Better than expected? Sounds like it is working exactly as Bush and his cronies expected.

wealthy people often exploit loopholes in the tax code to pay as little tax as possible.

so there's going to be plenty left to trickle down to us peons, right?

FlashHarry: wealthy people often exploit loopholes in the tax code to pay as little tax as possible.

This was a 161% jump in just four years. That's a fairly significant increase.

mcwebe0: FlashHarry: wealthy people often exploit loopholes in the tax code to pay as little tax as possible.

This was a 161% jump in just four years. That's a fairly significant increase.

exactly. all according to plan.

FlashHarry: exactly. all according to plan.

Right. Your use of Romero made it seem like the low taxes were business as usual rather than the result of Bush.

mcwebe0: FlashHarry: exactly. all according to plan.

Right. Your use of Romero made it seem like the low taxes were business as usual rather than the result of Bush.

Well low taxes for the rich are business as usual. It's just that under these tax cuts business is better than ever.

Philbb: Well low taxes for the rich are business as usual. It's just that under these tax cuts business is better than ever.

Touche.

I'm sure Bush's opposition in Congress fought the charitable deductions when they were voted on after Katrina, right?

It looks like "Laffer curve" is just a politically correct way of saying amnesty for rich illegals.

Deport rich tax evaders.

None of these loop holes have anything to do with the Bush tax cuts. They were either already in existence, were added by the charity exemption the article talked about, or the Jobs Creation Act. The Bush tax cuts took place in 2001 and 2003. The article says the trend started in 2005.

The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

But, as usual, don't let the facts get in the way of a good headline.

Does anyone want to take a swing at why this is a good situation?

It's only right that the poor slags who hate America enough not to get rich in her great presence, at least pay for the wars all the rich Americans are reluctantly and bravely defending her in.

Philbb: Well low taxes for the rich are business as usual. It's just that under these tax cuts business is better than ever.

That's right. The budget surplus and lack of corporate welfare are proof.

FlashHarry: mcwebe0: FlashHarry: wealthy people often exploit loopholes in the tax code to pay as little tax as possible.

This was a 161% jump in just four years. That's a fairly significant increase.

exactly. all according to plan.

Man, I'm going to fire my accountant. I still pay taxes and I earn more than that...

DeltaXi65: The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

NO they didn't change that. But if your burden starts higher, its harder to pay nothing, isn't it? Right?

What does this have to do with Bush Tax cuts?

bartink: DeltaXi65: The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

NO they didn't change that. But if your burden starts higher, its harder to pay nothing, isn't it? Right?

Meh, easy fix here:

Eliminate all deductions, credits, et al.
Lower marginal tax rate a bit

My brother-in-law insists that the middle class is NOT shrinking, but expanding - and that the economy is doing great. He builds Applebee's for a living. He does not acknowledge any connection between gas prices and food prices.

Fun discussions with my bro-in-law.

Subby is obviously a communist. Hating on the rich is class war.

Allowing taxpayers to eliminate up to 100% of their alternative minimum tax liability by using credits for any foreign taxes paid is a blow for the common man. No reasonable person could be against this.

grxymkjbn: My brother-in-law insists that the middle class is NOT shrinking, but expanding - and that the economy is doing great. He builds Applebee's for a living. He does not acknowledge any connection between gas prices and food prices.

Fun discussions with my bro-in-law.

Just being associated with Applebees makes him evil.

Bartink

I doubt it. I'm not a tax attorney, but if the loopholes exist, there's no reason why the rich won't exploit them no matter how much they have to pay, whether its 39.6% or 35%.

In fact, there's an argument to be made that lowering the tax rate on the richest actually resulted in more of them paying their taxes - the amount they'd save by having a lawyer rig the system would be about the same or less than the attorney's fees they'd be paying to get out of the taxes. Why go through the effort of hiring an attorney if it won't actually end up saving you money?

Its counter intuitive, but probably true. Tax revenue has actually increased since the tax cuts in 2003. Some of that is the expanding economy, but as I recall, some of it was also because more people were paying their taxes.

DeltaXi65: The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

Are you suggesting that there has been no change in the ability of the wealthy to avoid paying taxes during the Bush administration?

DeltaXi65: Why go through the effort of hiring an attorney if it won't actually end up saving you money?

Are you suggesting that it's typical for a wealthy individual to NOT hire a tax attorney?

DeltaXi65: Bartink

I doubt it. I'm not a tax attorney, but if the loopholes exist, there's no reason why the rich won't exploit them no matter how much they have to pay, whether its 39.6% or 35%.

In fact, there's an argument to be made that lowering the tax rate on the richest actually resulted in more of them paying their taxes - the amount they'd save by having a lawyer rig the system would be about the same or less than the attorney's fees they'd be paying to get out of the taxes. Why go through the effort of hiring an attorney if it won't actually end up saving you money?

Its counter intuitive, but probably true. Tax revenue has actually increased since the tax cuts in 2003. Some of that is the expanding economy, but as I recall, some of it was also because more people were paying their taxes.

