Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Forbes)   A peasant's guide to Trump's Tax returns by a Tax attorney. TL/DR: Yes some of what his did is very shady, but what's REALLY crooked is the incredible extent to which rich people and corporations have set up the tax code to their own advantage   (forbes.com) divider line
    More: Murica, Tax, Taxation in the United States, Taxation, President Trump's tax returns, Tax refund, tax return, Former IRS Commissioner Koskinen, New York Times  
•       •       •

1336 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Sep 2020 at 11:25 AM (8 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



89 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-09-28 9:52:29 AM  
Blame the system.
 
2020-09-28 10:15:27 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.


Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.
 
2020-09-28 10:34:50 AM  
We know.

Let me tell you, under rich guy rules, I could probably have $50 million to my name.
 
2020-09-28 10:41:35 AM  

Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.


Point of order: you're right, but don't focus on their market cap.  That's just looking at what people think Amazon is worth.  Amazon doesn't have that money sitting in the bank and they collected a tiny.portion of it.

Focus on profit or even revenue. Focus on the state and local income taxes they now collect that they didn't before (assuming you're on the other side and think they already 'pay' taxes), but market cap is a craptastic way to determine what taxes a company should pay.
 
2020-09-28 10:42:04 AM  
I keep telling people:  I WISH I could file my taxes the same way these corporations do.  You know, the ones that whine about a 30+% tax rate?  I wish I could file my taxes like they do.  Corporations don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...

That's what most people don't get about corporate taxes.  They don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...only on 'profit'.  They get to deduct EVERY cost of doing business.  Rent, office supplies, chairs, food, advertising, ANYTHING related to the cost of doing business is tax free.

I would HAPPILY pay the full corporate tax rate if I could deduct all my 'expenses' before paying taxes.
 
2020-09-28 10:52:37 AM  
external-content.duckduckgo.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-28 11:10:47 AM  
Well if I didn't get that ROI on my lobbying and influence-peddling efforts, I wouldn't be a very good businessman now would I?

/lights cigar with benjamin
 
2020-09-28 11:25:13 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.


it is almost like everyone in government on both sides of the aisle have one thing in common.
 
2020-09-28 11:27:02 AM  
The issue before us is not the tax code is really complicated. It is not that all rich people do this. It is not that corporations don't pay their fair share, or that Trump's accountant should be in jail, or the IRS should have moved on this faster. All this is true, but it's just spin, to make you look away from the little shiatweasel behind the curtain.

The issue right here, right now, is that the man who is the president and wants to be president again is a liar, a cheat, a fraud, a thief and a crook; the evidence is before us; and THAT is all we should be talking about.
 
2020-09-28 11:28:09 AM  
bUt tHe rIcH pAy mOrE iN iNcOmE tAx!
 
2020-09-28 11:28:28 AM  

enry: Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.

Point of order: you're right, but don't focus on their market cap.  That's just looking at what people think Amazon is worth.  Amazon doesn't have that money sitting in the bank and they collected a tiny.portion of it.

Focus on profit or even revenue. Focus on the state and local income taxes they now collect that they didn't before (assuming you're on the other side and think they already 'pay' taxes), but market cap is a craptastic way to determine what taxes a company should pay.


Perhaps a 1% federal SALES tax. . .
 
2020-09-28 11:29:17 AM  
Seriously?  How is this news to anyone with more than 2 brain cells?

Rich people game the system to avoid paying taxes?  The hell you say!

Next thing you'll tell me they offshore money in tax havens and never get nailed for it.  Meanwhile if you or me make a simple error in filing we get embroiled in a world of shiat.
 
2020-09-28 11:30:20 AM  
Yeah, blame the system, especially since he's hiding his tax returns like they are murder weapons. If he was abusing the rules of the system, he'd show them off like the 2016 electoral vote count. He was hoping to ride the clock out past Election Day since he knows he will never be impeached in the Senate.
 
2020-09-28 11:31:02 AM  
And lest anyone forgets, he advocated for and made sure to minimize any estate taxes his kids may incur (assuming he's not actually broke).
 
2020-09-28 11:31:07 AM  
If only there was someone running for office who has been a part of writing those tax laws for years who I could vote against in the coming election.
 
2020-09-28 11:31:28 AM  
A capitalist system should tax capital not labor, because capital is receiving the benefits of government.

The fact that we even have an income tax, or corporate income taxes in a system that is supposed to be a free market of some sort is an extreme perversion.

Companies and people should be paying taxes based on their net worth. Are you worth $100B dollars? Congrats you are paying $2B per year. When you sell a company for $50B that you claimed was worth $20B for years, you have to pay all the back taxes and interest, and penalties as part of the transaction. Etc etc
 
2020-09-28 11:32:17 AM  

The Perineum Falcon: enry: Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.

Point of order: you're right, but don't focus on their market cap.  That's just looking at what people think Amazon is worth.  Amazon doesn't have that money sitting in the bank and they collected a tiny.portion of it.

Focus on profit or even revenue. Focus on the state and local income taxes they now collect that they didn't before (assuming you're on the other side and think they already 'pay' taxes), but market cap is a craptastic way to determine what taxes a company should pay.

Perhaps a 1% federal SALES tax. . .


Regressive taxes are not the correct answer.
 
2020-09-28 11:35:05 AM  

Avigdore: If only there was someone running for office who has been a part of writing those tax laws for years who I could vote against in the coming election.


Is that the same guy who is currently running on raising taxes for anyone making over 400k?  How does that compare to the current tax cheat in office?
 
2020-09-28 11:36:32 AM  

Gyrfalcon: The issue before us is not the tax code is really complicated. It is not that all rich people do this. It is not that corporations don't pay their fair share, or that Trump's accountant should be in jail, or the IRS should have moved on this faster. All this is true, but it's just spin, to make you look away from the little shiatweasel behind the curtain.

The issue right here, right now, is that the man who is the president and wants to be president again is a liar, a cheat, a fraud, a thief and a crook; the evidence is before us; and THAT is all we should be talking about.


This.

Trump and Moscow Mitch have been able to get one obscene tax cut for billionaires passed and are chomping at the bit to get another passed.

Step number one is, GET THOSE MOTHERFARKERS THE HELL OUT OF POWER!!!!!

Then we can start working on the rest.
 
