Ron Paul Is Secretly Taking Over The GOP And It's Driving People Insane
- Thread starter Billybob
- Start Date
Yeah, I know a couple of families like that, and when you mix your show horses into the "ranch" it's another tax break for luxuries.
And it happens at "lower levels" also. One of my sisters has an "S corporation", her vehicle, house rent, and virtually all expenses for her life and her daughter and SIL who live with her come out of the corp., but since the "corp." only pays her minimum wage that's all she's taxed on. And since the corp. spends so much to support it's "officers" it makes little or no profit and pays little or no taxes.
I have another sister who owns a business, she owns it,(shadow owner) because her husband had long term issues and was so illiterate he couldn't pass the test required for the professional license to run a company dealing with dangerous chemicals,(but he's a good ******** salesman). They've been busted two or three times for tax issues, but since they can afford to hire a tax lawyer for a settlement and only end up paying 1/3 of what they owe it pays them to keep cheating.
But hey it's all "legal" so let's just ***** about the poor and elderly not paying "their share".
Last edited:
Why half of us don't pay income tax
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- It's a provocative fact about the tax code: Nearly half of U.S. households end up owing no federal income tax.
But it's not surprising given the addiction to tax breaks by both Democrats and Republicans, and the fact that the U.S. tax code is set up to be progressive.
"There's nothing nefarious going on here," William Gale, co-director of the independent Tax Policy Center, said on a call with reporters Wednesday.
Intentionally or not, Congress set it up this way.
Over the years, lawmakers have increased the number of non-payers by enacting reams of tax breaks -- such as tax credits for work, kids and education. And the Bush tax cuts, first passed more than a decade ago, expanded many of them.
Then lawmakers approved temporary tax breaks after the 2008 financial crisis to stimulate the economy, and that expanded the rolls even more, said Robert Greenstein, president of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The Tax Policy Center estimates that for tax year 2011, 46% of households will end up owing nothing in federal income taxes.
The percentage was closer to 40% before the recession, Greenstein said.
Millionaires who owe no federal income tax
Looking ahead if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire next year, the percentage of non-payers could drop to 36%, said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.
While the Zero Tax Club includes some very high-income households, it is made up disproportionately of low- and lower-middle-income households.
They, too, may benefit from a bevy of tax breaks, such as tax credits for work and kids. But for many, those types of breaks aren't the biggest reason why they end up in the non-payer group.
Say lawmakers stripped out all tax breaks except those most elemental to a progressive code -- such as the standard deduction and personal exemption, which exempt subsistence-level income and dependents. Even then, about 23% of households would still end up owing nothing in federal income taxes, according to Tax Policy Center research.
In other words, a couple with two kids, earning less than $26,400, would get an $11,600 standard deduction and four exemptions worth $3,700 each, reducing their taxable income to zero, Williams noted in the blog TaxVox.
But if payroll taxes are counted, the number of non-payer households drops precipitously -- to an estimated 18% in 2011.
That's because payroll taxes, which fund the big entitlement programs, hit low-income households harder than most since 100% of their income is subject to them. High-income filers pay a lower percentage of their income in payroll taxes since wages subject to the Social Security tax are capped at $110,100.
Most of those 18% of households that owe neither federal income nor payroll taxes are elderly or had income under $20,000, Williams said.
But even then, they still end up paying something in taxes. Once sales taxes as well as state and local income taxes are thrown into the mix, virtually no household in America would qualify for the non-payer group.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/26/pf/taxes/income-tax/index.htm
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- It's a provocative fact about the tax code: Nearly half of U.S. households end up owing no federal income tax.
But it's not surprising given the addiction to tax breaks by both Democrats and Republicans, and the fact that the U.S. tax code is set up to be progressive.
"There's nothing nefarious going on here," William Gale, co-director of the independent Tax Policy Center, said on a call with reporters Wednesday.
Intentionally or not, Congress set it up this way.
Over the years, lawmakers have increased the number of non-payers by enacting reams of tax breaks -- such as tax credits for work, kids and education. And the Bush tax cuts, first passed more than a decade ago, expanded many of them.
Then lawmakers approved temporary tax breaks after the 2008 financial crisis to stimulate the economy, and that expanded the rolls even more, said Robert Greenstein, president of the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
The Tax Policy Center estimates that for tax year 2011, 46% of households will end up owing nothing in federal income taxes.
The percentage was closer to 40% before the recession, Greenstein said.
Millionaires who owe no federal income tax
Looking ahead if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire next year, the percentage of non-payers could drop to 36%, said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.
While the Zero Tax Club includes some very high-income households, it is made up disproportionately of low- and lower-middle-income households.
They, too, may benefit from a bevy of tax breaks, such as tax credits for work and kids. But for many, those types of breaks aren't the biggest reason why they end up in the non-payer group.
Say lawmakers stripped out all tax breaks except those most elemental to a progressive code -- such as the standard deduction and personal exemption, which exempt subsistence-level income and dependents. Even then, about 23% of households would still end up owing nothing in federal income taxes, according to Tax Policy Center research.
In other words, a couple with two kids, earning less than $26,400, would get an $11,600 standard deduction and four exemptions worth $3,700 each, reducing their taxable income to zero, Williams noted in the blog TaxVox.
But if payroll taxes are counted, the number of non-payer households drops precipitously -- to an estimated 18% in 2011.
That's because payroll taxes, which fund the big entitlement programs, hit low-income households harder than most since 100% of their income is subject to them. High-income filers pay a lower percentage of their income in payroll taxes since wages subject to the Social Security tax are capped at $110,100.
Most of those 18% of households that owe neither federal income nor payroll taxes are elderly or had income under $20,000, Williams said.
But even then, they still end up paying something in taxes. Once sales taxes as well as state and local income taxes are thrown into the mix, virtually no household in America would qualify for the non-payer group.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/26/pf/taxes/income-tax/index.htm
On a side note, The Tea Party candidate knocked out the RINO Lugar last night.
I think that instead of raising anybodies taxes, they should cut out the waste, duplication and fraud in government spending. Something like $900 billion total the last I heard.
I think that instead of raising anybodies taxes, they should cut out the waste, duplication and fraud in government spending. Something like $900 billion total the last I heard.
That's 9 days worth. Only 356 more to go!
$900 Billion is a really good start, then they can look at collecting from the tax cheats.
The irony of the week, Obama advising the new French President elect not to raise taxes or increase government spending because it is bad for the economy.
$900 Billion is a really good start, then they can look at collecting from the tax cheats.
The irony of the week, Obama advising the new French President elect not to raise taxes or increase government spending because it is bad for the economy.
what a hypocrite!
I agree it's actually a pretty impressive number. I was just trolling a bit
to demonstrate the sheer scale of our spending. When someone says "We'll save a BILLION dollars," it sounds impressive until one considers it's like, less than 1 hour of federal budgetary spending. Saving a billion is good, no doubt, but it's a drop in the bucket on the whole.
Personally I think we need to increase our collections as well, but a reasonable corporate tax rate with a closure of loopholes is a far better approach than trying to bleed out the middle (and upper, for that matter) class.
So what you're saying is that the plethora of tax breaks available to everyone, benefits everyone, including the IRS which gets to retain more control and power? But if we eliminate tax breaks, we should only do it to the rich? I'd have no problem with them eliminating ALL tax breaks, so long as they cut the corporate tax in half and eliminate those tax breaks that benefit the low income earners as well. If you earn very little and want taxes to hurt less, you either need to work harder or get smarter. No one deserves a free ride in this "progressive socialist" system!
I'd be happy if all the people saying the FairTax plan isn't fair to the poor actually read the FairTax plan.
