MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: mudeltaforcegurl on February 09, 2019, 10:13:38 AM
-
Has anyone filed their taxes yet and had significant changes in your refund or amount owed?
I filed this morning and found the Federal portion quicker, few questions with not itemizing. If you take the standard deduction you can no longer deduct charitable items.
I have heard homeowners complaining about no longer being able to deduct mortgage interest. You can now only deduct home equity loan interest if the loan is used for home improvements. This is going to impact a lot of people who haven’t paid attention to the tax law changes. I’m guessing there will be many expecting a nice refund and get slapped with a bill instead.
-
Has anyone filed their taxes yet and had significant changes in your refund or amount owed?
I filed this morning and found the Federal portion quicker, few questions with not itemizing. If you take the standard deduction you can no longer deduct charitable items.
I have heard homeowners complaining about no longer being able to deduct mortgage interest. You can now only deduct home equity loan interest if the loan is used for home improvements. This is going to impact a lot of people who haven’t paid attention to the tax law changes. I’m guessing there will be many expecting a nice refund and get slapped with a bill instead.
This was known when it was passed. I keep reading these articles last few days of people pissed they don’t have a bigger refund, yet they paid lower taxes. People relying on the refund, but didn’t pay attention that their tax obligation all year was less and confusing that with hoping for a big pot of gold at the end. All along they were taking home more per paycheck. Refunds are not the way to measure it, but I have no idea many Americans are despite net net having a lower tax bill for most, which is what was promised and passed.
You hit the nail on the head....those that didn’t pay attention, and that screams a lot of people in this country.
-
I got about 2 grand back that I didn't last year.
-
This was known when it was passed. I keep reading these articles last few days of people pissed they don’t have a bigger refund, yet they paid lower taxes. People relying on the refund, but didn’t pay attention that their tax obligation all year was less and confusing that with hoping for a big pot of gold at the end. All along they were taking home more per paycheck. Refunds are not the way to measure it, but I have no idea many Americans are despite net net having a lower tax bill for most, which is what was promised and passed.
You hit the nail on the head....those that didn’t pay attention, and that screams a lot of people in this country.
I also heard a lot of companies haven’t been withholding enough from employees checks since the changes to the tax laws. It is on us to be informed.
-
If only you had a private jet to write off...
-
I also heard a lot of companies haven’t been withholding enough from employees checks since the changes to the tax laws. It is on us to be informed.
Withholding rates are set by the IRS.
Taxes are complex. People got used to the idea that if you declared “3” on your paychecks, and had “3” dependents, that you were going to end up right in the end.
What has happened with this law is that the imcreased standard deduction messed with the withholding amounts. So yeah if you figured it out ahead of time and adjusted accordingly, you were fine. But many people didn’t. They either didn’t take the time or couldn’t figure it out.
I owe about $1,000 more than I thought I would. It’s my fault because it’s somewhat obvious why in retrospect, but it’s still a pain.
-
I adjusted my deductions and just finished up my taxes and got a $72 credit. Pretty proud of myself for only giving them a $72 interest-free loan.
-
Dumbasses upset they didn’t give a huge no interest loan to the govt... and maybe won’t be able “reward” themselves by making a discretionary purchase after finally getting their money back.
Americans be dumb ainer
-
IBTL
-
Dumbasses upset they didn’t give a huge no interest loan to the govt... and maybe won’t be able “reward” themselves by making a discretionary purchase after finally getting their money back.
Americans be dumb ainer
No longer being able to deduct mortgage interest is something I can understand people being anger about, but this has been known for at least a year. If people are so reliant on a refund from their mortgage interest to pay bills they are obviously living beyond their means.
-
No longer being able to deduct mortgage interest is something I can understand people being anger about, but this has been known for at least a year. If people are so reliant on a refund from their mortgage interest to pay bills they are obviously living beyond their means.
Or they don’t make enough to have money set aside. For many in this country, buying food is living “beyond their means”. But if it builds you up to criticize them, go for it.
Elitist snobs always want to blame poor people for being poor. We obviously have several here in this thread.
-
Writing a $220 check. Blessed that that is an inconvenience and not a problem.
-
Or they don’t make enough to have money set aside. For many in this country, buying food is living “beyond their means”. But if it builds you up to criticize them, go for it.
Elitist snobs always want to blame poor people for being poor. We obviously have several here in this thread.
If someone can’t buy food how would they be able to buy a home?
-
No longer being able to deduct mortgage interest is something I can understand people being anger about, but this has been known for at least a year. If people are so reliant on a refund from their mortgage interest to pay bills they are obviously living beyond their means.
Correct. Where the pic tho
-
Correct. Where the pic tho
Pic of what?
-
If someone can’t buy food how would they be able to buy a home?
great point mudfg!!
might as well add that to the list of free chit
-
Happy national Marquette day
-
IBFL
-
My taxes rate went up approximately 2.4 percent. I lost the deductibility of state income taxes which increased marginal income tax rate 5 percent . Offset by 2.6 marginal tax rate deduction . No cap gains marginal tax lower. So the new tax law cost me an additional combined about $114,000 more . 48 k income and 66 k cap gains additional. So much for the myth that it was a tax cut for the 1 percent .
-
My taxes rate went up approximately 2.4 percent. I lost the deductibility of state income taxes which increased marginal income tax rate 5 percent . Offset by 2.6 marginal tax rate deduction . No cap gains marginal tax lower. So the new tax law cost me an additional combined about $114,000 more . 48 k income and 66 k cap gains additional. So much for the myth that it was a tax cut for the 1 percent .
You’re not in the 1%.
-
No longer being able to deduct mortgage interest is something I can understand people being anger about, but this has been known for at least a year. If people are so reliant on a refund from their mortgage interest to pay bills they are obviously living beyond their means.
You can still deduct mortgage interest although there’s is a cap on value of home/mortgage on which interest is paid. With the higher standard deduction, it may no longer be worth it to itemize.
-
My taxes rate went up approximately 2.4 percent. I lost the deductibility of state income taxes which increased marginal income tax rate 5 percent . Offset by 2.6 marginal tax rate deduction . No cap gains marginal tax lower. So the new tax law cost me an additional combined about $114,000 more . 48 k income and 66 k cap gains additional. So much for the myth that it was a tax cut for the 1 percent .
Boy, there are a lot of people who pretend to be smart posting a lot of hot garbage in this thread.
-
To be candid, the Administration rolled the residential real estate business. You could not confront the Realtors head-on so what happened was the standard deduction and the SALT limitation made most taxpayers indifferent over whether to own a home. I expect that when the average taxpayer sees the federal government no longer is subsidizing a move-up home and that most young homebuyers won't have an advantage to owning real estate, that home prices in many slower growth locales will stagnate for several years.
I know a lot of this stuff has been out there since the tax act but until you do your taxes, it seems like an intangible.
Did my taxes and because of some unique circumstances, will be getting a large refund.
-
I hear ya, 9-9-9. The tax cut didn't work for me, either.
Despite having my worst earnings year since 1993 -- I mean, I only made $4.2 billion -- I was just able to take home $2.9 billion in 2018.
Talk about unfair to the 1%!! I was totally robbed.
-
Boy, there are a lot of people who pretend to be smart posting a lot of hot garbage in this thread.
Not sure what the hot garbage is I just provided the actual increase in taxes. If people want to be in a state of denial that of course is there prerogative , but the fact remains I paid meaningfully more in taxes .
-
If someone can’t buy food how would they be able to buy a home?
Reminds me of one of the most quotable men to ever warm a seat in the Senate, Dr. S.I. Hayakawa:
On rising fuel prices: "Poor people don't need gas, because they;/'re not working"
On turning over the Panama Canal: "We stole it fair and square"
On the internment of Japanese Americans: "It accelerated their integration into mainstream American society"
Dr S.I. Hayakawa received his PhD from the University of Wisconsin.
-
Not sure what the hot garbage is I just provided the actual increase in taxes. If people want to be in a state of denial that of course is there prerogative , but the fact remains I paid meaningfully more in taxes .
Mine actually went down. A couple of issues specific to my situation but they went down modestly. Will say that for all the “sky is falling” crying when the legislation was written, my effective tax rate may have fallen a couple of points and that’s it.
-
Mine actually went down. A couple of issues specific to my situation but they went down modestly. Will say that for all the “sky is falling” crying when the legislation was written, my effective tax rate may have fallen a couple of points and that’s it.
Your experience is the actual case for 90 plus percent of the people who file .
-
Not sure what the hot garbage is I just provided the actual increase in taxes. If people want to be in a state of denial that of course is there prerogative , but the fact remains I paid meaningfully more in taxes .
Multiple comments about mortgage interest not being deductible. Incorrect.
Your comment about not being able to deduct state income tax. Incorrect.
-
Multiple comments about mortgage interest not being deductible. Incorrect.
Your comment about not being able to deduct state income tax. Incorrect.
my understanding is that one can only deduct up to $10k of property taxes now. if you pay more than that in property taxes-congratulations on either having a very nice house or you live in a high tax area. i have 2 modest homes(the one in Az. saves me) and still don't pay more than $10k combined-yeehaw!
-
my understanding is that one can only deduct up to $10k of property taxes now. if you pay more than that in property taxes-congratulations on either having a very nice house or you live in a high tax area. i have 2 modest homes(the one in Az. saves me) and still don't pay more than $10k combined-yeehaw!
There is a $10k cap on state and local taxes.
-
Your experience is the actual case for 90 plus percent of the people who file .
Correct, or close to it. Some think tanks say 82% while others estimate around 90%
-
Multiple comments about mortgage interest not being deductible. Incorrect.
Your comment about not being able to deduct state income tax. Incorrect.
Fair enough.
In my case, My overall state taxes were 310k versus 10k SALT deduction allowable and I had no interest, so bottom line all I had was increased standard deduction of 24k. So in my case I did not have benefit of SALT.
Correct, or close to it. Some think takes say 82% while others estimate around 90%
Will be interesting to see what actual total is.
-
my understanding is that one can only deduct up to $10k of property taxes now. if you pay more than that in property taxes-congratulations on either having a very nice house or you live in a high tax area.
In the metro Chicago area, the property tax on a $300K home can approach $10K.
And if I am not mistaken, that $10K also includes all state and local taxes, including income tax.
-
What I have surmised is that higher income earners are not paying less in taxes, the higher standard deduction is causing homeowners to get lower refunds because of not deducting mortgage interest, and many tax payers should have but did not change the number allowances, and are surprised to find out they owe or are getting a small refund.
The only people that have experienced favorable results from the tax law changes are those with a unique circumstances and those who have earned far less in 2018 than in years past.
-
Reminds me of one of the most quotable men to ever warm a seat in the Senate, Dr. S.I. Hayakawa:
On rising fuel prices: "Poor people don't need gas, because they;/'re not working"
On turning over the Panama Canal: "We stole it fair and square"
On the internment of Japanese Americans: "It accelerated their integration into mainstream American society"
Dr S.I. Hayakawa received his PhD from the University of Wisconsin.
Someone bought a home they couldn’t afford, and now they can’t afford food?
-
For those of you who live in Illinois, and support parochial education, you no longer have to pay income tax (at least while the program lasts). Under the Invest in Kids program, you may receive a tax CREDIT of 75 cents on the dollar for contributions to scholarships for elementary and HS students in need.