2020-09-28 11:38:21 AM  
I watched The Dark Knight Rises this weekend. I hadn't seen it since it came out, so I was curious to see how it would hit me years later.

A surprising number of quotes from the movie are remarkably prescient today.

"I take what I need from those who have more than enough."
"So, Robin Hood?"
"I think do more good for society than anyone else in this room."

"A storm's coming, Mr. Wayne. You and your rich friends better batten down the hatches, because someday soon you're going to wonder how you lived so large and left so little for the rest of us."

"This is a stock exchange. There isn't any money for you to steal."
"Really? Then why are you here?"

"It's not much, but it's better than what you have now."
"They're letting me keep the house, actually."
"So the rich don't even go broke like the rest of us do, huh?"
 
2020-09-28 11:38:27 AM  
"Shady, but not illegal! Shady is just another word for shrewd or clever!"

/papermate, libbys-libbys-libbys on the label-label-label
 
2020-09-28 11:39:32 AM  

APO_Buddha: [external-content.duckduckgo.com image 792x1032]


And on that day, the rich will pay 30% of us to eat the rest of us, and another 30% to tell every left alive that we should blame ourselves for letting the cannibals get out of control.
 
2020-09-28 11:40:15 AM  
Address capital gains.

One of the biggest farkings is where a corporation (or just a rich person) owns a profit-making asset (like a single business). They make it look like there's no net profit so they don't pay income tax on revenues. This goes on for ten years.

Then they sell that asset for many times over what they paid. The whole time they've been claiming they haven't been making a profit, the asset has been gaining value. When they sell it, they do pay taxes on the gains. But they likely balance those profits out with other losses.

One other approach is to make all costs of living deductible. Rent should be deductible. Money spent on food. All sorts of other things.

Or just scrap all deductions, lower the tax rates a bunch, and enforce those rates fully.
 
2020-09-28 11:43:02 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-28 11:44:00 AM  

chucknasty: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

it is almost like everyone in government on both sides of the aisle have one thing in common.


Maybe one day they'll figure out the lies told to us during the Red Scares 1 and 2 and the Cold War about socialism and capitalism.

England just banned the education of socialism from schools. Why? What is so terrifying about it that politicians and bankers piss their pants at the mere mention of it? Why are socialist leaders overthrown violently and countries undermined viciously that trend that direction?

And why do people keep warming to it if it is so bad? How did socialism become anti-American?
 
2020-09-28 11:44:19 AM  

dark brew: The Perineum Falcon: enry: Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.

Point of order: you're right, but don't focus on their market cap.  That's just looking at what people think Amazon is worth.  Amazon doesn't have that money sitting in the bank and they collected a tiny.portion of it.

Focus on profit or even revenue. Focus on the state and local income taxes they now collect that they didn't before (assuming you're on the other side and think they already 'pay' taxes), but market cap is a craptastic way to determine what taxes a company should pay.

Perhaps a 1% federal SALES tax. . .

Regressive taxes are not the correct answer.


Yeah, no shiat. Having more money than you spend is what being rich is. Sales taxes put the burden on people who spend every dollar they get.
 
2020-09-28 11:44:32 AM  

A Cave Geek: I keep telling people:  I WISH I could file my taxes the same way these corporations do.  You know, the ones that whine about a 30+% tax rate?  I wish I could file my taxes like they do.  Corporations don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...

That's what most people don't get about corporate taxes.  They don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...only on 'profit'.  They get to deduct EVERY cost of doing business.  Rent, office supplies, chairs, food, advertising, ANYTHING related to the cost of doing business is tax free.

I would HAPPILY pay the full corporate tax rate if I could deduct all my 'expenses' before paying taxes.



Thanks to the Trump Tax Break, my tax rate went down a couple of percent. But I lost all my itemized deductions (and I don't take many - zero business expenses), so the amount I paid went up a few thousand dollars. So yeah, the deductions that large corporations are taking is obscene.

Want to pay for single payer health care? There's enough money out there to do it, all you have to do is make one segment pay their fair share.
 
2020-09-28 11:45:17 AM  
his did

Yup.  Monday.
 
2020-09-28 11:46:53 AM  
Apparently everyone missed the article on here that pointed out that the rich on average pay waaaaay more in taxes than Trump did, even when he paid. Sure, the rich find loopholes and shelters, but this claim is whataboutism at its finest, because in average, they still pay in the millions. Fix Trump now, worry about tax shelters later.

Between the writing off veterans, the downplaying the Coronavirus, and this, Donnie has had a horrible 6 weeks or so, and I think it's eroding his base nicely.
 
2020-09-28 11:49:06 AM  

Fart_Machine: bUt tHe rIcH pAy mOrE iN iNcOmE tAx!


The funny thing is, they DON'T really.  The 1% control about 37% of all income in the US and pay ~37% of income taxes.  Nice and fair right?

Not really for two reasons

1) The folks at that end of the Tax bracket receive all sorts of money that isn't technically "income".  Since they only need a fraction of their paychecks for basic necessities, they can play all sorts of games with "deferred compensation" "carryover interest" stock options etc etc to avoid paying "income" taxes on money coming In to them.  Instead, if it's taxed at all it's at the "capital gains" (which is just a fancy name for income) rate which is much lower.

2) But even if they were paying on every penny that STILL wouldn't be fair because of a concept called "the Marginal Cost of Money" which is to day, How "expensive" it is to come up with a certain sum of money for you.  and of course the less you have, the more that same amount "costs"

For example: Your car needs a $400 repair.  What does that mean to you?   IF you are making $10/hr that's an entire week's work before taxes, and probably is unobtainable for you or represents financial ruin.  You'll have to be late on your rent, or avoid buying groceries, or not see the doctor, etc etc

Now, for the guy making $50/hr it's just a day's pay, inconvenient but likely no more than that.

to the guy Making $100/hr it's the same as dropping $20 at the McDonald Drive through

and to the millionaire making $1,000 it wouldn;t even register

same thing with say, a 10% flat tax that conservatives love to tout

to $10/hr guy  $2,000 is a HUGE sum of money and probably repsents all his discretionary income he could use to get out of his poverty

to $100/hr guy $20,000 is leasing the Mercedes AND the BMW or settling for just one

and $1000/hr guy may be forking over $200K but he has the $1.8 million left to dry his tears

now, the guy making 200K, would he really feel the bit if HIS tax rate was 11% and the $22K he paid allowed us to remove Mr $20K a year entirely from the tax rolls?

