I accept that people don't want to pay more taxes and vote that way, but I do not accept the sheer level of ignorance shown when the same party that glorifies any investment experience as a guarantee that all their ideas are good telling one of the best investors to shut up, and then following it up with the ludicrous concept that everyone who wants a tax increase on anybody should simply volunteer to pay more.

The sad fact that econ 101 and the level of logic taught in high school math courses would improve the quality of our national conversation is scary.

jpo2269: Has anyone figured out who is forcing Mr. Buffett to treat his income as capital gains instead of wages? I understand the current tax code allows him to do so, but does the tax code force him to file in this manner?

Now if he and others wish to argue we need to change the tax code to make sure Wall Streeters cannot treat income as capital gains, I would be in full support of this effort.

On a seperate note, and I honestly do not know the answer to this question, but if there is someone up on tax law.....

As part of the health care reform, there was a tax on those who make over $250,000, given that Mr. Buffett and others on Wall Street "don't pay income taxes" but pay "capital gains tax;" would Mr. Buffett pay the health care tax if all of his income is treated as "capital gains?"

You sound concern.

Buffet can afford the lawyers, accountants, and income deferment that go with hiding your income as capital gains or interest. If you or I could afford these things, we would do them too, and so would Christie. Challenging Buffet as a hypocrite is a non-starter.

On the other hand, the solution to the tax disparity is simply to TREAT ALL CAPITAL GAINS AS ORDINARY INCOME. Obama has chosen to ignore the simple solution, and propose a complex tax rule which will force the very wealthy to calculate their tax liability at least three times. Obama's rule may cause guys like Buffet to pay more tax, or it may cause them to sink even more effort into legal tax evasion. Either way they will be expending more effort on being compliant and up to date on their taxes than they do today.

Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

It is set up that way to discourage hoarding of money and encourage investment.

The thing is though, the mild inflation we sustain on purpose through monetary policy already ensures that the only way to save money is to keep it in an investment vehicle anyways. Which means all a decrease in % return on investment would really do is discourage risky investments, while safe investments would still easily beat the alternatives of a bank account or a pillow.

I've heard a good compromise would be treating income that wasn't invested for a long period of time (say, a year maybe) as normal income, and long-term investment returns as capital gains.

dlp211: NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

NOPE

of course taxing them the same could result in a net taxable income of 0 for many large earning individuals as we'd have to allow capital losses to offset wage and investment income but in principle looks good to me

skullkrusher: dlp211: NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

NOPE

of course taxing them the same could result in a net taxable income of 0 for many large earning individuals as we'd have to allow capital losses to offset wage and investment income but in principle looks good to me

No, if you lose money too damn bad, no offset. They knew the risks. It's no different than anyone else losing money on what they buy.

Serious question:

I take $1000 dollars and put it in the stock market. That money has already been taxed once (it came from my paycheck). After a few months of up and down I still have exactly $1000 left, so decide to take it out. Does it get taxed?

(If I end up with $3000, then I definitely see why the extra $2000 should be taxed, but I'm wondering about that initial $1000 from my own income)

DeltaPunch: Serious question:

I take $1000 dollars and put it in the stock market. That money has already been taxed once (it came from my paycheck). After a few months of up and down I still have exactly $1000 left, so decide to take it out. Does it get taxed?

(If I end up with $3000, then I definitely see why the extra $2000 should be taxed, but I'm wondering about that initial $1000 from my own income)

=========

No, your $1000 doesn't get taxed. That's why it's called capital GAINS. You pay tax on the gain. In the 2nd case you pay tax on the $2000 you made.

moralpanic SmartestFunniest 2012-02-29 10:27:35 PM


jpo2269: Has anyone figured out who is forcing Mr. Buffett to treat his income as capital gains instead of wages? I understand the current tax code allows him to do so, but does the tax code force him to file in this manner?

Now if he and others wish to argue we need to change the tax code to make sure Wall Streeters cannot treat income as capital gains, I would be in full support of this effort.

