The rich aren't paying enough tax.

[WPB Dawg Fan]

WPB hidden corporate costs? I have a few entities and other partners that have many more in some large income scales.

 

One thing a business does not do is hide cost from itself or lack to portray them to their stock holders.

 

Those are all costs but certainly not hidden nor not taken into account immediately on any projections.

 

Also LLC does give the same corporate liability protection but allows pass thru income like a partnership which is why they are so wildly popular.

 

As for S or C corps paying taxes on the reported incomes.... these entities use loans and money management to defer as much income to pay out on dividends on a quarterly basis massively and can because they can afford to hire full time professionals to do that whereas the rest of the population can not.

 

No matter how you portray the "wealthy" the scale is still massively tilted in their favor. 85% of the population can not afford to have financial/legal professionals doing these strategies and using all of these mechanisms to manage wealth.

 

One of the first things people should do to take advantage of LLC and INC financial management tools to not pay taxes is to form one of these in the first place. a w-2 earner is at a massive disadvantage in terms of expensing deductions that they dont pay federal or state income taxes to.

 

The three top end bush tax cuts MASSIVELY bonuses the top 1% and the level under them. It is impossible to dispute the wealth concentration figures and the benefits/tax base gdp reduction this has cost our system.

 

Trickle down economics was BS because of the dynamic that investing and wealth management is the exact vehicle the top 1% use anyways and does not take into factor personal human greed IE: corporate bonuses even in the face of crazy losses.

 

I don't mean that the companies 'hide' those expenses...I mean that those taxes are not reported in the "INCOME TAX" reports that everyone here was discussing. It is IN ADDITION to the taxes we were talking about.

 

As for the tax benefits...I had my own S Corp for years....and yes, some of the tax benefits were nice....but if you want to talk about those breaks and doing away with them...you need to remember that many companies that benefit were LIKE ME making just between $100 and $200k...and without them could not possibly compete against the bigs. Do away with those benefits and a large portion of these small corps are closing their doors, plain and simple.

 

As for 'trickle down' economics not working....I find that laughable.

 

It is amazing that the 'greed' is acknowledged when we give the breaks to companies (they won't pass the savings down), but it is conveniently forgotten when we TAX THEM (no, they wouldn't think about passing along the additional expense to save their bottom line).

 

Greed is a constant...and if you give a company a break...only a small portion of that will trickle down. I agree.

 

But if you cause that same company to take on extra expenses (taxes), they will not only pass it along...but pass it along with a 10% profit for themselves. Bet on it.

 

So, does trickle down work? Not if you think that every penny will trickle down...but it doesn't RAISE prices like raising taxes (costs) will.

 

[WPB Dawg Fan]

Boortz' numbers are pretty misleading. The tax burden on the richest is as low as it's been in many, many years. Highest marginal tax rates, a sampling -- per Wikipedia:

 

1932-'33 63%

1941 81%

1944-'45 94%

1954-'63 91% (supposedly the great prosperous era everyone wants to return to)

1964 77% (AFTER the Kennedy tax cuts)

1982 50%

1987 33%

1993-'00 39.6%

Currently 35%

 

The reason the rich are paying more as a total is that the very rich are even richer than before. Income inequality is throwing everything off.

Not sure where you got your info from, but from 1980 forward can be found here on table 6, and the top 1% has never paid more than 40% in that time...so our data for 1982 is incorrect, as is your data for 1987. Further, from 1993-2000 the rate ranged from 29-37%. Currently, according to the IRS, it is 40.42%...so your numbers are all whacked.

 

Keep in mind what we are calling rich here people. To qualify as top 5%, you only need to make $160k per year. To make to 10% it is only $113k (these are 2007 numbers). Not exactly rolling in the dough there guys. In fact, it only took an income of $410k to make the top 0.1% of the population.

 

We are not talking about taxing multi-millionaires here...we are talking about taxing business people.

 

[choco]

funny how those people screaming for jobs are also the ones screaming for healthcare.

 

 

funny how those 2 items tie into taxes.....