How about Mr. Millionare?  If he paid 15% and his $300K let us remove FIFTY low-income earners from the roles and gave them that $2k back, would it significantly crimp  his style living on 1.7 million a year as opposed to $1.8?

That's SUPPOSEDLY the system we have, a "Progressive Income Tax System"   but the righ have played so many games with it , we essentially do have a "flat tax" or even a regressive system
 
2020-09-28 11:53:53 AM  

Magorn: Fart_Machine: bUt tHe rIcH pAy mOrE iN iNcOmE tAx!

The funny thing is, they DON'T really.  The 1% control about 37% of all income in the US and pay ~37% of income taxes.  Nice and fair right?

Not really for two reasons

1) The folks at that end of the Tax bracket receive all sorts of money that isn't technically "income".  Since they only need a fraction of their paychecks for basic necessities, they can play all sorts of games with "deferred compensation" "carryover interest" stock options etc etc to avoid paying "income" taxes on money coming In to them.  Instead, if it's taxed at all it's at the "capital gains" (which is just a fancy name for income) rate which is much lower.

2) But even if they were paying on every penny that STILL wouldn't be fair because of a concept called "the Marginal Cost of Money" which is to day, How "expensive" it is to come up with a certain sum of money for you.  and of course the less you have, the more that same amount "costs"

For example: Your car needs a $400 repair.  What does that mean to you?   IF you are making $10/hr that's an entire week's work before taxes, and probably is unobtainable for you or represents financial ruin.  You'll have to be late on your rent, or avoid buying groceries, or not see the doctor, etc etc

Now, for the guy making $50/hr it's just a day's pay, inconvenient but likely no more than that.

to the guy Making $100/hr it's the same as dropping $20 at the McDonald Drive through

and to the millionaire making $1,000 it wouldn;t even register

same thing with say, a 10% flat tax that conservatives love to tout

to $10/hr guy  $2,000 is a HUGE sum of money and probably repsents all his discretionary income he could use to get out of his poverty

to $100/hr guy $20,000 is leasing the Mercedes AND the BMW or settling for just one

and $1000/hr guy may be forking over $200K but he has the $1.8 million left to dry his tears

now, the guy making 200K, would he really feel the bit if HIS tax rate was 11% and the $22K he paid allowed us to remove Mr $20K a year entirely from the tax rolls?

How about Mr. Millionare?  If he paid 15% and his $300K let us remove FIFTY low-income earners from the roles and gave them that $2k back, would it significantly crimp  his style living on 1.7 million a year as opposed to $1.8?

That's SUPPOSEDLY the system we have, a "Progressive Income Tax System"   but the righ have played so many games with it , we essentially do have a "flat tax" or even a regressive system


I want to make sweet, sweet love to your newsletter.
 
2020-09-28 11:55:36 AM  
He only paid $750 in taxes because he really is broke. He has to win reelection to keep his taxes in audit because the IRS will not go after a sitting president. He owes over 72 million in taxes and he can't pay it. Everything he does is a total disaster.
 
2020-09-28 11:55:55 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-28 11:55:56 AM  
Tax wealth, not work.

Put marginal tax rates back to where they were before Ronald Reagan blew a nearly irreparable hole in the federal treasury by handing already-rich people even more money because they pinky-swore they'd create jobs, and because Reagan convinced gullible coke-addled yuppies that the problem wasn't the trillions of dollars being given to the wealthy, it was the tens of dollars being given to the poor.
 
2020-09-28 11:57:46 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.


And we should.   This goes far beyond Trump's character or lack thereof.   This thing blows the lid off deep systemic problems with the US tax code.  A game which is quite clearly rigged in favor of the rich, and it's been that way for decades.
 
2020-09-28 11:58:07 AM  
And he's right. If you were to randomly audit any person with a net worth over a million and most of their income coming from non-payroll sources, you would find something very similar. Hell, my taxes are similar, though obviously not nearly as bad.

Our tax system is broken beyond repair. Depending on how I direct my accountant to do my taxes, I could owe $5,000 or $100,000, and both would be completely legal and accurate. And there's no way to fix the current tax code to eliminate these problems. It needs to be retired, and rewritten from scratch. Some thoughts on what would help tremendously:

1. Eliminate income types. All income is treated identically. This includes investment income, capital gains (including from the sale of a primary residence,) staying free of charge in the penthouse of your hotel, whatever.

2. More and more granular tax brackets tied to median income. That is, your tax bracket is determined by your income as a percentage of median income, rather than just based on the raw dollar amount. No federal income tax below .5x median income. 75% top tax rate above 10x median income.

3. Strict AMT. Nothing can be deducted from your AMT. It becomes a hard floor that is immutable based on your raw top-line income.

4. Loses can't be carried forward. The government should but be in the business of paying for your bad business decisions.

5. That said, business owners can take 5 years of deferred taxes once in their lives for the creation of a new company. The first five years, you still file taxes but you don't need to pay them, and then they get spread out over the next 10 years.

I'm sure there's more I can think of, but these are some that have been bouncing around my head for a while.
 
2020-09-28 11:58:14 AM  

Magorn: Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.


I dunno.  For example, Amazon, until fairly recently, always lost money, and probably did earn various tax credits by doing various things (and said credits could be pushed forward until they did finally earn a profit).

IE, income taxes are, um, taxes on income, not net sales revenue.  If you have no income, you pay no income taxes.

This is by design.  Charging taxes on revenue, not income, is a bad idea and discourages entrepreneurship.
 
2020-09-28 11:59:30 AM  

sniderman: "Shady, but not illegal! Shady is just another word for shrewd or clever!"

/papermate, libbys-libbys-libbys on the label-label-label


Funnied for the slashy. 👍
 
2020-09-28 12:02:33 PM  
Remember, kids, every dollar the wealthy don't pay in taxes is a dollar that you have to make up. Or it comes out of a government service you (used to) use, which is practically the same.
 
2020-09-28 12:03:15 PM  
And president plagues tax returns show how much he loves America; cheating the country out of its fair share of taxes, spending 1000% more on his hair a year then on taxes, THATS putting America First!