On a seperate note, and I honestly do not know the answer to this question, but if there is someone up on tax law.....

As part of the health care reform, there was a tax on those who make over $250,000, given that Mr. Buffett and others on Wall Street "don't pay income taxes" but pay "capital gains tax;" would Mr. Buffett pay the health care tax if all of his income is treated as "capital gains?"

You sound concern.

You are so cute, thank you for your concern. Do you have a point to make?

dlp211: skullkrusher: dlp211: NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

NOPE

of course taxing them the same could result in a net taxable income of 0 for many large earning individuals as we'd have to allow capital losses to offset wage and investment income but in principle looks good to me

Or not.

you won't let people write off their capital losses but you'll tax their capital gains? Hmm...

there their theyre: skullkrusher: dlp211: NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

NOPE

of course taxing them the same could result in a net taxable income of 0 for many large earning individuals as we'd have to allow capital losses to offset wage and investment income but in principle looks good to me

No, if you lose money too damn bad, no offset. They knew the risks. It's no different than anyone else losing money on what they buy.

yeah, punish those rich bastards!

dlp211: I don't get to write off the losses in my 401k, or IRA, or RIRA.

why do you think that is?

dlp211: I don't get to write off the purchases that I make whether they make me money or not. You earned the income, you spend it in a manner you see fit. You take the income out, it doesn't get taxed again, you take a profit out, that gets taxed, you take a loss, sucks to be you, invest better.

if you spend money to make money - car for work, home office, computer equipment, anal bleaching - you get to write that off. Honestly, taxing cap gains as regular income is a nice idea. No need to sully it with your "eat the rich" nonsense.

skullkrusher:
Knara: Tax policy only works correctly when we all chip in, and in fair proportion. Saying "lol write a check to the IRS if you care so much" ignores the whole point.

I didn't say that.

If only we could refer to something you said about 10 comments upthread.

skullkrusher: That said, there is nothing stopping him from paying more in taxes and he should lead by example.

Imagine my shock when I found floorhumper skullkrusher denying his very own words (which, it turns out, have meaning). Did you forget which alt you were logged in as? Here's a hint: if it was something pants-shiattingly stupid, you probably did say it.

Pretending that problems of taxation vs revenue that have been brewing for over a generation can be solved with voluntary donations is so mind-bendingly dumb that I almost can't believe you would try to convince people otherwise. I say almost, because the level of cognitive dissonance required means you are a bot, a troll, or a shill; none of which are encumbered with an excess of logic or reasoning capabilities. Get back under your bridge.

dlp211: NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

NOPE

dlp211: DeltaPunch: Serious question:

I take $1000 dollars and put it in the stock market. That money has already been taxed once (it came from my paycheck). After a few months of up and down I still have exactly $1000 left, so decide to take it out. Does it get taxed?

(If I end up with $3000, then I definitely see why the extra $2000 should be taxed, but I'm wondering about that initial $1000 from my own income)

No.

You have a way of really cutting to the heart of the matter and clarifying it in a way anyone can understand. I admire that.

Can someone explain American income Tax to me?

In my country we have a sliding scale for Income Tax (PAYE - pay as you earn). What it basically means is that the people who get the most income pay the most tax. Our highest tax bracket is 35% of annual income. It also means that if you have an annual income below a certain amount (its about N&30 000 per year) you don't pay any taxes.

Natsumi: Can someone explain American income Tax to me?

In my country we have a sliding scale for Income Tax (PAYE - pay as you earn). What it basically means is that the people who get the most income pay the most tax. Our highest tax bracket is 35% of annual income. It also means that if you have an annual income below a certain amount (its about N&30 000 per year) you don't pay any taxes.

Take your system, add so many incentives and loopholes for millionaires that Warren Buffett pays less in taxes than his secretary, and you have the American Income Tax system.

That's it? It took him this long to come up with... That?

I can see how that meeting went... 'Well, there's not much you can say to that sir, he's right' Buffet: 'You shut up!' 'I guess we'll go with that then...'

Smackledorfer: NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

It is set up that way to discourage hoarding of money and encourage investment.