So, for example, if you typically give $10,000 to your HS alma mater for scholarships, you can give the same amount and reduce your state income tax bill by $7,500. Or, you can gross up your gift to $40,000, resulting in the same “out of pocket” to you of $10,000, but $40,000 to your school of choice and $30,000 back to you in a refund from the state.
The program has a $100 million limit. I am not sure if there is an individual limit.
So, for 2018 and 2019, I will be paying no money to the state of Illinois in income taxes. I have effectively elected to allocate all of my Illinois income taxes to schools which I already supported in amounts out of pocket that were consistent with prior giving.
If there were greater participation, This would be a public policy disaster. (I know- shocking). My hope is that there will be some corresponding reduction in the burden/cost of public education, but in all events it would never approach dollar for dollar.
It is designed as a 5 year program, and I do not believe that it will be renewed. Passed with budget/school funding legislation as a last minute add-on with heavy support from Chicago Archdiocese.
Other states, mostly in the south, offer similar programs.
-
Someone bought a home they couldn’t afford, and now they can’t afford food?
Or maybe someone bought home they could afford years ago, but a change in circumstances (family health crisis, disability, job loss, divorce, etc.) left them house rich, cash poor.
-
Or maybe someone bought home they could afford years ago, but a change in circumstances (family health crisis, disability, job loss, divorce, etc.) left them house rich, cash poor.
Sell the house
-
For those of you who live in Illinois, and support parochial education, you no longer have to pay income tax (at least while the program lasts). Under the Invest in Kids program, you may receive a tax CREDIT of 75 cents on the dollar for contributions to scholarships for elementary and HS students in need.
So, for example, if you typically give $10,000 to your HS alma mater for scholarships, you can give the same amount and reduce your state income tax bill by $7,500. Or, you can gross up your gift to $40,000, resulting in the same “out of pocket” to you of $10,000, but $40,000 to your school of choice and $30,000 back to you in a refund from the state.
The program has a $100 million limit. I am not sure if there is an individual limit.
So, for 2018 and 2019, I will be paying no money to the state of Illinois in income taxes. I have effectively elected to allocate all of my Illinois income taxes to schools which I already supported in amounts out of pocket that were consistent with prior giving.
If there were greater participation, This would be a public policy disaster. (I know- shocking). My hope is that there will be some corresponding reduction in the burden/cost of public education, but in all events it would never approach dollar for dollar.
It is designed as a 5 year program, and I do not believe that it will be renewed. Passed with budget/school funding legislation as a last minute add-on with heavy support from Chicago Archdiocese.
Other states, mostly in the south, offer similar programs.
You’re still paying Federal income tax.
-
Should MU have a football program?
-
Sell the house
Your empathy is something to behold.
-
Sell the house
An expensive and emotionally consuming undertaking.
-
Your empathy is something to behold.
Sounds like she just believes in personal responsibility. I know many of *you* do not.
-
Sounds like she just believes in personal responsibility. I know many of *you* do not.
Yeah, that financially strapped couple definitely shouldn't have allowed their child to get cancer.
And that disabled former maintenance worker shouldn't have let himself get hit by a drunk driver.
And, seriously, what did those kids think was going to happen when they allowed themselves to be born to a single mother who'd lose her job a decade later?
-
Sounds like she just believes in personal responsibility. I know many of *you* do not.
That’s right.
-
Yeah, that financially strapped couple definitely shouldn't have allowed their child get cancer.
And that disabled former maintenance worker shouldn't have let himself get hit by a drunk driver.
And, seriously, what did those kids think was going to happen when they allowed themselves to be born a mother who'd lose her job a decade later?
Why do you assume everyone had unexpected bad circumstances? There are some in these situations but there are also many entitled irresponsible people living beyond their means trying to impress others with their illusion of success.
-
You’re still paying Federal income tax.
Yes...and ...
-
Why do you assume everyone had unexpected bad circumstances? There are some in these situations but there are also many entitled irresponsible people living beyond their means trying to impress others with their illusion of success.
I'm not the one who finds it mind boggling that a person can own a house but still struggle to afford food, or who believes such a person lacks personal responsibility. That's your assumption.
I'm just pointing out some of the many instances in which such an assumption makes a you-know-what out of the person making it.
-
Why do you assume everyone had unexpected bad circumstances? There are some in these situations but there are also many entitled irresponsible people living beyond their means trying to impress others with their illusion of success.
It's OK to have empathy for someone's situation regardless of how they got into those circumstances.
-
I'm not the one who finds it mind boggling that a person can own a house but still struggle to afford food, or who believes such a person lacks personal responsibility. That's your assumption.
I'm just pointing out some of the many instances in which such an assumption makes a you-know-what out of the person making it.
You are the one that finds it mind boggling that people are irresponsible and buy things they can’t afford.
-
In the metro Chicago area, the property tax on a $300K home can approach $10K.
And if I am not mistaken, that $10K also includes all state and local taxes, including income tax.
i'm just inside the township of waukesha-pay $5k, literally off my backyard is city. move my house 500 feet to the west, my bill becomes $10k. in Az., fairly similar value as wi. paying about $2k including HOA. my bro-in-law has a 5000 sq.ft. joint in lisle-$25k
-
Your empathy is something to behold.
rather than making an assumption that mudfg lacks empathy, how about pointing out where his/her statement is wrong. you're picking a nit pakman. i know of a number of people who came upon some bad times. they did what they had to do. it sucks, but life ain't fair man. some people prepare for these situations, some people know people who can help them, but i'm not quite sure what you're looking for here
-
You are the one that finds it mind boggling that people are irresponsible and buy things they can’t afford.
Nope.
-
rather than making an assumption that mudfg lacks empathy, how about pointing out where his/her statement is wrong. you're picking a nit pakman. i know of a number of people who came upon some bad times. they did what they had to do. it sucks, but life ain't fair man. some people prepare for these situations, some people know people who can help them, but i'm not quite sure what you're looking for here
I did point out where she was wrong. You're welcome.
I've found that the people mostly likely to say "life ain't fair" are the people who've rarely, if ever, had to deal with real hardship. Because those who have had to deal with real hardship know what it's like and have empathy for those experiencing the same.
-
I did point out where she was wrong. You're welcome.
I've found that the people mostly likely to say "life ain't fair" are the people who've rarely, if ever, had to deal with real hardship. Because those who have had to deal with real hardship know what it's like and have empathy for those experiencing the same.
oh boy...who said they are without empathy? and you've just so happened to find a lot of people who lack empathy. i have found a lot of people who are kind and have helped a lot of people down on their luck.
btw, i remember some very hard times myself, but it only motivated me to correct them.
-
In the metro Chicago area, the property tax on a $300K home can approach $10K.
And if I am not mistaken, that $10K also includes all state and local taxes, including income tax.
Sister Chick, you are not mistaken. SALT means State and Local Taxes.
In many north suburbs, a $300,000 house alone may generate well over the $10,000 cap on its own. That's before Illinois's income taxes and does not consider one of the highest sales tax rates in the nation.
Big question for many taxpayers is with the SALT limitations and limitations on mortgage interest PLUS the $24,000 standard deduction, do you buy a home? In my case, this will be the first time I did not itemize since 1984.
-
I did point out where she was wrong. You're welcome.
I've found that the people mostly likely to say "life ain't fair" are the people who've rarely, if ever, had to deal with real hardship. Because those who have had to deal with real hardship know what it's like and have empathy for those experiencing the same.
Where was I wrong? I said there are some people that are irresponsible and some that had bad circumstances occur.
-
w/ the government on its way to a second shutdown largely due to democrats not giving up $5.7B to fund a wall mexico is already funding (?) you don’t have to pay any taxes, so thats cool!
-
This thread is about to shutdown.
-
Sister Chick, you are not mistaken. SALT means State and Local Taxes.
In many north suburbs, a $300,000 house alone may generate well over the $10,000 cap on its own. That's before Illinois's income taxes and does not consider one of the highest sales tax rates in the nation.
You are preaching to the choir, my friend.
There is no question that our president decided that the the federal government would no longer subsidize the blue states by continuing to let their high taxes be deductible for Federal purposes.
It's one more reason Glow and I intend to get out of Illinois as soon as reasonably possible.
-
This thread will be locked soon, but what’s going on with Ed Burke, Solis, the Chicago mayoral race has been fascinating to watch. I didn’t have a good other place to post that, so thought I’d toss it in here.
-
You are preaching to the choir, my friend.
There is no question that our president decided that the the federal government would no longer subsidize the blue states by continuing to let their high taxes be deductible for Federal purposes.
It's one more reason Glow and I intend to get out of Illinois as soon as reasonably possible.
You've got this backwards since the states that get the most federal money are all red states. Blue states tend to be net payers into the federal government even with the previous SALT deductions.
Personally I think the next hurricane that hits Texas or Florida should be funded out their state residents pockets. They should pay their own damn taxes rather than relying on the rest of us to subsidize their no state income taxes.
-
You've got this backwards since the states that get the most federal money are all red states. Blue states tend to be net payers into the federal government even with the previous SALT deductions.
Personally I think the next hurricane that hits Texas or Florida should be funded out their state residents pockets. They should pay their own damn taxes rather than relying on the rest of us to subsidize their no state income taxes.
You are missing the point. The Blue states thend to have higher SALT rates, and because these taxes are deductible, the federal government is underwriting part of that cost.
If a blue state decides to have higher taxes, why should the Federal government collect less in tax revenue as a result?
-
You are missing the point. The Blue states have higher SALT, and because these taxes are deductible, the federal government is underwriting part of the cost to the taxpayer by making them federal tax-deductible.
If a blue state decides to have higher taxes, why should the Federal government collect less in tax revenue as a result?
I think most of the people on here are missing the point. Most (I'm sure not all), of us that regularly post on here lived pretty blessed lives. We do not want for food, or shelter, or safety. We can relax in comfortable homes and root on our favorite team. Not all are so fortunate.
Paying a little less or a little more in taxes, isn't affecting most of our lives. Maybe our time and energy would be better spent focusing on what we can do for each other a little more.
Note this is not directed at you at all, more a mixture of self-reflection and general observations regarding how much we argue over little details (and how many threads spiral into lockdown), and worry about whether our state, our side, etc, is getting its fair share, when in reality we should be focusing on what we can do to make things better.
-
I think most of the people on here are missing the point. Most (I'm sure not all), of us that regularly post on here lived pretty blessed lives. We do not want for food, or shelter, or safety. We can relax in comfortable homes and root on our favorite team. Not all are so fortunate.
Paying a little less or a little more in taxes, isn't affecting most of our lives. Maybe our time and energy would be better spent focusing on what we can do for each other a little more.
Note this is not directed at you at all, more a mixture of self-reflection and general observations regarding how much we argue over little details (and how many threads spiral into lockdown), and worry about whether our state, our side, etc, is getting its fair share, when in reality we should be focusing on what we can do to make things better.
It was not my intent to start arguments. I was curious about what others experienced personally with the tax law changes. Maybe we can circle back to the original post.
-
MANY irresponsible, greedy lazy pricks outspend their means. Pakuni believes the smart & successful should bail them out. Bizarre, but that’s where we’re at.
-
MANY irresponsible, greedy lazy pricks outspend their means. Pakuni believes the smart & successful should bail them out. Bizarre, but that’s where we’re at.
Do you always get this angry when you drink?