Ugh. I remember a time when tax cheats were prosecuted, but the party of law and order feel this is now acceptable
 
2020-09-28 12:07:58 PM  
Bullshiat.

Paying your kids consulting fees for the company when they're already employees is straight-up ghost employment and a felony.

Declaring properties of the corporation as your your domicile and deducting their expenses means you're homeless. So either he's been voting illegally for years, or he owes some homestead taxes somewhere.
 
2020-09-28 12:14:12 PM  

The Perineum Falcon: enry: Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.

Point of order: you're right, but don't focus on their market cap.  That's just looking at what people think Amazon is worth.  Amazon doesn't have that money sitting in the bank and they collected a tiny.portion of it.

Focus on profit or even revenue. Focus on the state and local income taxes they now collect that they didn't before (assuming you're on the other side and think they already 'pay' taxes), but market cap is a craptastic way to determine what taxes a company should pay.

Perhaps a 1% federal SALES tax. . .


Yes. Because a sales tax will right this and not just largely be a tax on the people who are already living paycheck to paycheck. That sales tax will do wonders to get the billions being horded in safe investments and overseas account back flowing through our financial system.
 
2020-09-28 12:15:13 PM  

APO_Buddha: [external-content.duckduckgo.com image 792x1032]


I dunno. That might be true internationally, but in America one thing the powerful figured out early on is that if you can maintain access to cheap processed food, the poor will stay pretty sedate.
 
2020-09-28 12:16:00 PM  
Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%2​0​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."
 
2020-09-28 12:16:07 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


/you didn't honestly think the rich people who wrote the tax laws would subject their own wealth to them, did you?
 
2020-09-28 12:18:30 PM  

Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.


I disagree, corporate taxes should be zero. Capital gains taxes on the other hand...
 
2020-09-28 12:18:52 PM  

jethroe: Seriously?  How is this news to anyone with more than 2 brain cells?

Rich people game the system to avoid paying taxes?  The hell you say!

Next thing you'll tell me they offshore money in tax havens and never get nailed for it.  Meanwhile if you or me make a simple error in filing we get embroiled in a world of shiat.


I think you are missing the point that, yes, we know that.  But this is extreme on SO MANY levels that it's absurd.

Like every other farking thing with this jerkoff...  There is SO much to unpack that he'll be dead before anyone can even get through it all
 
2020-09-28 12:25:37 PM  

Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."


That person is an idiot and has never filled anything more complicated than a 1040ez. Otherwise, he would have recognized a very common accounting trick:

1. File for extension with an estimated tax number that looks correct.
2. You don't need to provide documentation for your estimated tax on the extension application.
3. Have accountants actually fill out tax paperwork with all of the deductions and loses accounted for with a much lower taxes due amount.
4. Recurve refund for estimated taxes, assuming you actually already paid.

I file a tax extension basically every year, because my taxes are rather complicated and my accountant charges me less to do them in the off season. I have never paid anywhere near as much as my estimated tax number on the extension application.
 
2020-09-28 12:26:54 PM  

Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."


It appears what's going on here is that you mistakenly feel a lone Twitter account with the handle "boobs and hysteria" is a credible source of critique on the New York Times while literally a planet of journalists and tax experts are now checking up on them.
 
2020-09-28 12:29:42 PM  
With the focus on Trump, this is the major story that we are missing.  And it's not by accident.  The media should be shouting from the highest rooftops how this is just an example of how the tax code is rigged in favor of the wealthy and corporate America.  But that would be too dangerous. Could result in real change (NOT).
 
2020-09-28 12:29:43 PM  

Mikey1969: Between the writing off veterans, the downplaying the Coronavirus, and this, Donnie has had a horrible 6 weeks or so, and I think it's eroding his base nicely.


On what information do you base such optimism?
 
2020-09-28 12:30:49 PM  

GoldSpider: Mikey1969: Between the writing off veterans, the downplaying the Coronavirus, and this, Donnie has had a horrible 6 weeks or so, and I think it's eroding his base nicely.

On what information do you base such optimism?


I haven't received a pro-Trump forwarded email from my nutjob relatives for a month now.
 
2020-09-28 12:34:44 PM  
This is the way things have been designed to function since the days of the Robber Barons, and of the likes of J.P. Morgan, Carnegy, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, etc. establishing a plutocracy here in the US.

We've had to pay in blood every time we've forced that plutocracy to give something up for the working class, and if it wasn't for the boom times during WWII and the post-war glut of opportunity giving the working man an edge, we would have never seen a reprieve from the bloody clashes.

Unfortunately for us, the plutocracy used that time to push through laws militarizing the police, handily criminalizing anyone that threatened their profits, and convincing us to accept authority and not to fight back, but to believe that our protests and our votes and our voices actually counted for something even as they corralled us into a smaller and smaller corner.
 
2020-09-28 12:35:14 PM  
If the IRS was properly funded, Trump would have been in prison for the last 40 years.
 
2020-09-28 12:37:40 PM  

thealgorerhythm: Bullshiat.

Paying your kids consulting fees for the company when they're already employees is straight-up ghost employment and a felony.

Declaring properties of the corporation as your your domicile and deducting their expenses means you're homeless. So either he's been voting illegally for years, or he owes some homestead taxes somewhere.


Homeless have the right to vote as well. So STFU.

/Not a trump supporter
//Trump isn't homeless trump is a tax cheat
///There had to be a lawsuit in my state to ensure homeless can vote so don't spread that BS
 
2020-09-28 12:40:48 PM  

Loki009: The Perineum Falcon: enry: Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.

Point of order: you're right, but don't focus on their market cap.  That's just looking at what people think Amazon is worth.  Amazon doesn't have that money sitting in the bank and they collected a tiny.portion of it.

Focus on profit or even revenue. Focus on the state and local income taxes they now collect that they didn't before (assuming you're on the other side and think they already 'pay' taxes), but market cap is a craptastic way to determine what taxes a company should pay.

Perhaps a 1% federal SALES tax. . .

Yes. Because a sales tax will right this and not just largely be a tax on the people who are already living paycheck to paycheck. That sales tax will do wonders to get the billions being horded in safe investments and overseas account back flowing through our financial system.