What it sound like you are really getting at is that the system is severely borked.

Solon Isonomia: Does anyone want to take a swing at why this is a good situation?

It is rich people donating money to charity, which is a good thing.

How, exactly, is income made overseas and taxed overseas supposed to be taxed here? By virtue of living here?

I suppose if you had income in the U.S. has well as overseas, by paying a higher tax rate in another country, and then using it as a tax credit, it could spill over to income made in the U.S.

Other than that the only thing I get out of the article was a onetime removal of the charity deduction limit back in 05.

Meanwhile in the interest of equal time guess who else got their tax bill cut to zero (If you count welfare like EITC) their tax bill goes negative:


"more than 90 percent of the 7.8 million families knocked off the tax rolls by the Bush tax cuts earn less than $50,000 per year. Another 9.3 percent of these families earn between $50,000 and $100,000, while just 0.06 percent earn more than $100,000."

Link (new window)

/subby is full of fail

FlashHarry: wealthy Intelligent people often exploit loopholes in the tax code to pay as little tax as possible.

/Fixed it for ya.
//Not wealthy
///Takes advantage of every little legal loophole & deduction possible.
////Pays about 9% income tax per year.
//SLASHIES!!!!

The picture in TFA seems to imply by making $200k, one flies in a private jet.

SilentStrider [TotalFark]

so there's going to be plenty left to trickle down to us peons, right?

Yup, rich people are so nice, they're going to give us the money the government should have! Isn't that swell?

MrLint

You hit the nail on the head - the system, as it currently exists, is broken. It needs to be completely reformed, from head to toe. As far as I am concerned, the modern tax system is nothing more than lawyer welfare. It keeps attorneys working.

As for whether or not the wealthy have had an easier time skirting their tax obligations under the Bush Administration, I have no idea. Like I said, I'm not a tax attorney. But my instincts tell me that it probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference who is in the White House...the rich will do just fine.

hasty ambush: Meanwhile in the interest of equal time guess who else got their tax bill cut to zero (If you count welfare like EITC) their tax bill goes negative:


"more than 90 percent of the 7.8 million families knocked off the tax rolls by the Bush tax cuts earn less than $50,000 per year. Another 9.3 percent of these families earn between $50,000 and $100,000, while just 0.06 percent earn more than $100,000."

Link (new window)

/subby is full of fail

Just because others got theres down to zero or less doesn't change the fact that its pretty stupid that the government collects no tax from people earning 200k.

inglixthemad: bartink: DeltaXi65: The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

NO they didn't change that. But if your burden starts higher, its harder to pay nothing, isn't it? Right?

Meh, easy fix here:

Eliminate all deductions, credits, et al.
Lower marginal tax rate a bit

Insanity.

Business expenses are deductible because you are spending money to earn a profit. A profit which is taxable.

Taxing all gross income without allowing deductions for expenses that helped create that profit is effectively double-taxation.

JimmyFartpants: inglixthemad: bartink: DeltaXi65: The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

NO they didn't change that. But if your burden starts higher, its harder to pay nothing, isn't it? Right?

Meh, easy fix here:

Eliminate all deductions, credits, et al.
Lower marginal tax rate a bit

Insanity.

Business expenses are deductible because you are spending money to earn a profit. A profit which is taxable.

Taxing all gross income without allowing deductions for expenses that helped create that profit is effectively double-taxation.

Many taxes are double taxes. Most are, actually.

bartink: .

Many taxes are double taxes. Most are, actually.


and you seem to think this is a good thing

mr lawson: bartink: .

Many taxes are double taxes. Most are, actually.


and you seem to think this is a good thing

By claiming it as fact I am supporting this?

You FAIL at teh logic.

I am filthy rich and don't pay taxes so I am getting a kick out of these comments...

bartink: JimmyFartpants: inglixthemad: bartink: DeltaXi65: The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

NO they didn't change that. But if your burden starts higher, its harder to pay nothing, isn't it? Right?

Meh, easy fix here:

Eliminate all deductions, credits, et al.
Lower marginal tax rate a bit

Insanity.

Business expenses are deductible because you are spending money to earn a profit. A profit which is taxable.

Taxing all gross income without allowing deductions for expenses that helped create that profit is effectively double-taxation.

Many taxes are double taxes. Most are, actually.

True. Particularly since most corporations pass along their own tax burden to the customer in the form of higher prices.

Fair Tax FTW. (pops)

First, I'm also not a Tax Lawyer. But, from my limited understanding of how the foreign tax credit loophole works, the Super Rich can afford to hire a Tax Lawyer type who will use a shell game of dummy overseas shelter businesses in countries with low income tax rates. The "incomes" are "paid" by these dummy businesses to the Super Rich for "work" they supposedly provided, like say a vacation to said country to collect the paycheck.

Then, because the "income" has already been taxed once, it isn't taxed again in the US. So, they are paying a low % income tax to some foreign country and no tax here. They are not required to pay the difference, if any, between the income tax rate of the foreign country and what they would/should have paid here. So say they paid 2% in the Bahamas, they pay 0 here.