-
Do you always get this angry when you drink?
^^^ ban dis (guy???)
-
MANY irresponsible, greedy lazy pricks outspend their means. Pakuni believes the smart & successful should bail them out. Bizarre, but that’s where we’re at.
MANY irresponsible, greedy pricks at the top of the "food chain" get bailed out all the time by the rest of us too. Crazy, but that's where we're at.
-
MANY irresponsible, greedy pricks at the top of the "food chain" get bailed out all the time by the rest of us too. Crazy, but that's where we're at.
Oh. They stop paying their home mortgages and walk away at the same rate?
Interesting.
-
I'm not the one who finds it mind boggling that a person can own a house but still struggle to afford food, or who believes such a person lacks personal responsibility. That's your assumption.
I'm just pointing out some of the many instances in which such an assumption makes a you-know-what out of the person making it.
Fair to say both occurrences are possible, yes?
-
Paying a little less or a little more in taxes, isn't affecting most of our lives. Maybe our time and energy would be better spent focusing on what we can do for each other a little more.
Isn’t that what everyone’s doing...
The right wing version of charity: “I’ll help the people I want to help.”
The left wing version of charity: “I’ll help only if everyone else helps.”
Actually, seems to me that everyone’s greedy and selfish, the only difference between the two are the lies they use to justify their attitude.
-
Personally I think the next hurricane that hits Texas or Florida should be funded out their state residents pockets. They should pay their own damn taxes rather than relying on the rest of us to subsidize their no state income taxes.
Excuse me, but we do!
In the state of Florida, built into Florida Power & Light's utility rate base is a hurricane recovery fund that charges every user of electricity a fee for getting the power on. Every year or so, a review is made of the fund and any shortfalls are recovered through the rates. Ever wonder why the power is back on in Florida generally within a few days while it tooks months in Puerto Rico?
Last fall, when a hurricane struck the panhandle, our first responders from throughout the state rushed to the panhandle to assist local governments with clean-up and a variety of public safety functions. That came from state and local money. We did it because we believe in the concept of neighborliness.
Ever try to buy homeowner's insurance in the State of Florida? Guess where the risk goes? Yeup, when the private insurance firms bailed on the state after Hurricane Andrew, the state stepped up. Yes, we reinsure part of it, but the State of Florida takes the core risk.
And yes, after Hurricane Andrew, our state did what it had to do so that far fewer federal relief dollars will ever find their way to Florida. We revised our building code so that new structures in the State of Florida meet the toughest residential building standards in the United States. As older structures are replaced or modified, our state expects that they'll meet standards applicable to a 140 mile an hour windstorm. Period.
You ridicule Florida for having no income tax. Let's understand why. First off, Florida has a very high sales tax. Say what you want about it (probably all true), it's lucrative. Secondly, the state has 21 million people and its business climate, weather and quality of life are such that within 10 years, we'll have 26 million Floridians. Our government has its problems but, gee, what would rather deal with: hurricanes, pesky alligators and regulating growth, or Mike Madigan and his $133 billion public pension deficit?
As a last thought, I also have a home in Illinois and I will tell you, if it was a "little more" taxes, nobody would complain. But it's NOT a "little more."
-
Fair to say both occurrences are possible, yes?
Yes, of course.
-
MANY irresponsible, greedy lazy pricks outspend their means. Pakuni believes the smart & successful should bail them out. Bizarre, but that’s where we’re at.
Nope.
-
You are preaching to the choir, my friend.
There is no question that our president decided that the the federal government would no longer subsidize the blue states by continuing to let their high taxes be deductible for Federal purposes.
It's one more reason Glow and I intend to get out of Illinois as soon as reasonably possible.
Stagecoaches leeve ourly, aina?
-
Eye'll have crean cheese, tomato, and onion on my lox, hey?
-
btw, i remember some very hard times myself, but it only motivated me to correct them.
Yeah? Do tell.
-
I did point out where she was wrong. You're welcome.
I've found that the people mostly likely to say "life ain't fair" are the people who've rarely, if ever, had to deal with real hardship. Because those who have had to deal with real hardship know what it's like and have empathy for those experiencing the same.
I had hardship in my life and at one point was homeless. Pulled myself up from the bootstraps. I have empathy for those experiencing true hardship as opposed to over indulgence related financial reversals . I have always lived below my means ( the missus gives me some heat sometimes though)
My view is self reliance is the preferred alternative. I understand though that many don't have the frame of reference and family support structure necessary. We do have a lot of safety net structures in society , I believe the private alternatives are run more effectively the public ones, however I do believe all need to be streamlined in a way for ready access.
-
I did our taxes yesterday, slightly higher refund (will need to tweak that withholding) probably due to the higher standard deduction. No mortgage interest since home is paid off, I was surprised that even with unusually high medical expenses for the Mrs. last year the standard deduction still applied.
-
I had hardship in my life and at one point was homeless. Pulled myself up from the bootstraps. I have empathy for those experiencing true hardship as opposed to over indulgence related financial reversals . I have always lived below my means ( the missus gives me some heat sometimes though)
My view is self reliance is the preferred alternative. I understand though that many don't have the frame of reference and family support structure necessary. We do have a lot of safety net structures in society , I believe the private alternatives are run more effectively the public ones, however I do believe all need to be streamlined in a way for ready access.
Curious ... without requiring you to tell your life story, how exactly did you pull yourself up by your bootstraps?
And of course no one has empathy for those facing hardship as a result of their own financial recklessness (well, unless it's a corporation deemed too big to fail), but, using things like bankruptcy filings as a guide, such cases are in the minority.
-
I had hardship in my life and at one point was homeless.
I have been homeless many times. By choice.
Sleeping under the stars night after night but only if the hazards of the situation allowed for sleep.
No access to fresh, clean water; having to make do by filtering coffee-colored liquid.
Living on 700 calories a day. Carrying dried beans and rice in spare socks which we reconstituted then flavored with a dash of tabasco and soy. Letting the mush roll around in the mouth to make the sensation of eating last.
No shower much less running water.
My entire existence reduced to the 140 pounds on my back.
When confronted with extreme deprivation, acute physical hardship, severe environmentals, and the very real probability of sudden outbreaks of intense violence life gets distilled down to the basics.
Anyone who has gone without naturally asks why are we so materialistic. People in the developed world are voracious consumers.
Food for thought: 99% of everything we purchase ends up in the waste stream within 180 days.
And the problem of waste is that it is not only poisoning the air, soil, and water but is also a major contributor to the issue of GHG emissions.
I love how people bitch about climate change yet are rapacious participants in our consumptive society. Change begins at home.
-
Curious ... without requiring you to tell your life story, how exactly did you pull yourself up by your bootstraps?
And of course no one has empathy for those facing hardship as a result of their own financial recklessness (well, unless it's a corporation deemed too big to fail), but, using things like bankruptcy filings as a guide, such cases are in the minority.
In a nutshell realized that I had only to rely on myself . It was then like an internal drive . Made me look at the hard labor job as a tool to a greater goal. Was basically a one foot forward after the next mind step with no excuses. Never got ahead of myself and at all times avoided being envious of others. Which when I look back was really the attribute that helped me the most, enabled me to focus on my own modest progress and build off of it.
-
The concept of empathy driving policy is an interesting one. I view it as an extension of the "privilege" discussion and how does one reduce the impact of privilege so to speak. Put another way, how much of government policy can really be around minimizing the negative impact of bad luck/the positive impact of good luck in life? Government can't save everyone from the circumstances of life, how do we decide who/what to reward/punish to achieve a balance that empathy would dictate?
-
Stagecoaches leeve ourly, aina?
Yeup and to cite the Chicago Tribune, there's the equivalent of one modern stagecoach (a Boeing 777) leaving Illinois daily, never to return. That's a sad reality on what should be the Midwest's economic and social driver.
-
In a nutshell realized that I had only to rely on myself . It was then like an internal drive . Made me look at the hard labor job as a tool to a greater goal. Was basically a one foot forward after the next mind step with no excuses. Never got ahead of myself and at all times avoided being envious of others. Which when I look back was really the attribute that helped me the most, enabled me to focus on my own modest progress and build off of it.
Brother Herm, I admire your story.
In my case, I went from a first job where I was sleeping in a really bad, roach infested apartment. During spring melt, I had water leaking through the roof and dripping on me as I slept (hint: I didn't sleep long). Went to a comparatively good life with a great wife and family. Two great secrets I've found are very simple:
1) Marry well. He/she should be your compass and your motivator. You both have to act as a team and be on the same page. Helps to know what book you're in while you are still dating.
2) Take advantage of every opportunity that you can that comes your way. In my case, it meant finding the fine print in the employee manual at my third employer that made my MBA possible. The other was a mentor who guided me from one career into another.
Oh and if you're paying high taxes, quit your complaining. You're probably making more money than you can count. As Ms. Dgies once said, "I don't understand why Republicans are complaining about Bill Clinton. Republicans never made so much money in their life!"
-
In a nutshell realized that I had only to rely on myself . It was then like an internal drive . Made me look at the hard labor job as a tool to a greater goal. Was basically a one foot forward after the next mind step with no excuses. Never got ahead of myself and at all times avoided being envious of others. Which when I look back was really the attribute that helped me the most, enabled me to focus on my own modest progress and build off of it.
I have no doubt that you're a self-motivated guy. I guess I was asking more specifically, like did you get an education, change your career path, drop some bad habits, etc.
You don't have to answer, by the way. I may be prying.
-
Brother Herm, I admire your story.
In my case, I went from a first job where I was sleeping in a really bad, roach infested apartment. During spring melt, I had water leaking through the roof and dripping on me as I slept (hint: I didn't sleep long). Went to a comparatively good life with a great wife and family. Two great secrets I've found are very simple:
1) Marry well. He/she should be your compass and your motivator. You both have to act as a team and be on the same page. Helps to know what book you're in while you are still dating.
2) Take advantage of every opportunity that you can that comes your way. In my case, it meant finding the fine print in the employee manual at my third employer that made my MBA possible. The other was a mentor who guided me from one career into another.
Oh and if you're paying high taxes, quit your complaining. You're probably making more money than you can count. As Ms. Dgies once said, "I don't understand why Republicans are complaining about Bill Clinton. Republicans never made so much money in their life!"
The taxation complaint often isn’t the amount, it is what it is spent on and also why others aren’t paying....in other words, who is carrying the load.
Thought your other comments were right on.
-
I love how people bitch about climate change yet are rapacious participants in our consumptive society. Change begins at home.
Amen.
-
The interesting thing is that you either itemize deductions or you take the standard deduction. Whichever is higher. So if you use the standard deduction, you are not deducting mortgage interest or charitable contributions, true, but you are getting a higher deduction against income because the standard deduction is higher. Presumably you are coming out ahead of the game. Or look at it another way, if you itemize the only deduction you are getting is the amount that is higher than the standard deduction.
So many freak out .... what do you mean I cannot deduct my mortgage interest? Ugh. You are getting a free deduction in the standard deduction. You did not have to spend any money to qualify for it. The closer your total itemized deductions get to zero the better the standard deduction benefits you.
And remember your preparer will need all those numbers this year anyway, even if the taxpayer uses the standard deduction as you could very well get an itemized deduction credit in Wisconsin which is based on those items....so not a whole lot easier in the end. Still need the numbers, even if using the standard for Federal.