The thing is though, the mild inflation we sustain on purpose through monetary policy already ensures that the only way to save money is to keep it in an investment vehicle anyways. Which means all a decrease in % return on investment would really do is discourage risky investments, while safe investments would still easily beat the alternatives of a bank account or a pillow.

I've heard a good compromise would be treating income that wasn't invested for a long period of time (say, a year maybe) as normal income, and long-term investment returns as capital gains.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, because the 'compromise' you describe is pretty much the way things are already. Warren Buffet is rich enough to wait a year before accessing his income. You and I are (probably) not.

IlGreven: Natsumi: Can someone explain American income Tax to me?

In my country we have a sliding scale for Income Tax (PAYE - pay as you earn). What it basically means is that the people who get the most income pay the most tax. Our highest tax bracket is 35% of annual income. It also means that if you have an annual income below a certain amount (its about N&30 000 per year) you don't pay any taxes.

Take your system, add so many incentives and loopholes for millionaires that Warren Buffett pays less in taxes than his secretary, and you have the American Income Tax system.

O_0
And i thought my country was effed up..

GentDirkly: Smackledorfer: NotARocketScientist: Can anyone give me a good reason why capitol gains should be taxed less than income? What makes making money off the stock market better for the country than going out and working for it? Why shouldn't all income be treated equally?

It is set up that way to discourage hoarding of money and encourage investment.

The thing is though, the mild inflation we sustain on purpose through monetary policy already ensures that the only way to save money is to keep it in an investment vehicle anyways. Which means all a decrease in % return on investment would really do is discourage risky investments, while safe investments would still easily beat the alternatives of a bank account or a pillow.

I've heard a good compromise would be treating income that wasn't invested for a long period of time (say, a year maybe) as normal income, and long-term investment returns as capital gains.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, because the 'compromise' you describe is pretty much the way things are already. Warren Buffet is rich enough to wait a year before accessing his income. You and I are (probably) not.

This.

Or he woudl just invest it in a fund that made rapid changes in investment.

Raoul_Ramirez: If only we could refer to something you said about 10 comments upthread.

skullkrusher: That said, there is nothing stopping him from paying more in taxes and he should lead by example

skullkrusher busted lying? Why, I haven't been this surprised since the last time something happened that I completely expected. What a role model for his child.

As for Governor Christie, people often mention him as a Republican with a bright future. Why? He vetoes gay equality and tells people to "just shut up!" when cornered (easily) in a debate. How is he any different than Jan Brewer, other than the fact that he's far too fat to have wrinkles?

A lot of liberal butthurt in this thread. You know what would make you libs feel better - tax Buffet all of the extra money he's going to make after Obama shut down the Keystone Pipeline.

Didn't the Articles of Confederation kinda prove that government on voluntary contributions doesn't work?

jpo2269: Has anyone figured out who is forcing Mr. Buffett to treat his income as capital gains instead of wages? I understand the current tax code allows him to do so, but does the tax code force him to file in this manner?

Now if he and others wish to argue we need to change the tax code to make sure Wall Streeters cannot treat income as capital gains, I would be in full support of this effort.

That's pretty much exactly what he is arguing. Or to be slightly more accurate, that taxing investment income different than wage income is fundementally unfair and favors investors like himself.

Frankly, I find the idea that we need to encourage people with extra cash to invest their money sort of silly. What are they going to do, shove a few million in their matresses?

Raoul_Ramirez: skullkrusher:
Knara: Tax policy only works correctly when we all chip in, and in fair proportion. Saying "lol write a check to the IRS if you care so much" ignores the whole point.

I didn't say that.

If only we could refer to something you said about 10 comments upthread.

I never said "lol write a check to the IRS if you care so much". What I DID do is correct a poster who was using that "lol" sort of nonsense as a rebuttal to WB's proposal. That is disingenuous as it doesn't address what WB is trying to address.


