The Tax Thread
- Thread starter CharminTide
- Start date
No CA. The tax revenue money is spent wisely, it's the money the government makes out of thin air that is wasted!
Is it possible or normal for my effective tax rate to decrease from last year when my income is greater than last year? I did have a few more deductions but I was surprised to see a much lower effective tax rate when my income increased about 10%. I've double checked everything. This is a tax return for married filing joint..
I keep putting mine off. I know I will have to pay again this year so I put it off until the very last minute. I have a couple of new things this year that I do not know what I need to do. I now have a Roth IRA and some stocks. I have no idea what I can claim in terms of loss. I got some research to do. It looks like I can only claim loss on the stocks if I sold the stocks? I lost money (did not sell) on the stocks and my IRA went down form what I contributed (did not cash it out though).
I am one of those disappointed people, but it’s because of the healthcare marketplace, BC/BS and possible fraud.
Calling the sate insurance commissioner now.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Unless rules have changed -
You don’t claim losses OR gains on stocks until you sell IIRC (dividends must be reported). Not sure, but I think you can only claim contributions to IRA’s if you’re not cashing out. Earle knows a lot more about that than I do.
At least that’s what I remember, I don’t report any increase or decrease in stock valuation because it’s only on paper, unless I sell it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
That's correct. Paper losses are not claimable - the security must be sold. If he's talking about his Roth IRA, his is even different from that. Losses (and gains) on securities held in a tax-exempt entity are not claimable, even if there are sales. And, he'd getting no deduction on contributions to his IRA, since it's a Roth...
How does Buffet do it? He reported paying less percent than his secretary.
All joking aside surely you can see ways for corporations to migrate their company's assets and profit structure off shore. Why did so many move before the last tax cut?
I'm in the camp of not really having a problem to pay taxes, as it is needed to run the modern bureaucratic government that our country has. I think there are lots of government organizations that are still needed, even if you were able to downsize them through strict oversight. I would also agree with Dr. Larry Arn's assessment that one reason (not the only reason) our modern government has gotten so large is because Congress has essentially given up its constitutional powers to become a rubber stamp for the presidency; there are many laws and regulations that have been enacted by the various government agencies and not by Congress.
I want to see the U.S. government pay down its debts, and reform its tax code so that everyone is paying their share. I'm not entirely opposed to a progressive tax structure, but it can't be so progressive before people decide to take their money and move out (see California, for example). I would like to see the government's budgets (local, state, and federal) adjusted to help public education. Public education has changed so much in terms of the student population, and public educations tends to be the first on the chopping block when budgetary cuts are made, or when budgets are required to be balanced.
I believe that the current rate of taxation and spending is a massive problem that most congressmen and government bureaucrats do not want to fix as it would affect their bottom line. I'm not well-versed enough in tax policy to give my two cents on what specifically needs to happen while accounting for the pros/cons of that policy. Would a VAT-type program work at the federal level, especially if you eliminated other taxes, like the income tax? I have no idea, and I'm not in a place right now to find that research, if there is any.
I want to see the U.S. government pay down its debts, and reform its tax code so that everyone is paying their share. I'm not entirely opposed to a progressive tax structure, but it can't be so progressive before people decide to take their money and move out (see California, for example). I would like to see the government's budgets (local, state, and federal) adjusted to help public education. Public education has changed so much in terms of the student population, and public educations tends to be the first on the chopping block when budgetary cuts are made, or when budgets are required to be balanced.
I believe that the current rate of taxation and spending is a massive problem that most congressmen and government bureaucrats do not want to fix as it would affect their bottom line. I'm not well-versed enough in tax policy to give my two cents on what specifically needs to happen while accounting for the pros/cons of that policy. Would a VAT-type program work at the federal level, especially if you eliminated other taxes, like the income tax? I have no idea, and I'm not in a place right now to find that research, if there is any.
I agree with the main thrust of your post.
The issue I have with consumption taxes (like a VAT or sales tax) is that it disproportionately affects those with lower income. Let's say everyone has to spend $X on basic necessities of life (food, shelter, etc.). That X is a much higher proportion of total income for those in the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum, and so they carry a heavier personal tax burden than those with higher income. Eliminating income tax and shifting revenue to consumption taxes would be a terribly regressive policy that only widens the wealth gap. Taxing income (in the form of payroll, investments, business profit, etc.) is certainly imperfect, but it's better. In principle, a wealth tax is what we need, but there are Constitutional issues in its application. It could be that applying a more progressive taxation structure to capital gains could approximately a wealth tax (rich people don't spend most of their money, they just let it sit in the markets), but I'm neither an economist nor a lawyer.
I want to break even every year. I will never understand why some people like getting a tax return. I don’t like knowing I could have had more money all year long.
I know I will have to pay this year as I have every year for about 8 years now. I don’t like it, but I will deal with it.
I know I will have to pay this year as I have every year for about 8 years now. I don’t like it, but I will deal with it.
People in general fundamentally misunderstand taxation.
But as for the tax refund, even people who do understand it may appreciate it in terms of having a regular "windfall" that they lack the self discipline to build themselves.
The problem (for people who think like me anyway) is that this conditions people to think of the money as the government's and not theirs.
What you mentioned is not workable for average Joe Taxpayer. The next time you have the money socked away to migrate your international corporation to Ireland, go head on...
There are two very good reasons for overpaying a bit. First, the return on short term money is close to being nonexistent. Second, the underestimation penalty can really bite, if you're not being withheld and are paying quarterly...
You think so?I've not noticed that with people who are deliberately setting up to be over-withheld. What I've noticed is that people feel like they're putting their own money aside for the future, sort of a no-interest Christmas Club...
Prior to ACA, we had deductions that were hard to calculate in regards to how much they would reduce our taxes; in some years, they involved late year decisions that couldn’t be predicted a year before.
So I looked at it as getting back some of what I paid in taxes, a welcome event; a “no-interest Christmas Club” savings account with a totally variable payout, if you will.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
So I looked at it as getting back some of what I paid in taxes, a welcome event; a “no-interest Christmas Club” savings account with a totally variable payout, if you will.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I don't think I'll have that to worry about, the comment was just made because I don't think the new members of congress or the young electorate will be able to use that kind of tax to reach their goals to have the government be all things to all people.
Started mine yesterday and looks like we'll thankfully be staying about where we were last year.
Latest threads
-
US Army replacing 5.56mm rifle with a 6.8mm for infantry- Started by Tidewater
- Replies: 1
-
-
Game One of Alabama-Texas A&M Alabama Series Moved to Friday as Part of Doubleheader- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
Bama Game Thread: Bama Gymnastics - NCAA Championship Semi-finals (ESPN2 | 4/18 @ 8pm CT)- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 32
-
No. 1 Visits Tuscaloosa for Second Straight Week as Alabama Hosts Top-Ranked Texas A&M
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-