As I noted last year when we ran our projections, most of my clients (so far, it is early) are showing up with less overall liability. However, due the changes in the withholding tables are getting less back than they are used to or owing more by April 15th. Overall liability has decreased so far in my small microcosm of the world.
-
Anyone who has gone without naturally asks why are we so materialistic. People in the developed world are voracious consumers.
How is shopping for the luxury sportyacht going?
-
Yeup and to cite the Chicago Tribune, there's the equivalent of one modern stagecoach (a Boeing 777) leaving Illinois daily, never to return. That's a sad reality on what should be the Midwest's economic and social driver.
1.9M have left New York over the years and the gov is blaming the current tax plan as a reason. Lol, 1.9M left BEFORE the new tax laws. Sometimes these guys need to look inward. Illinois, CA no different.
-
How is shopping for the luxury sportyacht going?
Every 50 MW of clean energy we install eliminates more than 30 tons of CH4, 730 tons of CO2, and 15 tons of leachate from poisoning the air, soil, and ground water that sustains all life on this planet.
Every quarter this year (and for the next several years) we will break ground on appox 800 MW of clean, renewable energy in both brownfield and greenfield sites on 5 continents that will make the planet a much healthier place.
I think we are doing our bit.
And yes, I am looking at sailboats. When you own 6.25% of all of these power plants you can afford one.
-
We are receiving a slightly larger refund.
-
Every 50 MW of clean energy we install eliminates more than 30 tons of CH4, 730 tons of CO2, and 15 tons of leachate from poisoning the air, soil, and ground water that sustains all life on this planet.
Every quarter this year (and for the next several years) we will break ground on appox 800 MW of clean, renewable energy in both brownfield and greenfield sites on 5 continents that will make the planet a much healthier place.
I think we are doing our bit.
And yes, I am looking at sailboats. When you own 6.25% of all of these power plants you can afford one.
No offense intended. I just found it funny so I was giving you crap.
-
Every 50 MW of clean energy we install eliminates more than 30 tons of CH4, 730 tons of CO2, and 15 tons of leachate from poisoning the air, soil, and ground water that sustains all life on this planet.
Every quarter this year (and for the next several years) we will break ground on appox 800 MW of clean, renewable energy in both brownfield and greenfield sites on 5 continents that will make the planet a much healthier place.
I think we are doing our bit.
And yes, I am looking at sailboats. When you own 6.25% of all of these power plants you can afford one.
And yet, GE just can't stay above the 10-dollar mark.
-
What I have surmised is that higher income earners are not paying less in taxes, the higher standard deduction is causing homeowners to get lower refunds because of not deducting mortgage interest, and many tax payers should have but did not change the number allowances, and are surprised to find out they owe or are getting a small refund.
The only people that have experienced favorable results from the tax law changes are those with a unique circumstances and those who have earned far less in 2018 than in years past.
Utter nonsense.
-
Why do you assume everyone had unexpected bad circumstances? There are some in these situations but there are also many entitled irresponsible people living beyond their means trying to impress others with their illusion of success.
Maybe you could look up the definition of empathy?
-
OK gang, back to taxes.
If there is ever living proof that the media collectively is a group of financial idiots, the recent coverage on tax reform is People's Exhibit Number 1.
In every report I've seen, the story has been about fools complaining that they are not getting as much of a refund as in past years. As if somehow that's a consequence of a tax policy that "screws" the middle class.
What it probably is -- and we'll never know because the financial idiots covering the story did not explore withholding and earnings with their sources -- is that withholding changed with the effective date of the tax law. Said source didn't bother to check his or her withholding and so there's no big refund. Said financial idiot reporter didn't bother to ask about deductions, gross income, and total tax bill against last year.
As Private Gomer Pyle once said, "S-u-r-p-r-i-s-e, S-u-r-p-r-i-s-e, S-u-r-p-r-i-s-e!!!!!"
-
OK gang, back to taxes.
If there is ever living proof that the media collectively is a group of financial idiots, the recent coverage on tax reform is People's Exhibit Number 1.
In every report I've seen, the story has been about fools complaining that they are not getting as much of a refund as in past years. As if somehow that's a consequence of a tax policy that "screws" the middle class.
What it probably is -- and we'll never know because the financial idiots covering the story did not explore withholding and earnings with their sources -- is that withholding changed with the effective date of the tax law. Said source didn't bother to check his or her withholding and so there's no big refund. Said financial idiot reporter didn't bother to ask about deductions, gross income, and total tax bill against last year.
How do you know what questions the reporter asked or didn't ask?
Or are you just assuming?
-
We are receiving a slightly larger refund.
Sure, Cheekz, just like you said the new tax law was successfully giving you larger take home pay...before someone pointed out the law hadn't yet gone into effect.
-
How do you know what questions the reporter asked or didn't ask?
Or are you just assuming?
Because it was on television!
-
And yet, GE just can't stay above the 10-dollar mark.
you can thank jeff imelt for that, the dude should be scrubbin jailhose johns on his hands and knees
-
Sure, Cheekz, just like you said the new tax law was successfully giving you larger take home pay...before someone pointed out the law hadn't yet gone into effect.
I haven’t even done my taxes yet, but let’s call everyone me...ehh?
-
Sure, Cheekz, just like you said the new tax law was successfully giving you larger take home pay...before someone pointed out the law hadn't yet gone into effect.
That someone was shown to be incorrect. Do you not remember?
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=55598.msg989776#msg989776
-
How do you know what questions the reporter asked or didn't ask?
Or are you just assuming?
Perhaps the questions were asked, but the answers didn't contribute to the story.
Nobody is going to click on an article that says "Americans Receive Smaller Refund Due to Reduced Withholding"... but people are going to click on "Americans Receive Smaller Refund."
Not that you did, but in case you ever need a reason to unequivocally prove that the average American is an idiot, look no further than the tendency of Americans to gauge their tax burden not by the "Total Tax" line on their 1040 but by the "Refund Due" line at the bottom.
-
I'm not sure it means they're an "idiot." I think what it means is that taxes are complex. Most people likely set their withholding awhile ago and didn't think much of the results. So when the law change, and the withholding amounts with it, they probably didn't think much of it because it has worked out for them in the past.
I also think the process by which withholdings are calculated is unnecessarily difficult. Instead of a complicated formula, have it be a declaration of a certain percentage of gross pay. So if I declare 1, 1% of my gross pay is withheld. Those are fairly easy numbers to calculate versus how they are calculated now.
-
Not that you did, but in case you ever need a reason to unequivocally prove that the average American is an idiot, look no further than the tendency of Americans to gauge their tax burden not by the "Total Tax" line on their 1040 but by the "Refund Due" line at the bottom.
^^^^^
He's right, you know.
I actually had a conversation with someone about taxes once, and asked how much tax he paid the prior year. The response: "I don't pay taxes. I got money back." While I know that this is true for some, this person had paid a significant amount of federal taxes...but he got money back in the spring, so he thought he hadn't payed.
-
Not that you did, but in case you ever need a reason to unequivocally prove that the average American is an idiot, look no further than the tendency of Americans to gauge their tax burden not by the "Total Tax" line on their 1040 but by the "Refund Due" line at the bottom.
Brother Benny, you're spot on!!!!!!!!!!!
-
^^^^^
He's right, you know.
I actually had a conversation with someone about taxes once, and asked how much tax he paid the prior year. The response: "I don't pay taxes. I got money back." While I know that this is true for some, this person had paid a significant amount of federal taxes...but he got money back in the spring, so he thought he hadn't payed.
Insert joke of someone looking at their pay check and asking the f%$& FICA is.
-
I'm not sure it means they're an "idiot." I think what it means is that taxes are complex. Most people likely set their withholding awhile ago and didn't think much of the results. So when the law change, and the withholding amounts with it, they probably didn't think much of it because it has worked out for them in the past.
I also think the process by which withholdings are calculated is unnecessarily difficult. Instead of a complicated formula, have it be a declaration of a certain percentage of gross pay. So if I declare 1, 1% of my gross pay is withheld. Those are fairly easy numbers to calculate versus how they are calculated now.
The calculation of taxes is complex, but the concept of taxes and whether smaller refund is good or bad is pretty basic. The fact that news organizations are reporting on refunds being down this year as a bad thing indicates that clicks are more important than facts/context for them
-
^^^^^
He's right, you know.
I actually had a conversation with someone about taxes once, and asked how much tax he paid the prior year. The response: "I don't pay taxes. I got money back." While I know that this is true for some, this person had paid a significant amount of federal taxes...but he got money back in the spring, so he thought he hadn't payed.
Yup....heard same logic on radio just the other day. Shaking my damn head. People are detached from reality that impacts them every day.
-
Not that you did, but in case you ever need a reason to unequivocally prove that the average American is an idiot, look no further than the tendency of Americans to gauge their tax burden not by the "Total Tax" line on their 1040 but by the "Refund Due" line at the bottom.
There are some good reasons for this though. Many Americans do their taxes using online software. Last year, that software would tell people how big their refund would be under the new tax law. It didn't take into consideration changes to withholding.
Many Americans do not understand the aspects of withholding. So they were expecting a refund of the size the software told them about last year. That didn't happen, because they already got that money.
So now they are pissed, because they were counting on that additional money now.
That is why growth from the tax cuts will be stagnated this year. It was largely driven by increases in consumer spending, who spent the extra money in their paychecks. They now have to cut back, because the "refund money" didn't come. On top of that, there are no additional changes to spur year over year growth. So we got a bolus of growth last year that will return to average year over year growths or stagnate.
-
Because it was on television!
Oh ... and you think the entirety of the interview and reporting appears in the 30-second news clip?
Got it.
-
The other interesting thing about the new tax law and whether or not you got a benefit or owed more in taxes is that you cannot just look at the numbers on the 2018 tax return to know. All those numbers will tell you is your Federal liability for 2018, your Federal WH for 2018 and whether or not you got a refund or owed money for 2018.
To really compare your number, you must take 2018's numbers and run them under the 2017 tax law. This is really the only way to know if your tax liability was higher or lower under the new law....unless for some very odd reason all of your numbers from 2017 (income and deductions) are identical to 2018. (No, I have never seen a case like that where the taxpayer actually had a tax liability).
I did this for my son and his girlfriend. Both single. One earned income (w2s) of $16,888 and the other $54,266. They had no other income or deductions. The one earning $16,888 had a lower tax liability in 2018 by $161, over what it would have been in 2017 under 2017 law. The one earning $54,266 had a lower tax liability in 2018 by $1,476, over what it would have been in 2017 under 2017 law.
-
There are some good reasons for this though. Many Americans do their taxes using online software. Last year, that software would tell people how big their refund would be under the new tax law. It didn't take into consideration changes to withholding.
Many Americans do not understand the aspects of withholding. So they were expecting a refund of the size the software told them about last year. That didn't happen, because they already got that money.
So now they are pissed, because they were counting on that additional money now.
That is why growth from the tax cuts will be stagnated this year. It was largely driven by increases in consumer spending, who spent the extra money in their paychecks. They now have to cut back, because the "refund money" didn't come. On top of that, there are no additional changes to spur year over year growth. So we got a bolus of growth last year that will return to average year over year growths or stagnate.
Maybe so, but it still points to their ignorance. In the summary of those tax programs it shows the total amount of TAXES PAID, for over 80% of the country it will be lower than they paid a few years ago. If people cannot process that, we're already sunk. Refund or not, that's the key number and a lot of Americans apparently cannot comprehend this. Media articles aren't helping.
