income. This PDF discusses the distinction between the two.

The current U.S.A. population is over 311 million people (311,800,000 in mid-2011). Average tax, (not average American) would mean total amount of taxes paid divided by total number of taxpayers. I've not been able to arrive at a satisfactory number because although corporations are given rights as people, they are not counted in the census. Too much work for a small mind like mine.

 

[Sparkey]

What do you mean the rich don't pay 10% now? I don't understand your comments at all?

Who says the average American is paying over 50% in taxes now?

Here's a method for using Google Search (if your browser allows). Left-Click_Drag_Mouse to Highlight the part you want to search for. Right-Click highlighted part to bring up the dialog then choose "Google Search"

Here is the clickable search result, filtered for .edu sites only.

This is one quote from one such article:

After presidential candidate Mitt Romney claimed 47% of Americans "pay no income tax" and are "dependent upon government," media noted that because of tax loopholes, not near-poverty income, 1,400 millionaires paid no federal income taxes in 2009 (Robertson Williams, senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center) and that in 2011 the corporate "person" Boeing had no net income-tax liability for the fourth year in a row, despite $5.1 billion in profits (Danny Westneat), according to the Seattle Times, Sept. 19, 2012.

 

[P31Woman]

1,100,000,000,000 + 741,200,000,000 + 268,700,000,000 + 200,800,000,000 + 9,600,000,000 = 3,270,700,000,000
1.1 Trillion Income Taxes + 741.2 Billion Payroll Taxes + 268.7 Billion Other + 200.8 Billion Corporate + 9.6 Billion Gift = 3.2707 Trillion
~total tax collected (Source: Tax Policy Center, Credit: Lam Thuy Vo / NPR)

The income numbers are for total cash income, rather than adjusted gross income. This PDF discusses the distinction between the two.

The current U.S.A. population is over 311 million people (311,800,000 in mid-2011). Average tax, (not average American) would mean total amount of taxes paid divided by total number of taxpayers. I've not been able to arrive at a satisfactory number because although corporations are given rights as people, they are not counted in the census. Too much work for a small mind like mine.

What you are saying here is not in my opinion the same as what you said here.

Originally Posted by Sparrowhawke


But if the "average American" today pays over 50% (some say
57% and it's going up) in taxes, how can the Knotical Tax be enough?
Is it
because the rich don't pay 10% now?

What's the rich 10% comment about?

 

[reba]

His definition is true. Those who don't pay are either breaking the law, or have the deductions to avoid paying. Also, it isn't true that they don't pay "anything." Everybody pays something, and no one gets all their money from withholding or quarterly estimated tax payments back. It is just that they don't pay beyond what they've paid in, and some get part of it or a lot of it back.

Some folks "get back" more then they paid in....
Is one really paying taxes was the "income they receive is some one else's tax monies paid


AS p31 said...

 

[P31Woman]

Some folks "get back" more then they paid in....
Is one really paying taxes was the "income they receive is some one else's tax monies paid

YES!

In fact some people get Advanced EIC....that's money they did not earn added to each paycheck they get.

 

[Sparkey]

What you are saying here is not in my opinion the same as what you said here.

What's the rich 10% comment about?

One is a statement based on research that I've provided, the other is a question. Your comment, "what you are saying" confuses what I've said and the question that I've asked. What is your answer to the question? Do the rich (look at the corporate person "Boeing" specifically) pay more or less than 10%?

In 2011 the corporate "person" Boeing had no net income-tax liability for the fourth year in a row, despite $5.1 billion in profits (Danny Westneat), according to the Seattle Times, Sept. 19, 2012.

Looking at EIC provided to the low income levels is like comparing thimble sized amounts to truck loads, train loads, shipping container loads.

I'm saying that the scales are balanced in favor of the rich, not the poor. Just look at the distribution of wealth figures. What percent of the "population" holds the largest share? Why? Is it because of an evenly balanced tax policy or do the rich get richer?