VAT (value added Tax) puts the burden on the producer not the consumer so tends to be less regressive, though it likely leads to higher prices for consumers
 
2020-09-28 12:41:23 PM  

Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."


I'm not a tax specialist. But it sounded like the IRS required deposits from him that got rolled over. Let's say you rent a car for $40 for a days use and they require a $500 deposit for damage. You didn't pay $540 for the car.
 
2020-09-28 12:41:55 PM  

Surrender your boo-tah: Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.

I disagree, corporate taxes should be zero. Capital gains taxes on the other hand...


I disagree with you both. Corporations should be taxed, and tax write-offs for corporations should be replaced with things like the following:

- Write off a percentage based on the total number of employees you hired.
- Write off a greater percentage based on the total number of employees you've had for more than 5 years.
- Write off a percentage based on raises given to workers at the lowest end of your pay scale.
- Write off a percentage of the costs for opening facilities in the US.
- Write off a greater percentage of the costs for opening facilities in the US if they were opened in low-income areas.
- Write off a percentage of funds invested in your local community.
- Write off a percentage of costs to provide education, day care services, and so on to employees.
- Write off a percentage based on number of workers promoted to fill positions vs. hiring external candidates.
- Write off a percentage of the costs to replace polluting infrastructure/equipment/systems with green technologies.

etc. etc.

If they want to write off as much as they can and lower their tax bill, they can do so by doing things that directly impact and improve the economic prospects of the people of the US.
 
2020-09-28 12:45:43 PM  

Loki009: thealgorerhythm: Bullshiat.

Paying your kids consulting fees for the company when they're already employees is straight-up ghost employment and a felony.

Declaring properties of the corporation as your your domicile and deducting their expenses means you're homeless. So either he's been voting illegally for years, or he owes some homestead taxes somewhere.

Homeless have the right to vote as well. So STFU.

/Not a trump supporter
//Trump isn't homeless trump is a tax cheat
///There had to be a lawsuit in my state to ensure homeless can vote so don't spread that BS


I'm less upset that Trump cheated on his taxes -- I generally expect pretty much everyone to cheat on their taxes to at least some small degree -- than I am that the tax code is such that he can cheat the system to the point where he only paid $750 in taxes.

The rest of the 90% of the people in the US, no matter how creative their bookkeeping is, couldn't get anywhere near that low of a tax bill.
 
2020-09-28 1:00:19 PM  
The Times suggests that Eric Trump has characterized the Seven Springs property as a "home base" in a Forbes article. Do you know what they are talking about?

To be honest, I didn't. But I found the article for you. It's here.


TRANSLATION:

I know exactly what they mean, but Forbes makes me pretend I am ignorant of basic tax law as this is something all average white Republicans can understand

You can't deduct expenses for your own home and Eric screwed up by referring to Seven Springs as a home.
 
2020-09-28 1:03:53 PM  

thealgorerhythm: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

It appears what's going on here is that you mistakenly feel a lone Twitter account with the handle "boobs and hysteria" is a credible source of critique on the New York Times while literally a planet of journalists and tax experts are now checking up on them.


No, I didn't feel that way.
I was asking a question. I was asking what anyone else thought of what that person tweeted.
 
2020-09-28 1:04:06 PM  
His supporters believe that not paying taxes is probably the single most patriotic act an American can perform.  One more thing that won't move the needle a single mm.
 
2020-09-28 1:07:56 PM  

thealgorerhythm: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

It appears what's going on here is that you mistakenly feel a lone Twitter account with the handle "boobs and hysteria" is a credible source of critique on the New York Times while literally a planet of journalists and tax experts are now checking up on them.


LO farking L
 
2020-09-28 1:10:37 PM  

Loki009: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

I'm not a tax specialist. But it sounded like the IRS required deposits from him that got rolled over. Let's say you rent a car for $40 for a days use and they require a $500 deposit for damage. You didn't pay $540 for the car.


And, you dont get to tell everyone you bought a brand new car for $40 because you're an incredible negotiator.
 
2020-09-28 1:21:35 PM  

runwiz: With the focus on Trump, this is the major story that we are missing.  And it's not by accident.  The media should be shouting from the highest rooftops how this is just an example of how the tax code is rigged in favor of the wealthy and corporate America.  But that would be too dangerous. Could result in real change (NOT).


It's rigged for the wealthy because the middle class families have been rewarded with a dwindling tax burden over the years themselves.  With the EITC, child credit, and halving of the tax rate for married people, the middle class family isn't paying a whole lot in federal taxes anymore either.  Median family income in the USA is about $65k.   A married couple with two kids making 65k will pay a whopping $500 in income taxes.   Up the income to $100k and they are still only paying $5k (an effect rate of 5%).  Oh the horror.    If you are single however you are paying $10k in tax on that $65k salary and $15k on that 100k.   Is that fair?
 
2020-09-28 1:37:25 PM  

A Cave Geek: I keep telling people:  I WISH I could file my taxes the same way these corporations do.  You know, the ones that whine about a 30+% tax rate?  I wish I could file my taxes like they do.  Corporations don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...

That's what most people don't get about corporate taxes.  They don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...only on 'profit'.  They get to deduct EVERY cost of doing business.  Rent, office supplies, chairs, food, advertising, ANYTHING related to the cost of doing business is tax free.

I would HAPPILY pay the full corporate tax rate if I could deduct all my 'expenses' before paying taxes.


Company cars, company jets, corporate retreats, entertainment for business associates. Everything.
 
2020-09-28 1:37:29 PM  
With all the money they save in taxes, the wealth will trickle down any day now!

I'm certain of it THIS time!
 
2020-09-28 1:49:33 PM  

dark brew: Avigdore: If only there was someone running for office who has been a part of writing those tax laws for years who I could vote against in the coming election.

Is that the same guy who is currently running on raising taxes for anyone making over 400k?  How does that compare to the current tax cheat in office?


Funny how Biden has chosen $400k as his line in the sand, considering that the Presidential salary is $400k...
 
2020-09-28 1:52:13 PM  

Pharmdawg: A Cave Geek: I keep telling people:  I WISH I could file my taxes the same way these corporations do.  You know, the ones that whine about a 30+% tax rate?  I wish I could file my taxes like they do.  Corporations don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...