-
The calculation of taxes is complex, but the concept of taxes and whether smaller refund is good or bad is pretty basic. The fact that news organizations are reporting on refunds being down this year as a bad thing indicates that clicks are more important than facts/context for them
Isn't this kind of a "duh" statement? Doesn't make it any less pathetic though.
-
While many points made are correct, I have a hard time with the snobbish comments here.
Does it make you guys feel good to attack people for not fully understanding taxes and tax law? I expect guys like Bennie to call people idiots, but that seems to be the general opinion here.
There are tens of millions of people in this country with a high school education or less. There are a myriad of reasons why this is the case. For you college educated snobs to belittle them or call them names is, quite frankly, disgusting.
Decency is never out of season.
-
While many points made are correct, I have a hard time with the snobbish comments here.
Does it make you guys feel good to attack people for not fully understanding taxes and tax law? I expect guys like Bennie to call people idiots, but that seems to be the general opinion here.
There are tens of millions of people in this country with a high school education or less. There are a myriad of reasons why this is the case. For you college educated snobs to belittle them or call them names is, quite frankly, disgusting.
Decency is never out of season.
I don't expect someone to understand tax law or tax mechanisms but I do expect someone to know whether they took home more or less money this year compared to last year....uts basic budgeting
-
I don't expect someone to understand tax law or tax mechanisms but I do expect someone to know whether they took home more or less money this year compared to last year....uts basic budgeting
I hope you know that you aren’t one of those that I was criticizing.
-
While many points made are correct, I have a hard time with the snobbish comments here.
Does it make you guys feel good to attack people for not fully understanding taxes and tax law? I expect guys like Bennie to call people idiots, but that seems to be the general opinion here.
There are tens of millions of people in this country with a high school education or less. There are a myriad of reasons why this is the case. For you college educated snobs to belittle them or call them names is, quite frankly, disgusting.
Decency is never out of season.
Truth be told, I honestly believe that lower income (and potentially lower educated) people are probably far more acutely aware of their taxes. In the example I was referencing, that person was a professional, payed a fairly five-figure federal tax bill, but thought he hadn’t paid taxes because he got a $7000 refund in the spring. Absolutely nothing to do with lack of education. To the contrary, I’d expect that particular brand of ignorance to be far more prevalent with people who are earning enough money to not really be paying much attention around the margins. People who haven’t looked at their pay stubs and agonized over where every penny was going every two weeks. In short, I was talking about exactly the opposite kind of person than you suggest.
-
Truth be told, I honestly believe that lower income (and potentially lower educated) people are probably far more acutely aware of their taxes. In the example I was referencing, that person was a professional, payed a fairly five-figure federal tax bill, but thought he hadn’t paid taxes because he got a $7000 refund in the spring. Absolutely nothing to do with lack of education. To the contrary, I’d expect that particular brand of ignorance to be far more prevalent with people who are earning enough money to not really be paying much attention around the margins. People who haven’t looked at their pay stubs and agonized over where every penny was going every two weeks. In short, I was talking about exactly the opposite kind of person than you suggest.
*paid
I agree there are those not overly concerned with taxes because they choose not to and aren't worried about money. I disagree that the poors who pay little to no income tax are "more acutely aware" of their taxes than others.
But, people all over the board from all walks of life have had a mindset of, "oh, I'm getting a refund, I should spend it on something for doing such a great job" instead of, "oh crap. I'm an idiot who let the gov't borrow my money for no interest. Finally I got it back. Need to do better."
-
I hope you know that you aren’t one of those that I was criticizing.
I suspect I was and, yes, I expect that you don't need an MA in Taxation to figure out that your refund is less important that measuring how much you paid against how much you made.
And yes, Brother Pakuni, with the Ken and Barbies on TV now, I do think what you see is what you get. TV and newspapers are shallow and most reporters don't get basic economics.
-
If the high schools would get back to teaching our kids “stuff” they NEED to know in order to have a productive life, such as how taxation works, would be a start. Maybe if we allowed them to receive their full pay and they would be responsible(no pun intended) to write their with holdings check from that and send it in to our gubment, the true effect of taxes would then be appreciated. I have a funny feeling that might drive our point home a little better
-
I don't expect someone to understand tax law or tax mechanisms but I do expect someone to know whether they took home more or less money this year compared to last year....uts basic budgeting
Not attacking, but the vast majority of lower wage workers, work hourly with varied schedules, multiple jobs, drive Uber...so for folks like you and I who work on salary, your statement is spot on, not sure it would be as easy if my check was literally a different amount every two weeks.
-
I hope you know that you aren’t one of those that I was criticizing.
I do, just putting my expectations out there is all.
-
If the high schools would get back to teaching our kids “stuff” they NEED to know in order to have a productive life, such as how taxation works, would be a start. Maybe if we allowed them to receive their full pay and they would be responsible(no pun intended) to write their with holdings check from that and send it in to our gubment, the true effect of taxes would then be appreciated. I have a funny feeling that might drive our point home a little better
I have tongue in cheek argued this for years and have stated if the tax law was this way there would be a tax revolt like you have never seen. This conversation typically takes place with a newly self employed individual when we go over how much they will owe in taxes and how they have to make quarterly payments. If they actually do OK and make some decent money the burden approaches 50 percent of thir net earnings pretty quickly.
-
I have tongue in cheek argued this for years and have stated if the tax law was this way there would be a tax revolt like you have never seen. This conversation typically takes place with a newly self employed individual when we go over how much they will owe in taxes and how they have to make quarterly payments. If they actually do OK and make some decent money the burden approaches 50 percent of thir net earnings pretty quickly.
It's the perfect execution of the opt out model I advocate for with retirement funds like 401Ks.....you have to choose not to contribue otherwise money is automatically taken out, if the money is never in your pocket you never miss it. If people had to pay their taxes at the end of the year out of the funds they already received I think it would be a major eye opener, because as Jockey pointed out, the vast majority of people either can't or don't want to understand their taxes....they just want to know if they are getting money back (if I get money back from the government on a refund I consider it a failed year of money management for me)
-
Not attacking, but the vast majority of lower wage workers, work hourly with varied schedules, multiple jobs, drive Uber...so for folks like you and I who work on salary, your statement is spot on, not sure it would be as easy if my check was literally a different amount every two weeks.
It's a very valid point, and I will certainly plead ignorance as I don't know how much of the working population has an extremely variable pay schedule as you describe. I understand the concept of living pay check to pay check but what % of the population are we talking about has such a high variability of pay schedule that determining YoY take home pay becomes difficult.
FYI, with that kind of variability I'd also think that the tax refund metric wouldn't make sense either because it would also be highly volatile YoY so those folks wouldn't be the ones angry about lower than anticipated refunds. For the refund to be a steady metric until this year the wage earners would have to have a relatively stable revenue mechanism.
-
I suspect I was and, yes, I expect that you don't need an MA in Taxation to figure out that your refund is less important that measuring how much you paid against how much you made.
And yes, Brother Pakuni, with the Ken and Barbies on TV now, I do think what you see is what you get. TV and newspapers are shallow and most reporters don't get basic economics.
I have read a few mainstream newspaper articles about this situation. They were just-the-facts-ma'am reports. They quoted several taxpayers who were distraught to find out that their refunds won't be as high as previous years, and they quoted economists and/or politicians to say that's because the taxpayers likely received more take-home pay throughout the year and didn't realize it. A couple of the reports provided examples using actual math. They didn't come to conclusions or editorialize.
I also have read columnists and op/eds that have used examples to support their viewpoints, which of course is their job. As long as they are presented as opinion/analysis, it's good to have them available for readers to draw their own conclusions.
TV screamers who stump for one or the other party and who obviously have an agenda but pretend it's "news" ... I have little use for them, no matter the subject.
Real journalists are allies of the American people.
-
Real journalists are allies of the American people.
Agree, problem is those are hard to find these days. The days of requiring two independent sources....the days of not using anonymous sources....the days of keeping one’s opinion out of articles.....
Sadly gone.
-
"TV screamers who stump for one or the other party and who obviously have an agenda but pretend it's "news" ... I have little use for them, no matter the subject."
that sure whittles it down a little ::)
-
I have read a few mainstream newspaper articles about this situation. They were just-the-facts-ma'am reports. They quoted several taxpayers who were distraught to find out that their refunds won't be as high as previous years, and they quoted economists and/or politicians to say that's because the taxpayers likely received more take-home pay throughout the year and didn't realize it. A couple of the reports provided examples using actual math. They didn't come to conclusions or editorialize.
I also have read columnists and op/eds that have used examples to support their viewpoints, which of course is their job. As long as they are presented as opinion/analysis, it's good to have them available for readers to draw their own conclusions.
TV screamers who stump for one or the other party and who obviously have an agenda but pretend it's "news" ... I have little use for them, no matter the subject.
Real journalists are allies of the American people.
Yeah I think a distinction should be made between newspaper media and TV media in this type of situation. Newspaper has the time/space to have that nuanced articulation of facts and information (whether people have time to read and/or understand is another question), whereas TV media has to disseminate "info" in 30 second bites and such articulation is either deliberately or as a byproduct of lack of time not done. The coverage from ABC national news the other day was frustrating, everything was positioned as if it was a problem including an interviewee directly tying a reduction in refund mean that there was no tax cut for them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPKl-RGWcW4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPKl-RGWcW4)
-
A classic response in Yahoo article.
Kelli (who wanted her last name withheld), tweeted to the president: “First time ever owing on taxes! Static income, but take away the itemization and we got hit hard! where’s the middle class benefits? Sadly disappointed here!”
She actually thinks this is the first time she paid taxes. Facepalm. Our schools are failing us miserably, the media isn't helping. Dear Kelli, you've been paying taxes all along. Don't confuse the year end "true-up" with the first time paying vs lending the gov't your money for free.
-
If the high schools would get back to teaching our kids “stuff” they NEED to know in order to have a productive life, such as how taxation works, would be a start. Maybe if we allowed them to receive their full pay and they would be responsible(no pun intended) to write their with holdings check from that and send it in to our gubment, the true effect of taxes would then be appreciated. I have a funny feeling that might drive our point home a little better
+1
Financial literacy and media literacy should be part of every student’s core curriculum......although part of me shudders at what those courses might end up looking like.
-
A classic response in Yahoo article.
Kelli (who wanted her last name withheld), tweeted to the president: “First time ever owing on taxes! Static income, but take away the itemization and we got hit hard! where’s the middle class benefits? Sadly disappointed here!”
She actually thinks this is the first time she paid taxes. Facepalm. Our schools are failing us miserably, the media isn't helping. Dear Kelli, you've been paying taxes all along. Don't confuse the year end "true-up" with the first time paying vs lending the gov't your money for free.
That is not what she said, and you know that, but choose to represent otherwise.
She's clearly stating that her income was flat and yet her tax bill went up.
-
+1
Financial literacy and media literacy should be part of every student’s core curriculum......although part of me shudders at what those courses might end up looking like.
critical thinking skills based on facts, not feelings. problem solving and learning how to think "outside the box" teaching how to think, NOT what to think. not everything fits into a little template
-
That is not what she said, and you know that, but choose to represent otherwise.
She's clearly stating that her income was flat and yet her tax bill went up.
