Tax Reform

gimmesometruth27 · October 2017

let's do herman cain's 9-9-9 thing, right?

Halifax2TheMax · October 2017

Anyone else see Sarah Huckabee Sanders' presser today? Complete with lame jokes and a "See Spot Do Taxes" type tale to dumb it all down to the dumbest level possible as it relates to tax reform, cuts or whatever you want to call the alleged tax reform coming from the Hill. And on a day as grave as today, she was yucking it up like there's no administration crisis or the biggest presidential scandal since Watergate occurring. Disgusting, embarrassing and most amateur administration ever. Seems only 33% currently stands by. Maybe we can see it drop to 15% and take the whole republican party with them. Losers. Tired of winning yet?

I am a patriot · November 2017

Rumor floating around is that the Senate Finance Committee is suggesting that endowment income from tax exempt universities should be taxed at 2%, or previously untaxed royalty income of not for profits should now be taxable in order to cover the tax cuts proposed.

Those special interest not for profits are gonna shit if that becomes law.

mickeyrat · November 2017

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

mickeyrat · November 2017

from 2014.......

http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/18/pf/child-cost/index.html

Halifax2TheMax · November 2017

Tired of winning yet?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/31/politics/tax-bill-delay-republican-plan/index.html

rgambs · November 2017

The only real tax reform that's necessary is to tax churches, minus their charitable contributions.
Boom, problem solved.

I am a patriot · November 2017

rgambs said:

The only real tax reform that's necessary is to tax churches, minus their charitable contributions.
Boom, problem solved.

But what about separation of church and state? Does it include Scientology? What about cults? Why not other charitable organizations like Harvard and Yale?

CM189191 · November 2017

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

none, that's the point

mickeyrat · November 2017

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

none, that's the point

oh, in 2014 the average cost per year to raise a child was 13,661 a year. for 18 years. 245,000 not including college.

CM189191 · November 2017

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

none, that's the point

oh, in 2014 the average cost per year to raise a child was 13,661 a year. for 18 years. 245,000 not including college.

so what there warrants a tax credit?

mickeyrat · November 2017

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

none, that's the point

oh, in 2014 the average cost per year to raise a child was 13,661 a year. for 18 years. 245,000 not including college.

so what there warrants a tax credit?

even with that credit, you STILL do better overall financially than a parent. Even paying a potentially higher tax.

you want an equal deduction? donate 13k a year.

Shawshank · November 2017

I reform my own taxes by simply not paying myself so much. Although the country as a whole would be in a world of hurt if everyone in my position did that. I don't need a lot, because I don't really buy a lot of bullshit. My businesses do well, so I reinvest much of my earnings back into my businesses which eliminates much of the corporate tax, and allows me to upgrade equipment, spend more on marketing, etc. etc. By not paying myself so much I keep my personal tax rate reasonable, and I ultimately save money and make more money.

rgambs · November 2017

I am a patriot said:

rgambs said:

The only real tax reform that's necessary is to tax churches, minus their charitable contributions.
Boom, problem solved.

But what about separation of church and state? Does it include Scientology? What about cults? Why not other charitable organizations like Harvard and Yale?

Separation of church and state does not apply.
All organizations should be taxed on any income which isn't used directly for charitable services.

CM189191 · November 2017

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

none, that's the point

oh, in 2014 the average cost per year to raise a child was 13,661 a year. for 18 years. 245,000 not including college.

so what there warrants a tax credit?

even with that credit, you STILL do better overall financially than a parent. Even paying a potentially higher tax.

you want an equal deduction? donate 13k a year.

yes, this is a financial decision I made. How does that explain or justify a tax credit? Why shouldn't I be afforded the same tax credit?

benjs · November 2017

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

none, that's the point

oh, in 2014 the average cost per year to raise a child was 13,661 a year. for 18 years. 245,000 not including college.

so what there warrants a tax credit?

even with that credit, you STILL do better overall financially than a parent. Even paying a potentially higher tax.

you want an equal deduction? donate 13k a year.

yes, this is a financial decision I made. How does that explain or justify a tax credit? Why shouldn't I be afforded the same tax credit?

I posted this on the 2nd page, not sure if you read it.

I think the government's MO is pretty clear: identify the barriers to opportunity in the lives of the populace (those barriers are typically 'burdens' such as student loans, mortgages, or dependents), and attempt to introduce tax credit such that the burden-to-opportunity ratio is approximately equitable across all persons. This is a ratio, and is not measured in dollars. Your taxes, and the taxes of a parent of two, are designed to leave you and the parent of two with a similar burden-to-opportunity ratio.

Gern Blansten · November 2017

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

mickeyrat said:

CM189191 said:

Stated differently: why is a tax payer punished for not having children?

Still doesn't make sense to me.

stated differently, why is a parent punished financially for having children?

They're not, how so? A family of 4 uses more public resources than a single person. Shouldn't that family also pay more taxes to pay for those services?

explain to me how it is as a nonparent you are being punished by families getting a tax credit?