That's what most people don't get about corporate taxes.  They don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...only on 'profit'.  They get to deduct EVERY cost of doing business.  Rent, office supplies, chairs, food, advertising, ANYTHING related to the cost of doing business is tax free.

I would HAPPILY pay the full corporate tax rate if I could deduct all my 'expenses' before paying taxes.

Company cars, company jets, corporate retreats, entertainment for business associates. Everything.


Personal use of a vehicle is taxed to the individual.
Personal use of an aircraft by the individual or their family members is taxed to the individual.
Entertainment was made non-deductible in the 2018 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Retreats are deductible.
 
2020-09-28 1:56:31 PM  

Kit Fister: Surrender your boo-tah: Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.

I disagree, corporate taxes should be zero. Capital gains taxes on the other hand...

I disagree with you both. Corporations should be taxed, and tax write-offs for corporations should be replaced with things like the following:

- Write off a percentage based on the total number of employees you hired.
- Write off a greater percentage based on the total number of employees you've had for more than 5 years.
- Write off a percentage based on raises given to workers at the lowest end of your pay scale.
- Write off a percentage of the costs for opening facilities in the US.
- Write off a greater percentage of the costs for opening facilities in the US if they were opened in low-income areas.
- Write off a percentage of funds invested in your local community.
- Write off a percentage of costs to provide education, day care services, and so on to employees.
- Write off a percentage based on number of workers promoted to fill positions vs. hiring external candidates.
- Write off a percentage of the costs to replace polluting infrastructure/equipment/systems with green technologies.

etc. etc.

If they want to write off as much as they can and lower their tax bill, they can do so by doing things that directly impact and improve the economic prospects of the people of the US.


Let's say that your proposed tax code goes into effect and taxes on the evil corporations increase.

Is it safe to assume that you're OK with price increases for your goods and services that you purchase from the evil corporations so that they can pay their taxes?
 
2020-09-28 2:00:17 PM  

Neeek: If the IRS was properly funded, Trump would have been in prison for the last 40 years.


Not just Trump, pretty much every major economic disruption except COVID and the political instability caused by nutjobs like the current republican party could have been avoided if we'd gone after white collar crime like we do drug war or just being poor.  We're pretty much a failed state whose elite have crimed it to death and are now trying to strip the last flesh from the bones.
 
2020-09-28 2:03:18 PM  

Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."


While I thought Boobs and Hysteria was a noted scholar on tax law and accounting, it is pretty obvious she does not know what is going on.

In 2016 and 2017 Line 56 provided total tax liability. That was $750. It is possible Trump provided expected payments on top of that which were either subtracted against future liabilities or refunded (there is no way for me to know). They were not paid in those years.
 
2020-09-28 2:13:42 PM  

vikingfan73: Let's say that your proposed tax code goes into effect and taxes on the evil corporations increase.

Is it safe to assume that you're OK with price increases for your goods and services that you purchase from the evil corporations so that they can pay their taxes?


You make a number of assumptions here, including:

1. My flippant reply does not cover the details that would need to be there, such as a mandatory increased minimum wage set to go up with cost of living increases and so on.
2. You assume immediate imposition, and not a phased imposition to give time for adjustments.
3. That the combination of increased wages and tax incentives designed to bring more jobs and higher wages to the US would not, in fact, result in a larger consumer base able to afford the goods being produced by said companies.

If I were to actually sit down and sketch out how this would work, firstly it would involve economists and tax experts so that it was feasible and free of loopholes and gotchas. Secondly, it would be built around myriad other protections and changes, including the three points mentioned above. Thirdly, and most importantly, it would also involve establishing greater partnerships with other nations, especially Canada, Mexico, and so on, to broaden the scope of markets and also efforts to retool our overall economy away from one being entirely driven by consumption of disposable goods and towards something that was more sustainable overall.

In short, nice try at a gotcha, but I'm not biting.
 
2020-09-28 2:15:30 PM  

Magorn: Marcus Aurelius: Blame the system.

Missing the point: He and a lot of people like him ARE the system.   Even if he'd followed the letter of the law (he clearly did not and broke the law)   his taxes would have been obscenely low for his income and that has to do with a system he and others like he designed for themselves.   Amazon, a company with a market cap of $1.58 TRILLION should not be paying zero in corporate taxes either.  Take Trump down and certainly lock him up, but don't indulge in high-fives all around and string up a "mission Accomplished" banner, there's a lot more work to be done after that.


The golden rule :

If you have the gold, you make the rules
 
2020-09-28 2:30:30 PM  

You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

While I thought Boobs and Hysteria was a noted scholar on tax law and accounting, it is pretty obvious she does not know what is going on.

In 2016 and 2017 Line 56 provided total tax liability. That was $750. It is possible Trump provided expected payments on top of that which were either subtracted against future liabilities or refunded (there is no way for me to know). They were not paid in those years.


I don't follow much Twitter so I have no idea who that person is. Unfortunately, I know some people who will sight this as absolving trump of any and all possible wrongdoing on anything and everything past, present, and future. (I'm no accountant or tax attorney but I know they aren't, either.)

Also, thanks to Loki900 and Gyrfalcon for seeing that I was indeed asking a question and trying to answer helpfully.
 
2020-09-28 2:49:58 PM  

Mrs. Snipes: You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

While I thought Boobs and Hysteria was a noted scholar on tax law and accounting, it is pretty obvious she does not know what is going on.

In 2016 and 2017 Line 56 provided total tax liability. That was $750. It is possible Trump provided expected payments on top of that which were either subtracted against future liabilities or refunded (there is no way for me to know). They were not paid in those years.

I don't follow much Twitter so I have no idea who that person is. Unfortunately, I know some people who will sight this as absolving trump of any and all possible wrongdoing on anything and everything past, present, and future. (I'm no accountant or tax attorney but I know they aren't, either.)

Also, thanks to Loki900 and Gyrfalcon for seeing that I was indeed asking a question and trying to answer helpfully.


Sorry. I am used only to snark on here.

Bottom line, she is wrong on this. Very wrong. But at the same time continues to insists she is right which is very frustrating. She is not an expert in the field or even a qualified amateur.
 
2020-09-28 2:52:46 PM  

Loki009: thealgorerhythm: Bullshiat.

Paying your kids consulting fees for the company when they're already employees is straight-up ghost employment and a felony.