She said first time every owing taxes. Her words. She's owed the entire year just like most Americans, but most don't pay attention to their withholding. I would bet serious dough that her "static" income also meant she had more take home each paycheck and she's referencing the actual total salary, not the net.
The new tax tables are designed so you aren't lending the gov't money interest free or having to payout a big chunk at the end, but people are addicted to a refund that makes no sense. https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-tax-refunds-withholding-deductions-20190212-story.html
"Getting a tax refund means that you gave the government an interest-free loan because you overpaid your taxes," said Nicole Kaeding, director of Federal Projects at the Tax Foundation, a right-leaning think thank.
But many Americans prefer refunds, even though personal finance experts say it's not a wise idea to get one.
"It's a mystery why taxpayers seem to be comfortable - and even happy - with getting refund checks," said Rosenberg.
-
"She's clearly stating that her income was flat and yet her tax bill went up."
not enough info here to even respond-how much did she make? was she already in that income class that did not benefit? did she change her withholdings? was she given a bonus in lieu of a raise that she isn't revealing while maintaining a "flat income" and lastly but probably most importantly-who did she vote for? if she doesn't like the person who initiated the tax changes gives her more reason to beach
remember human nature
-
But many Americans prefer refunds, even though personal finance experts say it's not a wise idea to get one.
"It's a mystery why taxpayers seem to be comfortable - and even happy - with getting refund checks," said Rosenberg.[/color]
When interest rates were higher than they are today I would agree wholeheartedly with the statement that it is not wise financial policy to make an interest free loan to the government. Over the years as rates dropped, my thinking on that changed some. For some clients, the only way they will save any money is to not see it. So for them an interest free loan to the government and a nice big refund is their savings plan, whether it be for a vacation, to pay down debt or whatever purpose. So as with all things, I think the real answer as to whether or not a refund is a good thing depends upon the specific taxpayer. And remember a ton of people are paycheck to paycheck so if they come up owing with their tax return, it could be a large burden to overcome. As with all things taxes, the answer is never as simple as x, at least in my experience.
Most personal finance experts would also say that having a mortgage is a good idea, and that is another one where I think it depends a lot on the person, but that is another discussion altogether.
-
I don't think it's much of a mystery why people prefer refunds. Because the alternative is writing an additional check. And as I said earlier, federal taxation is complex. I have a pretty good understanding of it and I still screwed up my withholdings mostly due to changes in my wife's income. And those changes happened in September, which doesn't give one a lot of time to analyze and correct the problem.
If a taxpayer could nail the exact amount of their taxation at the beginning of each year without doubt or mystery, most would do that. But they don't understand it enough. And its's not because it isn't taught enough in high school. I'm 55 and never was taught it in high school. It's because it is complex. Figuring out your income, withholdings, deductions, etc. isn't easy.
So yeah people are happy to get a refund. It's the better outcome of a complex process.
-
She said first time every owing taxes. Her words. She's owed the entire year just like most Americans, but most don't pay attention to their withholding. I would bet serious dough that her "static" income also meant she had more take home each paycheck and she's referencing the actual total salary, not the net.
The new tax tables are designed so you aren't lending the gov't money interest free or having to payout a big chunk at the end, but people are addicted to a refund that makes no sense. https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-tax-refunds-withholding-deductions-20190212-story.html
"Getting a tax refund means that you gave the government an interest-free loan because you overpaid your taxes," said Nicole Kaeding, director of Federal Projects at the Tax Foundation, a right-leaning think thank.
But many Americans prefer refunds, even though personal finance experts say it's not a wise idea to get one.
"It's a mystery why taxpayers seem to be comfortable - and even happy - with getting refund checks," said Rosenberg.
No, she said first time ever owing on taxes. Which is reasonably read as the first time she's owed money to the government after completing her taxes.
You really believe that someone who understands that eliminating itemized deductions impacted her tax bill doesn't understand that taxes are taken out throughout the year?
-
That is not what she said, and you know that, but choose to represent otherwise.
She's clearly stating that her income was flat and yet her tax bill went up.
I agree that she didn’t say that this was the first time she paid taxes. But, she also didn’t say her tax bill went up.
She said it was the first time she owed taxes. This is ambiguous. It could mean that her tax bill went up. It could also mean it’s the first time she’s had to write a check (i.e., she under-withheld). I interpret it as the latter. A good journalist would have asked follow-up questions to figure it out.
-
When interest rates were higher than they are today I would agree wholeheartedly with the statement that it is not wise financial policy to make an interest free loan to the government. Over the years as rates dropped, my thinking on that changed some. For some clients, the only way they will save any money is to not see it. So for them an interest free loan to the government and a nice big refund is their savings plan, whether it be for a vacation, to pay down debt or whatever purpose. So as with all things, I think the real answer as to whether or not a refund is a good thing depends upon the specific taxpayer. And remember a ton of people are paycheck to paycheck so if they come up owing with their tax return, it could be a large burden to overcome. As with all things taxes, the answer is never as simple as x, at least in my experience.
Most personal finance experts would also say that having a mortgage is a good idea, and that is another one where I think it depends a lot on the person, but that is another discussion altogether.
Fair enough
-
No, she said first time ever owing on taxes. Which is reasonably read as the first time she's owed money to the government after completing her taxes.
You really believe that someone who understands that eliminating itemized deductions impacted her tax bill doesn't understand that taxes are taken out throughout the year?
Based on the comments I'm reading in various articles, nothing surprises me any more what people do or do not know about their financial situation. People need to take more control of their situation....Americans don't do this to a degree they should.
End of the day, it's about your liability, not your refund. https://www.forbes.com/sites/howardgleckman/2019/02/12/its-about-your-tax-liability-not-your-refund/#12f97ba25292
-
I agree that she didn’t say that this was the first time she paid taxes. But, she also didn’t say her tax bill went up.
She said it was the first time she owed taxes. This is ambiguous. It could mean that her tax bill went up. It could also mean it’s the first time she’s had to write a check (i.e., she under-withheld). I interpret it as the latter. A good journalist would have asked follow-up questions to figure it out.
That's fair. Everything would have to be static for it to count as her tax bill going up (withholding, income, potential deductions, etc.).
-
Does it make you guys feel good to attack people for not fully understanding _______________________?
(https://i.imgflip.com/10pjtj.jpg)
-
+1
Financial literacy and media literacy should be part of every student’s core curriculum......although part of me shudders at what those courses might end up looking like.
It is available in most high schools. The problem is that it is usually an elective as opposed to a required class.
-
It is available in most high schools.
#FakeNews #Lies
-
There are those who think that every American should have "skin in the game" and should have to pay some income tax. They pretend that there aren't all kinds of taxes and fees imposed on Americans every day, and most of them are regressive -- they affect the poor a lot more than they affect those with means. The sales tax might be the biggest of those.
To illustrate that, here is a letter that appeared in today's Charlotte Observer:
PLEASE DON’T ADD TO MY TAX BURDEN
I read about the arts people not having enough money in their funds, so they decided to just put it on a sales tax increase.
Forget the poor who are the ones paying these sales taxes, which seem to never quit. I am a 90-year-old man. I go to the dollar store and buy 10 boxes of tissue for $10 and the cashier charges me another 70 cents sales tax, which is almost another box of Kleenex. That cuts back my buying power.
President Trump has given an income tax cut for the rich. He should have cut the sales taxes and give a tax cut for the poor.
JOSEPH DEMERS, STATESVILLE
Obviously, POTUS can't cut sales taxes, which are state levies, but that's not the point. The point is that every American already has skin in the game. And as a percentage of his or her earnings, the poor has far more skin than the rich.
-
Yes, everyone should pay something in Federal Income Taxes. The military defends us all, not just some...all should contribute. Fed highways benefit rich and poor, even if one never uses them goods are shipped on those highways. So on and so forth. Everyone should pay something. I don’t care if it is $5 min, everyone should pay something....for the educational purpose alone of explaining stuff isn’t free, this is your civic duty.
If you have no income, fine.
-
There are those who think that every American should have "skin in the game" and should have to pay some income tax. They pretend that there are all kinds of taxes and fees imposed on Americans every day, and most of them are regressive -- they affect the poor a lot more than they affect those with means. The sales tax might be the biggest of those.
To illustrate that, here is a letter that appeared in today's Charlotte Observer:
PLEASE DON’T ADD TO MY TAX BURDEN
I read about the arts people not having enough money in their funds, so they decided to just put it on a sales tax increase.
Forget the poor who are the ones paying these sales taxes, which seem to never quit. I am a 90-year-old man. I go to the dollar store and buy 10 boxes of tissue for $10 and the cashier charges me another 70 cents sales tax, which is almost another box of Kleenex. That cuts back my buying power.
President Trump has given an income tax cut for the rich. He should have cut the sales taxes and give a tax cut for the poor.
JOSEPH DEMERS, STATESVILLE
Obviously, POTUS can't cut sales taxes, which are state levies, but that's not the point. The point is that every American already has skin in the game. And as a percentage of his or her earnings, the poor has far more skin than the rich.
This is the crux of why I'm a Modern Whig. Tax policy in this country and all levels is inherently complex (more a feature than a bug, but I disgress) which punishes the poor disproportionately because the federal government has assumed too many roles that should be left to the states. Further the states and local governments have blended their roles because everyone wants "control". I think the closer to the community you can put the control/purse strings the more efficient you are going to get. Obviously there are exceptions like national defense, interstate transit, technology and research, etc but the merging of federal, state, county, city, etc government levels is creating a real problem IMO
-
Yes, everyone should pay something in Federal Income Taxes. The military defends us all, not just some...all should contribute. Fed highways benefit rich and poor, even if one never uses them goods are shipped on those highways. So on and so forth. Everyone should pay something. I don’t care if it is $5 min, everyone should pay something....for the educational purpose alone of explaining stuff isn’t free, this is your civic duty.
If you have no income, fine.
We will agree to disagree on this, troll, though it's interesting of you to acknowledge the importance of socialist initiatives like the highway system.
-
Yes, everyone should pay something in Federal Income Taxes. The military defends us all, not just some...all should contribute. Fed highways benefit rich and poor, even if one never uses them goods are shipped on those highways. So on and so forth. Everyone should pay something. I don’t care if it is $5 min, everyone should pay something....for the educational purpose alone of explaining stuff isn’t free, this is your civic duty.
If you have no income, fine.
Federal highways are funded primarily through the federal gas tax, which everyone pays.
And yes, let's require everyone pay $5. How much does it cost to implement and enforce that program and collect the revenue? It would quickly become the biggest waste of money in the federal government, and that's saying something.
But it sure would teach those stupid poor people that stuff isn't free.
-
Federal highways are funded primarily through the federal gas tax, which everyone pays.
And yes, let's require everyone pay $5. How much does it cost to implement and enforce that program and collect the revenue? It would quickly become the biggest waste of money in the federal government, and that's saying something.
But it sure would teach those stupid poor people that stuff isn't free.
Primarily, but not solely. If you FILE taxes, we can collect. Not hard at all. A huge number of people that FILE federal income taxes pay $0....very easy. If we have the means to say "YOU DON'T OWE ANYTHING" we have the means to say, $5 (or name the amount) is going to be paid. How is this even a challenge? It isn't. Not in anyway. We have your TAX ID number, your social security number (even though millions used fraudulently each year), etc. If you are paid legitimately, piece of cake.