A good read on the topic, although a few years dated now, is "Perfectly Legal" by David Cay Johnston who exposes this and many other tax shelters that the Super Rich are able to use to avoid most/all of their tax responsibilities.

Note: I say Super Rich, because someone making only 200k per year cannot afford the Tax Lawyer types who run these shell games. 1mil plus, maybe.

So 7,389 people figured out how to game the system.
Nice headline and pic combination they have there... I sense no misleading attempt at class warfare at all.

JimmyFartpants: bartink: JimmyFartpants: inglixthemad: bartink: DeltaXi65: The rich have always been able to avoid paying their full tax burden if they've gotten a good enough lawyer. The tax cuts didn't change that.

NO they didn't change that. But if your burden starts higher, its harder to pay nothing, isn't it? Right?

Meh, easy fix here:

Eliminate all deductions, credits, et al.
Lower marginal tax rate a bit

Insanity.

Business expenses are deductible because you are spending money to earn a profit. A profit which is taxable.

Taxing all gross income without allowing deductions for expenses that helped create that profit is effectively double-taxation.

Many taxes are double taxes. Most are, actually.

True. Particularly since most corporations pass along their own tax burden to the customer in the form of higher prices.

Fair Tax FTW. (pops)

Have you considered the black market implications of the Fair Tax?

Badfrog: So 7,389 people figured out how to game the system.
Nice headline and pic combination they have there... I sense no misleading attempt at class warfare at all.

yeah 200k is pretty well off, but nowhere near private jet

Badfrog: So 7,389 people figured out how to game the system.
Nice headline and pic combination they have there... I sense no misleading attempt at class warfare at all.

Ooooo, you just worked in a right wing catch phrase.

Got any original material?

Superjoe: SilentStrider [TotalFark]

so there's going to be plenty left to trickle down to us peons, right?

Yup, rich people are so nice, they're going to give us the money the government should have! Isn't that swell?

Uh, yeah. If you had bothered to RTFA you would have seen that when the government stopped limiting deductions for charitable giving, some rich people actually donated 100% (or more) of that year's income. Since they were not limited on the amount they could deduct, it wiped out all of their taxable income and they paid no income tax for that year.

So yes, they did give us the money that the government should have.

You hit the nail on the head - the system, as it currently exists, is broken. It needs to be completely reformed, from head to toe. As far as I am concerned, the modern tax system is nothing more than lawyer welfare. It keeps attorneys working.

That how most things work. The war on drugs and various other systems are to keep people employed in the police, civil servants and prison systems, wars and conflict are good for making weapon sales and employing people in the military, and pretty much most the bureaucracy is designed to make jobs and imagine all the councilors and social services designed to keep an eye on family and deal with problems made up to keep them employed. Without this 90% of the people employed in these businesses would be jobless and the economy would collapse.

The government quickly worked out that you need to keep people at work or end up with a great depression type situation and the best way to do that is with the unsolvable problem of the week situation.

bartink: By claiming it as fact I am supporting this?

You FAIL at teh logic.


um...no
by stating this:
"Just because others got theres down to zero or less doesn't change the fact that its pretty stupid that the government collects no tax from people earning 200k."

and then stating this:
"Many taxes are double taxes. Most are, actually."

I infer that you are hell bent on collecting as much taxes as possible(even it it means double taxation or taxing wealthy individuals). If i read you wrong, i am sorry. If not, well....

mr lawson: bartink: By claiming it as fact I am supporting this?

You FAIL at teh logic.


um...no
by stating this:
"Just because others got theres down to zero or less doesn't change the fact that its pretty stupid that the government collects no tax from people earning 200k."

and then stating this:
"Many taxes are double taxes. Most are, actually."

I infer that you are hell bent on collecting as much taxes as possible(even it it means double taxation or taxing wealthy individuals). If i read you wrong, i am sorry. If not, well....

So thinking that people making 200k should pay some taxes means that I believe the straw man that I am "hell bent on collecting as much taxes as possible"?

You FAIL at teh logic. Again.

chu2dogg: How, exactly, is income made overseas and taxed overseas supposed to be taxed here? By virtue of living here?

If you are a US citizen, you are required to pay federal income taxes on all wages above some point (I believe around $85K). This is true even if you have no footprint (bank accounts, property, family, etc) in the United States. I believe that this came into effect under President Carter, but I could be mistaken.

I've always found this to be somewhat unfair since you are essentially being taxed on the same income multiple times. It is one thing to fund Social Security and Medicare, both things you can pull from while retired in another country. But giving money to the general fund? Meh.

I also wonder how your voting rights are handled if you no longer have a home in the United States. Taxation without representation?


/Subby is a troll
//Alternative minimum tax hits most people who make six figures

Dinjiin: I also wonder how your voting rights are handled if you no longer have a home in the United States. Taxation without representation?

You do know that overseas Americans can vote, don't you?