Declaring properties of the corporation as your your domicile and deducting their expenses means you're homeless. So either he's been voting illegally for years, or he owes some homestead taxes somewhere.

Homeless have the right to vote as well. So STFU.

/Not a trump supporter
//Trump isn't homeless trump is a tax cheat
///There had to be a lawsuit in my state to ensure homeless can vote so don't spread that BS


So they don't receive mail at their golf clubs?

That's my point.
 
2020-09-28 2:58:42 PM  

A Cave Geek: I keep telling people:  I WISH I could file my taxes the same way these corporations do.  You know, the ones that whine about a 30+% tax rate?  I wish I could file my taxes like they do.  Corporations don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...

That's what most people don't get about corporate taxes.  They don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...only on 'profit'.  They get to deduct EVERY cost of doing business.  Rent, office supplies, chairs, food, advertising, ANYTHING related to the cost of doing business is tax free.

I would HAPPILY pay the full corporate tax rate if I could deduct all my 'expenses' before paying taxes.


This. One of the things that people (everybody, this shiat should really be mandatory, as long as I'm endorsing shiat that is never gonna happen) need to learn about is the tax system. The way it's explained is like the Schoolhouse Rocks version of how a bill becomes a law. Remember how above board and simple that shiat seemed when you were a kid, then you became an adult and heard about shiat like lobbyists and riders and line-item veto? It's like that.

The tax system has always benefited rich white people over the rest of us. Always.
 
2020-09-28 2:58:57 PM  

You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

While I thought Boobs and Hysteria was a noted scholar on tax law and accounting, it is pretty obvious she does not know what is going on.

In 2016 and 2017 Line 56 provided total tax liability. That was $750. It is possible Trump provided expected payments on top of that which were either subtracted against future liabilities or refunded (there is no way for me to know). They were not paid in those years.

I don't follow much Twitter so I have no idea who that person is. Unfortunately, I know some people who will sight this as absolving trump of any and all possible wrongdoing on anything and everything past, present, and future. (I'm no accountant or tax attorney but I know they aren't, either.)

Also, thanks to Loki900 and Gyrfalcon for seeing that I was indeed asking a question and trying to answer helpfully.

Sorry. I am used only to snark on here.

Bottom line, she is wrong on this. Very wrong. But at the same time continues to insists she is right which is very frustrating. She is not an expert in the field or even a qualified amateur.


No worries at all, I appreciated your help, too.
 
2020-09-28 3:14:27 PM  

Mrs. Snipes: You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

While I thought Boobs and Hysteria was a noted scholar on tax law and accounting, it is pretty obvious she does not know what is going on.

In 2016 and 2017 Line 56 provided total tax liability. That was $750. It is possible Trump provided expected payments on top of that which were either subtracted against future liabilities or refunded (there is no way for me to know). They were not paid in those years.

I don't follow much Twitter so I have no idea who that person is. Unfortunately, I know some people who will sight this as absolving trump of any and all possible wrongdoing on anything and everything past, present, and future. (I'm no accountant or tax attorney but I know they aren't, either.)

Also, thanks to Loki900 and Gyrfalcon for seeing that I was indeed asking a question and trying to answer helpfully.

Sorry. I am used only to snark on here.

Bottom line, she is wrong on this. Very wrong. But at the same time continues to insists she is right which is very frustrating. She is not an expert in the field or even a qualified amateur.

No worries at all, I appreciated your help, too.


Shouldn't you ask your husband Wesley? I'd've figured after his stint for tax issues, he'd know a lot about the law...
 
2020-09-28 3:34:27 PM  

Kit Fister: Mrs. Snipes: You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: You're the jerk... jerk: Mrs. Snipes: Can somebody tell me what's going on here:

https://twitter.com/search?q=%22The%20​%24750%22&src=trend_click&vertical=tre​nds

It appears this person is calling BS, that he DID pay his taxes, $1 Mil and 4.2 Mil for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and everyone's freaking out over nothing.

"...every single story saying he paid $750 is a lie."

While I thought Boobs and Hysteria was a noted scholar on tax law and accounting, it is pretty obvious she does not know what is going on.

In 2016 and 2017 Line 56 provided total tax liability. That was $750. It is possible Trump provided expected payments on top of that which were either subtracted against future liabilities or refunded (there is no way for me to know). They were not paid in those years.

I don't follow much Twitter so I have no idea who that person is. Unfortunately, I know some people who will sight this as absolving trump of any and all possible wrongdoing on anything and everything past, present, and future. (I'm no accountant or tax attorney but I know they aren't, either.)

Also, thanks to Loki900 and Gyrfalcon for seeing that I was indeed asking a question and trying to answer helpfully.

Sorry. I am used only to snark on here.

Bottom line, she is wrong on this. Very wrong. But at the same time continues to insists she is right which is very frustrating. She is not an expert in the field or even a qualified amateur.

No worries at all, I appreciated your help, too.

Shouldn't you ask your husband Wesley? I'd've figured after his stint for tax issues, he'd know a lot about the law...


I apologize, that came off as rude when I intended it as snark only.
 
2020-09-28 4:26:43 PM  
Nah, that was funny.
 
2020-09-28 9:03:17 PM  

vikingfan73: Pharmdawg: A Cave Geek: I keep telling people:  I WISH I could file my taxes the same way these corporations do.  You know, the ones that whine about a 30+% tax rate?  I wish I could file my taxes like they do.  Corporations don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...

That's what most people don't get about corporate taxes.  They don't pay taxes on 'revenue'...only on 'profit'.  They get to deduct EVERY cost of doing business.  Rent, office supplies, chairs, food, advertising, ANYTHING related to the cost of doing business is tax free.

I would HAPPILY pay the full corporate tax rate if I could deduct all my 'expenses' before paying taxes.

Company cars, company jets, corporate retreats, entertainment for business associates. Everything.

Personal use of a vehicle is taxed to the individual.
Personal use of an aircraft by the individual or their family members is taxed to the individual.
Entertainment was made non-deductible in the 2018 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Retreats are deductible.


Supposed to be taxed to the individual. If you have some ready excuse for why what you're doing relates to the business, then you can deduct it.
 