Why shouldn't I receive the same credit? I would like to pay less taxes. Why should it matter if I have children or not?

how much of your salary or yearly wages goes to raising a child?

none, that's the point

oh, in 2014 the average cost per year to raise a child was 13,661 a year. for 18 years. 245,000 not including college.

so what there warrants a tax credit?

even with that credit, you STILL do better overall financially than a parent. Even paying a potentially higher tax.

you want an equal deduction? donate 13k a year.

yes, this is a financial decision I made. How does that explain or justify a tax credit? Why shouldn't I be afforded the same tax credit?

There are also tax credits for employing unemployed veterans....why don't I get that credit?

Answer: Because I don't employ unemployed veterans

I am a patriot · November 2017

rgambs said:

I am a patriot said:

rgambs said:

The only real tax reform that's necessary is to tax churches, minus their charitable contributions.
Boom, problem solved.

But what about separation of church and state? Does it include Scientology? What about cults? Why not other charitable organizations like Harvard and Yale?

Separation of church and state does not apply.
All organizations should be taxed on any income which isn't used directly for charitable services.

I'm just playing devil advocate, but what about the costs for maintaining workspace or for paying management. Some may say this is not direct expense related to charitable services, others may say that the charity cannot survive without such expenses. How about private foundations such as the John S and James L Knight Foundation that I hear on NPR all the time. They have ordinary and necessary business expenses to maintain the Foundation. All the money that comes in is used to maintain the Foundation - this includes investment management fees and legal fees. The income used to cover those expenses should be taxed? But they paid the money on those expenses. Further, I mentioned the Harvards and Yales that have huge endowments that generate income that will (eventually) be spent on maintaining the universities and providing scholarships. Are those related to charitable purposes?

Herein lies a crux to the "simplification" of the Code - we need all the rules/regulations to get 330,000,000 people as close to uniform as possible. A "simple" question like "what are charitable services?" can lead to many more words and rules.

It'll be nice once we see both plans and can then stop speculating on what should/could change and we can start focusing on what is proposed to change.

Halifax2TheMax · November 2017

I am a patriot said:

rgambs said:

I am a patriot said:

rgambs said:

The only real tax reform that's necessary is to tax churches, minus their charitable contributions.
Boom, problem solved.

But what about separation of church and state? Does it include Scientology? What about cults? Why not other charitable organizations like Harvard and Yale?

Separation of church and state does not apply.
All organizations should be taxed on any income which isn't used directly for charitable services.

I'm just playing devil advocate, but what about the costs for maintaining workspace or for paying management. Some may say this is not direct expense related to charitable services, others may say that the charity cannot survive without such expenses. How about private foundations such as the John S and James L Knight Foundation that I hear on NPR all the time. They have ordinary and necessary business expenses to maintain the Foundation. All the money that comes in is used to maintain the Foundation - this includes investment management fees and legal fees. The income used to cover those expenses should be taxed? But they paid the money on those expenses. Further, I mentioned the Harvards and Yales that have huge endowments that generate income that will (eventually) be spent on maintaining the universities and providing scholarships. Are those related to charitable purposes?

Herein lies a crux to the "simplification" of the Code - we need all the rules/regulations to get 330,000,000 people as close to uniform as possible. A "simple" question like "what are charitable services?" can lead to many more words and rules.

It'll be nice once we see both plans and can then stop speculating on what should/could change and we can start focusing on what is proposed to change.

But Sarah Huckabee Sanders explained the proposal in a very down home, simple $100 bar tab parable. What about that didn’t you get?

Halifax2TheMax · November 2017

Halifax2TheMax said:

I am a patriot said:

rgambs said:

I am a patriot said:

rgambs said:

The only real tax reform that's necessary is to tax churches, minus their charitable contributions.
Boom, problem solved.

But what about separation of church and state? Does it include Scientology? What about cults? Why not other charitable organizations like Harvard and Yale?

Separation of church and state does not apply.
All organizations should be taxed on any income which isn't used directly for charitable services.

I'm just playing devil advocate, but what about the costs for maintaining workspace or for paying management. Some may say this is not direct expense related to charitable services, others may say that the charity cannot survive without such expenses. How about private foundations such as the John S and James L Knight Foundation that I hear on NPR all the time. They have ordinary and necessary business expenses to maintain the Foundation. All the money that comes in is used to maintain the Foundation - this includes investment management fees and legal fees. The income used to cover those expenses should be taxed? But they paid the money on those expenses. Further, I mentioned the Harvards and Yales that have huge endowments that generate income that will (eventually) be spent on maintaining the universities and providing scholarships. Are those related to charitable purposes?

Herein lies a crux to the "simplification" of the Code - we need all the rules/regulations to get 330,000,000 people as close to uniform as possible. A "simple" question like "what are charitable services?" can lead to many more words and rules.

It'll be nice once we see both plans and can then stop speculating on what should/could change and we can start focusing on what is proposed to change.

But Sarah Huckabee Sanders explained the proposal in a very down home, simple $100 bar tab parable. What about that didn’t you get?

Seeing how tax reform is easy like health care reform is easy.

Tax Reform

Comments

Categories