Military, ATF, ICE, Border Patrol, highways, social security administration, etc, etc....federal tax dollars go to fund all of those things and everyone benefits in some way at the services or protections provided by those services. Thus, EVERYONE should have to pay for some of it. Everyone, even if only $5.
-
We will agree to disagree on this, troll, though it's interesting of you to acknowledge the importance of socialist initiatives like the highway system.
As I've said countless times, that is correct...there are things that are built for the collective good. In fact, I've used highways and military as such examples. There is no such thing as pure capitalism....thanks for noticing my wise words.
-
Primarily, but not solely. If you FILE taxes, we can collect. Not hard at all. A huge number of people that FILE federal income taxes pay $0....very easy. If we have the means to say "YOU DON'T OWE ANYTHING" we have the means to say, $5 (or name the amount) is going to be paid. How is this even a challenge? It isn't. Not in anyway. We have your TAX ID number, your social security number (even though millions used fraudulently each year), etc. If you are paid legitimately, piece of cake.
Well, first, people who are paid legitimately do pay federal taxes, aka payroll taxes. Payroll taxes make up about 35 percent of federal revenue. So, if your concern is that those people are paying nothing, rest easy. They are paying. For the military. For ICE. for ATF. They have skin in the game.
Second, the reason many of the people you cite here don't end up owing federal income taxes is because of various credits (child credits, EIC, exemptions, etc.). Now, if you're willing to do away with those so they have "skin in the game" I assume you must be willing to do away with credits that also benefit the wealthy and corporations that allow entities like Amazon to also have no skin in the game.
But all in all, I don't think you're all that concerned about who has skin in the game or the phony principle of teaching people that things aren't free (as if poor people don't know this). You just like to rail on poor people.
-
Well, first, people who are paid legitimately do pay federal taxes, aka payroll taxes. Payroll taxes make up about 35 percent of federal revenue. So, if your concern is that those people are paying nothing, rest easy. They are paying. For the military. For ICE. for ATF. They have skin in the game.
Second, the reason many of the people you cite here don't end up owing federal income taxes is because of various credits (child credits, EIC, exemptions, etc.). Now, if you're willing to do away with those so they have "skin in the game" I assume you must be willing to do away with credits that also benefit the wealthy and corporations that allow entities like Amazon to also have no skin in the game.
But all in all, I don't think you're all that concerned about who has skin in the game or the phony principle of teaching people that things aren't free (as if poor people don't know this). You just like to rail on poor people.
Agree with 100% of this. Especially the last line.
-
Federal Tax Dollars breakdown, others bucket it differently but this is one view.
24% Social Security
26% Medicare / Health (Medicare, CHIP, Medicaid)
15% Defense
13% Income Security (Food Stamps, Unemployment insurance, Low Income Housing)
8% Veterans Benefits / Federal employee benefits
6% Net Interest on national debt
3% Other (NASA, Foreign Aid, National Parks, etc)
3% Education
2% Transportation
A lot of people benefit, in some cases the entire nation. BY LAW, if you make more than $12K in income and under the age of 65. 76 million people this year will pay $0 in Federal Income taxes, or 44% of Americans. Yes yes yes, some pay into payroll taxes, sales taxes, etc, etc....but the above items (defense, health care, education, etc) are funded by Federal INCOME taxes. If you benefit, you should pay something.
-
But all in all, I don't think you're all that concerned about who has skin in the game or the phony principle of teaching people that things aren't free (as if poor people don't know this). You just like to rail on poor people.
Nope, and pretty sad that you say that. Typical of you, but entirely wrong. Just another one of your accusatory cards you play. Sad, pathetic really.
It's pretty simple, if you benefit you should have to pay something. I have nothing against poor or rich. I do have problems with people that scam the system, whether they are rich or poor. The poor need help and I have zero problem with resources going that direction and it's also why we personally give to the poor. Now, those that abuse the system and take away from those truly in need I find reprehensible, but it happens way too often.
Finally, most of the Payroll Tax revenue goes to fund Social Security and Medicare. To suggest that any large portion of payroll taxes are going to pay for the military, transportation, education, etc, is not appropriate when you breakdown what payroll taxes ultimately fund.
-
I think if you are going to setup the system so that everyone pays something, then you need a major overhaul of the Federal tax system.
As it stands it is a social program system (Earned Income Credit amongst others), a special interests system (too many credits/deductions to detail) and a national policy system (encourage home ownership / going to college) all rolled into one. How about we use the tax system for what it was meant for and leave out all of the other policy drivers that have worked their way into the system. Then I would agree that everyone could pay something. However, if you set it up that way now you'll have what this thread has argued about since the opening post....
.....if I get a refund I did not pay taxes. WOO Me!
-
Nope, and pretty sad that you say that. Typical of you, but entirely wrong. Just another one of your accusatory cards you play. Sad, pathetic really.
"Sad!"
A favorite phrase of someone else, I believe.
Anyhow, I'll stop believing you get your jollies out of railing on the poor when you stop saying dumb things about the poor needing to pay $5 in federal income taxes for the "educational purpose alone of explaining stuff isn’t free."
Deal?
I have nothing against poor or rich. I do have problems with people that scam the system, whether they are rich or poor.
Scam the system = paying what's legally required.
But yeah, we must stop all these poor people who are paying $1,000 an hour tax attorneys and lobbyists to take advantage of every loophole, hide their revenue in offshore accounts and influence tax legislation so they can avoid that $5 payment you suggest.
Again, I'd believe you didn't have it in for the poor if you complained about corporations avoiding taxes 1/10th as often as you did the single mom earning $11 an hour at Wal-Mart.
Finally, most of the Payroll Tax revenue goes to fund Social Security and Medicare. To suggest that any large portion of payroll taxes are going to pay for the military, transportation, education, etc, is not appropriate when you breakdown what payroll taxes ultimately fund.
Cheeks then: It doesn't matter if federal highways are funding almost entirely by gas taxes.
Cheeks now: Payroll taxes don't count because a majority of that money goes to Social Security and Medicare.
Hmmm.
-
"Sad!"
A favorite phrase of someone else, I believe.
Anyhow, I'll stop believing you get your jollies out of railing on the poor when you stop saying dumb things about the poor needing to pay $5 in federal income taxes for the "educational purpose alone of explaining stuff isn’t free."
Deal?
Scam the system = paying what's legally required.
But yeah, we must stop all these poor people who are paying $1,000 an hour tax attorneys and lobbyists to take advantage of every loophole, hide their revenue in offshore accounts and influence tax legislation so they can avoid that $5 payment you suggest.
Again, I'd believe you didn't have it in for the poor if you complained about corporations avoiding taxes 1/10th as often as you did the single mom earning $11 an hour at Wal-Mart.
Cheeks then: It doesn't matter if federal highways are funding almost entirely by gas taxes.
Cheeks now: Payroll taxes don't count because a majority of that money goes to Social Security and Medicare.
Hmmm.
Lots of people say sad, especially when people are making sad claims. When I say scamming, I mean people that are dipping into those funds when they shouldn't be, or are spending money irresponsibly on items instead of essentials. And yes, by educational I mean there are way too many people in this country that have no idea what their taxes go to pay, or feel they are entitled to free stuff and shouldn't have to pay anything at all. That isn't railing on the poor...it is trying to teach folks basic civics. And yes, I do believe everyone should have to pay something, even if symbolic. You disagree, that's fine....no need for the name calling and typical responses. Not going to do a "deal" that is flawed from the start with those antics. Because people have differing viewpoints doesn't mean they hate the poor or anyone else, but that is tactic some people can't wait to unleash...a favorite phrase of someone else I believe. It dumbs the debate.
Do you want to break down the funding of payroll taxes that go to military, border patrol, ICE, ATF, etc ...I'm happy to have that discussion with you.
-
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=51888.0
-
Who scams the system more:
1. Minimum wage worker who pays their required amount - even if zero
2. Millionaire who does everything they can to avoid paying their required amount - through legal, illegal or unethical means
-
There are many items my taxes are used to pay for things I do not support. That is the way it goes. No reason to fret about it.
-
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=51888.0
Why do you kill the fun. I love the same old people having the same old arguments over and over and over and over and over...
Oh, wait, yeah, I agree with what the good Dr. said.
-
Who scams the system more:
1. Minimum wage worker who pays their required amount - even if zero
2. Millionaire who does everything they can to avoid paying their required amount - through legal, illegal or unethical means
Great question, no simple answer. Scamming can mean different things for different people.
Someone receiving food stamps or welfar but is spending money on drugs, smart phones and designer bags may be legally ok, but are they ethically?
Someone paying their legal amount of taxes, but spends money to find every loophole in the book are they ethical?
-
Some folks are very afraid of the welfare recipient who "games the system" to get an extra $15/month to feed her family but aren't the least bit concerned about the billionaire who runs a scam business, bilks thousands of employees and defrauds the government.
-
Why do you kill the fun. I love the same old people having the same old arguments over and over and over and over and over...
No wonder you spend so much time in the MLB thread.
-
No wonder you spend so much time in the MLB thread.
Hahah! Fair enough.
-
Some folks are very afraid of the welfare recipient who "games the system" to get an extra $15/month to feed her family but aren't the least bit concerned about the billionaire who runs a scam business, bilks thousands of employees and defrauds the government.
Why aren't we afraid of both? Dollars scammed mean less dollars from those that need it most.
-
Why aren't we afraid of both? Dollars scammed mean less dollars from those that need it most.
Do the math and let me know which one has a bigger impact.
Even if there are unseemly things going on by multiple parties, that's doesn't mean it's even "on both sides."
-
Do the math and let me know which one has a bigger impact.
Even if there are unseemly things going on by multiple parties, that's doesn't mean it's even "on both sides."
When a limited pie of funds is available, it matters. Turn a blind eye to one side doing it means more and more will do it and it isn't fair to those that truly are in need and playing by the rules. Go after the big fish hardest, but you cannot ignore the others. Why do we continue to punish rule followers, especially the disadvantaged rule followers? Makes no sense. It's as if we are telling them they are fools for following the rules, because if you don't follow it we won't do anything about it. That's what we should be teaching and enforcing?
-
When a limited pie of funds is available, it matters. Turn a blind eye to one side doing it means more and more will do it and it isn't fair to those that truly are in need and playing by the rules. Go after the big fish hardest, but you cannot ignore the others. Why do we continue to punish rule followers, especially the disadvantaged rule followers? Makes no sense. It's as if we are telling them they are fools for following the rules, because if you don't follow it we won't do anything about it. That's what we should be teaching and enforcing?
Go after those that are the bigger bang for the buck, so to speak. Not to mention you can't get blood from a turnip.
-
Go after those that are the bigger bang for the buck, so to speak. Not to mention you can't get blood from a turnip.
I get what you are saying, but it can be both. The store my wife returned to work for....$19M in theft last year. It was less than $5M only a few years earlier, that is due to a change in the laws here where anything under a certain value ($950) is no longer punished as a felony. So guess what happened...."small" crime has exploded and there is now a push to clamp down. Want to know who is hit hardest? Small business owners that don't have the big pockets as the retail giants. If you let the small stuff go unpunished, you are begging for it to become a way of life and part of every day action. Shoplifting up more than 40% in some stores, on average up 20%. Not good. Means prices go up for everyone. Same concept, if you ignore the smaller crimes they will eventually cause great harm and hurt the average person more than the rich guy.
