IRS: Nearly 1,500 millionaires paid no federal income tax in 2009

[Mac1337]

john dough wrote:
If I knew how to shelter that kind of money, do you think I would be on this forum now? The people I know that pull down that kind of money to get these breaks have groups in place to get them what they have.

Here is an example of a loophole: buying yachts (as if anyone is thinking about that here). When buying a boat, the seller goes out to international waters with the buyer and signs all of the papers there. Since they sell the ship outside of the US, it is not subject to US tax on the sale; if you know the prices of boats, the tax savings can run to the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why do you think that so many ships are registered in the Caribbean?

It is not that they are secretive, just that you have to have money to make money.

You are pointing out the most obscure way of saving on taxes. I am not even sure what you are saying is true or doable. I can buy a car in Delaware without a sales tax but when I bring it back to PA I have to pay sales tax. I am sure if I didn't know this you would have called this a "loophole" too.

[Ted King]

Ted King wrote:
[quote=cbelt3]
I think if most Americans would Do. The. Math. they would find out that it will mean they will pay less overall, and have less to worry about.

Show me the math. I don't believe it, but if you show me the math, then I'll believe it.
Geez, I just looked at this again and saw how easily this could be taken as implying that you are lying. No way do I think that and if you did take it that way, I apologize for expressing myself in a way that would lead you to think that. What I should have said is that I'm having a hard time accepting that what you said is correct. I certainly don't think you are lying or anything like that, but I do wonder if you might have innocently misconstrued some information or something like that. If you can show me how the numbers "add up" to verify what you are saying, that will alleviate my skepticism.

[john dough]

The car issue is not a loophole as you are buying it in the US (just a different state). The example I gave WAS. You asked for one and you got it. There are hundreds of "obscure" loopholes that are gamed every day.

Look at the Google example I gave in the other thread. They save BILLIONS by shopping around where they have their money end up; is that NOT a loophole to avoid taxes?

That aside, how much do you make?

[Ted King]

Grace62 wrote:
Even the great acolytes of the flat tax: Steve Forbes, FreedomWorks, the Heritage Foundation, etc., include standard deductions, marital status, and deductions for children. The rate they use is 17%. Some also consider a minimum income amount below which you are not taxed at all, or taxed at a lower rate.
So even among its most ardent and true fans, the realities set in.

I think it's the "flat" part of the flat tax structures that people like Forbes are mostly interested in. The "less deduction" part they throw in with it (you could have flat rates even with all the deductions we have now) is just to get people to associate "flat tax" with "simplified tax structure". But since there is essentially no difference between the complexity of a progressively stepped tax structure and a flat tax structure if both allow and/or disallow the same deductions, the association between flat tax structure and simplification is just a ruse. Either that or they are being made so stupid by their ideology that they can't see that there isn't any connection between flat and simple tax structures that couldn't be essentially the same with a progressive stepped structure and simplification.

[Mac1337]

john dough wrote:


That aside, how much do you make?

Nice try!

[Grace62]

Ted King wrote:
[quote=Grace62]
Even the great acolytes of the flat tax: Steve Forbes, FreedomWorks, the Heritage Foundation, etc., include standard deductions, marital status, and deductions for children. The rate they use is 17%. Some also consider a minimum income amount below which you are not taxed at all, or taxed at a lower rate.
So even among its most ardent and true fans, the realities set in.

I think it's the "flat" part of the flat tax structures that people like Forbes are mostly interested in. The "less deduction" part they throw in with it (you could have flat rates even with all the deductions we have now) is just to get people to associate "flat tax" with "simplified tax structure". But since there is essentially no difference between the complexity of a progressively stepped tax structure and a flat tax structure if both allow and/or disallow the same deductions, the association between flat tax structure and simplification is just a ruse. Either that or they are being made so stupid by their ideology that they can't see that there isn't any connection between flat and simple tax structures that couldn't be essentially the same with a progressive stepped structure and simplification.
Well, looking directly at what FreedomWorks says on their site, it's simplification that they are after. "Flat tax" is part of that because it results in lower taxes for the wealthiest Americans, which is the foundational reason for FW's existence.

[john dough]

You still won't tell us? I am dying to know how much you make; what sort of job would afford you to spend ALL DAY here?

[rjmacs]

Dakota wrote:
[quote=rjmacs]

Except if it's truly a 'flat tax,' then EVERYONE pays 3%, and that is ALL that ANYONE pays in income tax, period. And the bottom line is: for the purposes of reasonable living standards, $750 is a lot LESS affordable to someone making $25,000/year than $24,000 is to someone making $800,000 a year.

This logic is motivated by the notion that taxes must hurt equally. Solely collecting enough revenues is not enough. Tax'em until they cry. Then you know you have hit the right rate. You are subscribing to the from-each-according-to his ability philosophy
You and i have fundamentally different ideas about fairness; yours is based on individualism, mine is based on interdependence. And that's okay - i still like you just the same. (I just want you to pay more taxes when you're rich!)

[SDGuy]

Grace62 wrote:
Here's the FreedomWorks "flat tax" calculator. I ran my numbers and got a tax amount about 40% higher than what I pay now.
I'll take the deductions and spend a few hours with the 1040, thanks anyway.

http://www.freedomworks.org/flattax/index.php

:agree:
At least triple for me...

[cbelt3]

Ted, no offense. I have NOT done the math. I simply believe that anything is better than the horrifyingly complex 'system' that we have now.

I understand that there are a number of theories out there. I also understand that, in order to make some of them politically acceptable, they include 'deductions', 'progressive' scales, and so forth. Such compromises can and will be necessary. But they're a slippery slope.

Look at this 1913 tax return form, and tell me if we're better or worse than we were.
http://taxhistory.org/thp/1040forms.nsf/WebByYear/1913/$file/1040_1913.pdf