 

[P31Woman]

One is a statement based on research that I've provided, the other is a question. Your comment, "what you are saying" confuses what I've said and the question that I've asked. What is your answer to the question? Do the rich (look at the corporate person "Boeing" specifically) pay more or less than 10%?


Looking at EIC provided to the low income levels is like comparing thimble sized amounts to truck loads, train loads, shipping container loads.

Who owns Boeing?

 

[jasoncran]

boeing is a corporation

 

[Sparkey]

Who owns Boeing?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing THE BOEING COMPANY, is a corporation organized and existing under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware. Delaware created Boeing (it may have restated its articles of incorporation, unsure). More can be found here.

But you've not answered the question. Is 0% less than 10%?

What is 10% of the $5.1 billion in profits Boeing reported? How does that number compare to the EIC benefit provided. Is 10% of the reported 5.1 Billion more or less than the EIC benefit provided to any one individual, even when they qualify for the maximum allowance. I'm guessing that the difference in comparison is like the difference between a thimbleful and a truck-load at least.

 

[P31Woman]

I'm saying that the scales are balanced in favor of the rich, not the poor.
Just look at the distribution of wealth figures. What percent of the
"population" holds the largest share? Why? Is it because of an evenly balanced
tax policy or do the rich get richer?

No it's not because of the tax laws. Have you ever read the book the Millionaire Next Door? It's probably the most accurate book I have ever read examining the life of the Average American Millionaire. It's about lifestyle choices.

 

[P31Woman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing THE BOEING COMPANY, is a corporation organized and existing under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware. Delaware created Boeing (it may have restated its articles of incorporation, unsure). More can be found here.

But you've not answered the question. Is 0% less than 10%?

So the people who own this company are retired teachers, firemen, working folks who buy stocks over he internet, people who work in baggage at Boeing and take advantage of stock offered to them. It's a company owned by working people, retired people, wealthy people, middle income people and possibly poor people.

Those people pay taxes on the profits the company makes for them. Those profits are reported on their income tax form.

 

[P31Woman]

JD Roth wrote this overview of the book The Millionaire Next Door

Many people who earn high incomes are not rich, the authors warn. Most people with high incomes fail to accumulate any lasting wealth. They live hyperconsumer lifestyles, spending their money as fast as they earn it. In order to accumulate wealth, in order to become rich, one must not only earn a lot (play “good offense”, according to Stanley and Danko), but also develop frugal habits (play “good defense”). Most books focus on only one side of the wealth equation: spending less or earning more. It’s refreshing to read a book that makes it clear that both are required to succeed.
It’s as if people can be classified based on the following table (which is my own invention based on the authors’ findings):

<table width="80%"><tbody><tr><td> </td><td align="center">High Income</td><td align="center">Low Income</td></tr><tr><td>Frugal</td><td align="center">wealthy</td><td align="center">breaking even (spartan)</td></tr><tr><td>Spender</td><td align="center">breaking even (lavish)</td><td align="center">broke</td></tr></tbody></table>​

High-income spenders live in a house of a cards. Sure they have the money now to fund their hyperconsumer lifestyle, but what happens when that money goes away? It’s also difficult for low-income frugal folks to acquire wealth. They need to learn to play financial “offense”. But those with low incomes who spend are in the biggest trouble of all.
The wealthy, on the other hand, generally have a high income and a frugal mindset. They share other characteristics as well.

• 80% of America’s millionaires are first-generation rich. This is contrary to those who would have you believe that wealth is usually inherited.
• 20% of millionaires are retired
• 50% of millionaires own a business

The authors write:

In the course of our investigations, we discovered seven common denominators among those who successfully build wealth.
​

Those characteristics are:

1. They live well below their means. In general, millionaires are frugal. Not only do they self-identify as frugal, they actually live the life. They take extraordinary steps to save money. They don’t live lavish lifestyles. They’re willing to pay for quality, but not for image.
2. They allocate their time, energy, and money efficiently, in ways conducive to building wealth. Millionaires budget. They also plan their investments. They begin earning and investing early in life. The authors note that “there is an inverse relationship between the time spent purchasing luxury items such as cars and clothes and the time spent planning one’s financial future”. In other words, the more time someone spends buying things that look good, the less time they spend on personal finance.
3. They believe that financial independence is more important than displaying high social status. The authors spend far too much time beating home this point: usually millionaires don’t have fancy cars. They drive mundane domestic models, and they keep them for years. (There’s an entire 31-page chapter devoted to how millionaires shop for cars. It’s tedious. It may be the worst chapter I’ve ever read in any personal finance book. And the authors go on ad nauseum about the average price per pound of various vehicles. There’s even an appendix showing the average price-per-pound for the most popular models.)
4. Their parents did not provide economic outpatient care. That is, most millionaires were not financially supported by their parents. The authors’ research indicates that “the more dollars adult children receive [from their parents], the fewer they accumulate, while those who are given fewer dollars accumulate more”.
5. Their adult children are economically self-sufficient. This chapter is fascinating. The authors clearly believe that giving money to adult children damages their ability to succeed.
6. They are proficient in targeting market opportunities. “Very often those who supply the affluent become wealthy themselves.” The authors discuss how one of the best ways to make money is to sell products or services to those who already have money. They list a number of occupations they feel have long-term potential in this area.
7. They chose the right occupation. “Self-employed people are four times more likely to be millionaires than those who work for others.” There is no magic list of businesses from which wealth is derived — people can be successful with any type of business. In fact, most millionaire business owners make their money in “dull-normal” industries. They build cabinets. They sell shoes. They’re dentists. They own bowling alleys. They make boxes. There’s no magic bullet.

 

[Sparkey]

Tipper truck load: 8.49 cubic meters. Measure a different truck and get different figures. I chose a standard size.

If a thimble has a capacity of 1 cubic milliliter that would mean a ratio of 1:8.49 thousand, right?

Now all there is left is to do the math for 0% tax (because of loopholes) and the 10% of 5.1 Billion (which by the way would equal 510 Million, right?) and compare that amount to the EIC benefit at maximum.

The EIC is available to workers with low to moderate incomes. Claimants must meet the following criteria:

1. Must have earned income
2. Adjusted gross income’ must be below a certain level, which depends on family size
3. Investment income must be less than $3,200
4. Must have a social security number
5. Tax filing status must NOT be ‘married filing separately’
6. Must be a citizen or ‘resident alien for tax purposes’ for the whole year
7. Must have lived in the country for at least half of the year

Do you have a figure for the EIC benefit for families with one child?

How does that figure compare to my thimble to truckload ratio of 1:849,000 ?
Let's just be generous and say that the EIC amount you were speaking about was $5,000 but I pulled that figure out of my hat, provide actual and corrected figures if you'd like.

But 5,000 to 510 million? That's approximately 1:102,000 right?
Thimble to Truckload: 1:849,000
Seems that I've overstated it a bit. It should be 8.3 thimblefuls compared to a TRUCKload. sry about that.

 

[P31Woman]

Tipper truck load: 8.49 cubic meters. Measure a different truck and get different figures. I chose a standard size.

If a thimble has a capacity of 1 cubic milliliter that would mean a ratio of 1:8.49 thousand, right?

Now all there is left is to do the math for 0% tax (because of loopholes) and the 10% of 5.1 Billion (which by the way would equal 510 Million, right?) and compare that amount to the EIC benefit at maximum.



Do you have a figure for the EIC benefit for families with one child?

How does that figure compare to my thimble to truckload ratio of 1:849,000 ?
Let's just be generous and say that the EIC amount you were speaking about was $5,000 but I pulled that figure out of my hat, provide actual and corrected figures if you'd like.

But 5,000 to 510 million? That's approximately 1:102,000 right?
Thimble to Truckload: 1:849,000
Seems that I've overstated it a bit. It should be 8.3 thimblefuls compared to a TRUCKload. sry about that.

What loophones are you talking about? Can you give me the actual tax code?

Frank invest the max into his IRA. Do you think it's a loophone he is taking advantage of when he does not pay taxes on that money?