-
chicos: Champion of the overdog.
-
I get what you are saying, but it can be both. The store my wife returned to work for....$19M in theft last year. It was less than $5M only a few years earlier, that is due to a change in the laws here where anything under a certain value ($950) is no longer punished as a felony. So guess what happened...."small" crime has exploded and there is now a push to clamp down. Want to know who is hit hardest? Small business owners that don't have the big pockets as the retail giants. If you let the small stuff go unpunished, you are begging for it to become a way of life and part of every day action. Shoplifting up more than 40% in some stores, on average up 20%. Not good. Means prices go up for everyone. Same concept, if you ignore the smaller crimes they will eventually cause great harm and hurt the average person more than the rich guy.
First of all, it is not referred to as "theft", as stores can not keep track of what is stolen or lost inventory. It is referred to as "Shrinkage". Most shrinkage is lost due to poor inventory tracking not theft.
Second, it isn't usually referenced as a total $ amount, as the stores targets will be gauged as a % of total sales/inventory. The goal is to keep shrinkage below a certain % of sales threshold.
If they are seeing a 300% increase in shrinkage in a couple years, someone needs to lose their job. My first target would be the transport company/vendors. The second would be the employees themselves.
-
First of all, it is not referred to as "theft", as stores can not keep track of what is stolen or lost inventory. It is referred to as "Shrinkage". Most shrinkage is lost due to poor inventory tracking not theft.
Second, it isn't usually referenced as a total $ amount, as the stores targets will be gauged as a % of total sales/inventory. The goal is to keep shrinkage below a certain % of sales threshold.
If they are seeing a 300% increase in shrinkage in a couple years, someone needs to lose their job. My first target would be the transport company/vendors. The second would be the employees themselves.
No, at her store they use real words, not fake crap. They call it theft because that is what it is. Their security people call it what it is...theft. Sure, management uses words like shrinkage, but everyone smirks because they know what it is. They have countless video of people brazenly walking up, grabbing $500 to $600 worth of stuff and walking right on out. They know the police won’t do a damn thing about it and they have trained the employees to just let it go. Sad. But this is what we have said is okie dokie now.
Who gets hit....the little shop owner. https://lompocrecord.com/news/local/shoplifters-taking-toll-on-local-economy-after-prop/article_95398fe0-111a-5698-8df4-c593ded67833.html
The worst part, it isn’t cumulative. Steal $949 today...do it again tomorrow, still no felony. Amazing.
https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/stores-fight-shoplifting-post-prop-47/1406126717
This is what happens if you let smaller crimes go unpunished...no different than welfare cheating, insurance scams, etc. The poor that are doing it right are made to be fools. Sad.
-
chicos: Champion of the overdog.
I was hoping you would weave in a totally unrelated story about why games were moved from North Carolina to Greenville....this seemed like the perfect thread for you.
MU82, champion of crime over people doing things the right way.
-
I was hoping you would weave in a totally unrelated story about why games were moved from North Carolina to Greenville....this seemed like the perfect thread for you.
MU82, champion of crime over people doing things the right way.
The subject of that tournament came up in another thread and my post was complete related and relevant.
But sure ... lie again.
-
The subject of that tournament came up in another thread and my post was complete related and relevant.
But sure ... lie again.
Yes, the tournament...no one said why are the games in South Carolina, no one asked why they were moved, but got to weave in your item and sprinkle in the added opinion on what it did to the state as if fact...you know...the same stuff you bellyache others do.
But sure...lie again.
-
Yes, the tournament...no one said why are the games in South Carolina, no one asked why they were moved, but You got to sprinkle in not on,y why, it the added opinion on what it did to the state as if fact...you know...the same stuff you bellyache others do.
But sure...lie again.
Have you ever wondered why you are one of the least popular Scoopers?
Do you wonder why you have gotten banned multiple times?
Do you wonder why few took you seriously a couple years back when you opened your heart and said you'd be a good boy if Scoop just took you back?
I'm guessing you think all of that is because you are the noble truth-teller, the permanently aggrieved, the misunderstood and the picked-on ... and it's the rest of us who are bad. After all, Jesus, Gandhi, MLK and Ners were misunderstood, too.
I'm done sparring verbally with you in public like this because our Scoop brothers and sisters don't need to be punished like this, so you can have the last word if you want. I suppose you can always PM me and spew hatred and lies, like you did last month, but I'll probably ignore that, too.
Anyway, I'll just hang up and wait for you to be banned again.
-
Have a good day and go back to your PMs and tell me who PMd who first? That’s right....you sent me one first....screenshots available if you wish. Not sure why you bothered to send me that initial PM, but yes you were the first to do so.
I have no doubt unpopular with some, popular with others, I have news for you, you fit the same mold.
Now, how about you and I focus on cheering for Marquette basketball.....deal? I think we both bring some good conversation there.
-
No, at her store they use real words, not fake crap. They call it theft because that is what it is. Their security people call it what it is...theft. Sure, management uses words like shrinkage, but everyone smirks because they know what it is. They have countless video of people brazenly walking up, grabbing $500 to $600 worth of stuff and walking right on out. They know the police won’t do a damn thing about it and they have trained the employees to just let it go. Sad. But this is what we have said is okie dokie now.
Who gets hit....the little shop owner. https://lompocrecord.com/news/local/shoplifters-taking-toll-on-local-economy-after-prop/article_95398fe0-111a-5698-8df4-c593ded67833.html
The worst part, it isn’t cumulative. Steal $949 today...do it again tomorrow, still no felony. Amazing.
https://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/stores-fight-shoplifting-post-prop-47/1406126717
This is what happens if you let smaller crimes go unpunished...no different than welfare cheating, insurance scams, etc. The poor that are doing it right are made to be fools. Sad.
Dang dude. I just sincerely can't understand the perspective of someone who lived through the financial crisis of the late 2000s and watched as some of the most wealthy/powerful committed white collar crime to the Nth degree that brought a nation to its knees (while little of them ended up being punished) and want to focus their attention on things like petty theft.
Sure, they're both crimes and neither are "the right thing to do."
But I just don't understand it.
-
It seems that we already achieved all this thread could have hoped for when we established "Taxes suck, and Americans are, on average, dumb."
Why are people still talking?
-
I'm done sparring verbally with you in public like this because our Scoop brothers and sisters don't need to be punished...
Promise? If so, thank you. Wades, you want in on this? Anyone else (you know who you are)? Do it for the children.
-
Dang dude. I just sincerely can't understand the perspective of someone who lived through the financial crisis of the late 2000s and watched as some of the most wealthy/powerful committed white collar crime to the Nth degree that brought a nation to its knees (while little of them ended up being punished) and want to focus their attention on things like petty theft.
Sure, they're both crimes and neither are "the right thing to do."
But I just don't understand it.
Why don't you understand it? Why can you not go after both? How are they NOT the right thing to do? If you are bilking the govt' out of $10K a year, and the next guy is, and the next the next guy...it adds up. The pie is limited, that cannot stand. For the same reason the aholes in the financial crisis cannot stand, but we've seen a lot of people protected there by both sides. Makes me sick, but so does jerk off that is taking that $10K so that Mrs. Honest poor citizen doesn't get hers because of his actions.
I just don't understand how you can turn a blind eye to that.
-
Why don't you understand it? Why can you not go after both? How are they NOT the right thing to do? If you are bilking the govt' out of $10K a year, and the next guy is, and the next the next guy...it adds up. The pie is limited, that cannot stand. For the same reason the aholes in the financial crisis cannot stand, but we've seen a lot of people protected there by both sides. Makes me sick, but so does jerk off that is taking that $10K so that Mrs. Honest poor citizen doesn't get hers because of his actions.
I just don't understand how you can turn a blind eye to that.
I never said turn a blind eye. I said start with the big fish and work from there.
I also believe that if the top was punished severely, it would have a downstream effect.
If you started at the bottom, I don't think the top changes anything.
-
Does McDonald's still do their tax day hamburger and cheeseburger deal? Had to skip lunch today and that is starting to sound real good right now.
-
Why don't you understand it? Why can you not go after both? How are they NOT the right thing to do? If you are bilking the govt' out of $10K a year, and the next guy is, and the next the next guy...it adds up. The pie is limited, that cannot stand. For the same reason the aholes in the financial crisis cannot stand, but we've seen a lot of people protected there by both sides. Makes me sick, but so does jerk off that is taking that $10K so that Mrs. Honest poor citizen doesn't get hers because of his actions.
I just don't understand how you can turn a blind eye to that.
Well, the IRS staff has been cut by a third over the last 8 years, thus less agents to investigate, prosecute, and collect.
Oh, and which income group is targeted the most? Low income folks making under $20,000 a year.
https://www.propublica.org/article/earned-income-tax-credit-irs-audit-working-poor
-
Well, the IRS staff has been cut by a third over the last 8 years, thus less agents to investigate, prosecute, and collect.
Oh, and which income group is targeted the most? Low income folks making under $20,000 a year.
https://www.propublica.org/article/earned-income-tax-credit-irs-audit-working-poor
Please stop the lies. The article is about the EITC.
-
I never said turn a blind eye. I said start with the big fish and work from there.
I also believe that if the top was punished severely, it would have a downstream effect.
If you started at the bottom, I don't think the top changes anything.
I think we can multi-task and do both, I have great confidence in our government.
-
Well, the IRS staff has been cut by a third over the last 8 years, thus less agents to investigate, prosecute, and collect.
Oh, and which income group is targeted the most? Low income folks making under $20,000 a year.
https://www.propublica.org/article/earned-income-tax-credit-irs-audit-working-poor
This isn't just about taxes, I'm talking fraud across other programs. SS, welfare, WIC, food stamps, etc....many of these programs for the poor we should not let the poor be taken advantage of by people that are abusing the system.
In 2016 we made $78 BILLION dollars in welfare payments annually that are improper. That includes fraud and a host of other issues, including simple errors. $78 Billion. That is money earmarked for the poor and disadvantaged and that amount is going to people improperly. That's just welfare. The exercise can be done with other areas. Pew has the number at Medicaid fraud / error payments at $136 Billion in 2015.
It feels like some people here view this as an attack on the poor.....I don't know why. I view it as a way to preserve the money FOR THE POOR, so the poor and disadvantaged that are supposed to get the proper payments actually do. Not sure why there is a disconnect on this by some.
-
Ban des guys!!!!!!!!!
-
This isn't just about taxes, I'm talking fraud across other programs. SS, welfare, WIC, food stamps, etc....many of these programs for the poor we should not let the poor be taken advantage of by people that are abusing the system.
In 2016 we made $78 BILLION dollars in welfare payments annually that are improper. That includes fraud and a host of other issues, including simple errors. $78 Billion. That is money earmarked for the poor and disadvantaged and that amount is going to people improperly. That's just welfare. The exercise can be done with other areas. Pew has the number at Medicaid fraud / error payments at $136 Billion in 2015.
It feels like some people here view this as an attack on the poor.....I don't know why. I view it as a way to preserve the money FOR THE POOR, so the poor and disadvantaged that are supposed to get the proper payments actually do. Not sure why there is a disconnect on this by some.
My bad about posting an article about taxes, in the thread named Taxes 🤔🤔🤔🤔
-
It's so great to have the old gang back.