Raoul_Ramirez: Pretending that problems of taxation vs revenue that have been brewing for over a generation can be solved with voluntary donations is so mind-bendingly dumb that I almost can't believe you would try to convince people otherwise. I say almost, because the level of cognitive dissonance required means you are a bot, a troll, or a shill; none of which are encumbered with an excess of logic or reasoning capabilities. Get back under your bridge.

yeah, I'm not pretending that. Never have I said that. In fact, I often call for taxing cap gains and dividends as ordinary income as a way to fix the inequitable distribution of taxes on a percentage basis. What I said in this thread was in response to a poster employing the Christie sort of non-logic:

skullkrusher: none of this speaks to the question of whether [Buffett] is right. He is correct.

I am sure your apology is forthcoming. Or you're go back to whatever lurkers do when they're not making fools of themselves by speaking up.

The Why Not Guy: skullkrusher busted lying? Why, I haven't been this surprised since the last time something happened that I completely expected. What a role model for his child.

stay classy and read the thread. You'll see how stupid you are for agreeing with him. Of course, you won't have the sack to man up and admit it but that is to be expected from someone with as little integrity and sense as you have.

jpo2269: Has anyone figured out who is forcing Mr. Buffett to treat his income as capital gains instead of wages? I understand the current tax code allows him to do so, but does the tax code force him to file in this manner?

His income comes from investments; it's capital gains by nature. There's no good way to convert that into a wage.

I imagine if he claimed it was all wages instead, the IRS would correct him and lower his tax bill. (They did this to me once when I made a mistake on my return). It might even be illegal (though I doubt they put much energy into prosecuting people who *over*state their tax liability).

Natsumi: Can someone explain American income Tax to me?

In my country we have a sliding scale for Income Tax (PAYE - pay as you earn). What it basically means is that the people who get the most income pay the most tax. Our highest tax bracket is 35% of annual income. It also means that if you have an annual income below a certain amount (its about N&30 000 per year) you don't pay any taxes.

Theoretically that's what we have - progressive marginal rates starting at 0% and ending up at 35%. (That's at the Federal government level; most States also have income taxes. We have no national VAT but most States have a sales tax that's kind of like that).

The two big loopholes for the rich are: capital gains on property held more than a year are taxed at a flat 15%, and stock dividends are untaxed.

So CEOs and the like get their compensation structured as mostly stock options so it ends up being long-term capital gains.

mrshowrules: The whole tax structure should be voluntary. Amirite?

But is is!

Link (new window)

B.b.but if we require millionaires pay more tax, they'll take their magical job creating skills to Europe where they'll pay less tax!!!

/a wealthy politician who doesn't want to pay more tax?! shocked.

skullkrusher: stay classy and read the thread.

Oh, I read the thread. You said something, then claimed you didn't say it, then Raoul busted you.

The Why Not Guy: skullkrusher: stay classy and read the thread.

Oh, I read the thread. You said something, then claimed you didn't say it, then Raoul busted you.

nope, still not accurate. You are a liar. Plain and simple. Or an idiot. Take your pick.

skullkrusher: nope, still not accurate. You are a liar. Plain and simple. Or an idiot. Take your pick.

Welp, here's the link. People can check it out for themselves if they like.

LINK:

The Why Not Guy: skullkrusher: nope, still not accurate. You are a liar. Plain and simple. Or an idiot. Take your pick.

Welp, here's the link. People can check it out for themselves if they like.

LINK:

first of all, the word you're trying to use is "whelp", you semi-literate quarterwit.

secondly, what I said was

"none of this speaks to the question of whether he is right. He is correct. That said, there is nothing stopping him from paying more in taxes and he should lead by example."

See? I am agreeing with Buffett. He is correct in his assessment. He and people like him SHOULD pay a greater percentage of their total income in taxes and I would like to see that happen.

"lol write a check to the IRS if you care so much" is CLEARLY meant to convey the idea that Buffett should just shut up about taxes and is free to donate without demanding the government make others do the same. Ya know, the Christie line. The line which I disagreed with in my statement.

Prediction: you'll still pretend not to get it. Farking dope.