2020-09-28 9:52:23 PM  

Kit Fister: vikingfan73: Let's say that your proposed tax code goes into effect and taxes on the evil corporations increase.

Is it safe to assume that you're OK with price increases for your goods and services that you purchase from the evil corporations so that they can pay their taxes?

You make a number of assumptions here, including:

1. My flippant reply does not cover the details that would need to be there, such as a mandatory increased minimum wage set to go up with cost of living increases and so on.
2. You assume immediate imposition, and not a phased imposition to give time for adjustments.
3. That the combination of increased wages and tax incentives designed to bring more jobs and higher wages to the US would not, in fact, result in a larger consumer base able to afford the goods being produced by said companies.

If I were to actually sit down and sketch out how this would work, firstly it would involve economists and tax experts so that it was feasible and free of loopholes and gotchas. Secondly, it would be built around myriad other protections and changes, including the three points mentioned above. Thirdly, and most importantly, it would also involve establishing greater partnerships with other nations, especially Canada, Mexico, and so on, to broaden the scope of markets and also efforts to retool our overall economy away from one being entirely driven by consumption of disposable goods and towards something that was more sustainable overall.

In short, nice try at a gotcha, but I'm not biting.


Raise the minimum wage, and the people's standard of living will marginally increase for a period of time until businesses increase their prices to absorb those cost increases.

I see how you want to index minimum wage annually to a cost of living increase.  Which then increases the cost of goods, which then increases the minimum wage, which increases the cost of goods, etc.

What you have in the end is people working at McDonalds during the day and Wal Mart at night for $75/hour that are complaining that they can't afford their $1,500/week grocery bill, $2,000/ month car payment, and their $3,000/month efficiency apartment.  And corporations are still making money, and the government is still collecting tax, partly so that  it can dole out $15,000/month to those that are unable to work just so that they can afford  to house and feed their kids.

And what do you have on a global scale?  A significant devaluation of the US Dollar due to our prices for international trade being so incredibly high. It's not like China is going to raise wages alongside us - how in the hell are we going to sell them a $400,000 minivan?
 
2020-09-28 10:25:44 PM  

vikingfan73: Raise the minimum wage, and the people's standard of living will marginally increase for a period of time until businesses increase their prices to absorb those cost increases.

I see how you want to index minimum wage annually to a cost of living increase. Which then increases the cost of goods, which then increases the minimum wage, which increases the cost of goods, etc.


This is actually not what happens.

Businesses don't increase the cost of goods just because you have more money. The price point of products is set at what the market will bear and what the business owner calculates will move full inventory, in which there is a psychological factor just as much (maybe even more so) than an economic one.

If people feel they are being ripped off then they will not buy the product, not matter how much they can afford it.

Labor accounts for about 30% of MSRP so increased labor costs have very little, if any, effect on the final list price of a product.
 
2020-09-28 10:45:11 PM  

Ishkur: vikingfan73: Raise the minimum wage, and the people's standard of living will marginally increase for a period of time until businesses increase their prices to absorb those cost increases.

I see how you want to index minimum wage annually to a cost of living increase. Which then increases the cost of goods, which then increases the minimum wage, which increases the cost of goods, etc.

This is actually not what happens.

Businesses don't increase the cost of goods just because you have more money. The price point of products is set at what the market will bear and what the business owner calculates will move full inventory, in which there is a psychological factor just as much (maybe even more so) than an economic one.

If people feel they are being ripped off then they will not buy the product, not matter how much they can afford it.

Labor accounts for about 30% of MSRP so increased labor costs have very little, if any, effect on the final list price of a product.


You're correct in saying that labor approximates 30% on average of a business' revenue.

You seem to be forgetting that the business also needs to buy raw materials to make a product, utilities, machinery, supplies, phone, internet, insurance, et cetera. Each of these items carries an inherent wage burden.

You might also note that FICA, work comp, and unemployment insurance are calculated as a percentage of payroll. As the payroll increases, those costs increase too.  And those costs are also borne by the suppliers to the business.

All of those cost increases go into the product.  The business needs to create enough gross margin to cover its fixed costs so that it can make a profit and continue. Therefore, it needs to increase its prices.

Let's say that the manufacturer's costs increase 10% as these adjustments occur. It will likely attempt to increase its prices to recover. Let's say that they raise them a corresponding 10%. Retailers may need to increase even higher than that to cover their increased labor, and utility costs - and those increases are passed on to you.

Yes, I understand the concept of "what the market will bear". But increases in mandated wage affect every aspect of a business, and those costs are passed through to the consumer. The money has to come from somewhere, and the business does need to earn a profit to survive and continue to employ people.
 
2020-09-29 12:21:08 AM  

vikingfan73: You seem to be forgetting


I'm not forgetting anything. All those things are accounted for in "labor costs", which means more than just salaries. Distribution, marketing, shipping, taxes, supplies, utilities and rent are other costs.

A lot of those costs are fixed, however. Labor is not. It is very flexible, which is why when a business looks to save money and cut costs, the first thing it looks at is labor: Salaries, pensions, benefits.

Very rarely is the reason for doing this the price point of the product.
 
2020-09-29 7:23:49 AM  

vikingfan73: Raise the minimum wage, and the people's standard of living will marginally increase for a period of time until businesses increase their prices to absorb those cost increases.


Which hasn't happened in any of the places that have thus far increased their minimum wages.

vikingfan73: I see how you want to index minimum wage annually to a cost of living increase.  Which then increases the cost of goods, which then increases the minimum wage, which increases the cost of goods, etc.


We have no evidence to support this, especially given that wages have remained stagnant despite a steadily rising cost of living.

vikingfan73: What you have in the end is people working at McDonalds during the day and Wal Mart at night for $75/hour that are complaining that they can't afford their $1,500/week grocery bill, $2,000/ month car payment, and their $3,000/month efficiency apartment.  And corporations are still making money, and the government is still collecting tax, partly so that  it can dole out $15,000/month to those that are unable to work just so that they can afford  to house and feed their kids.


That's purely speculation and fearmongering on your part. Again, there's no evidence to support this as an outcome.

vikingfan73: And what do you have on a global scale?  A significant devaluation of the US Dollar due to our prices for international trade being so incredibly high. It's not like China is going to raise wages alongside us - how in the hell are we going to sell them a $400,000 minivan?


Yet again, no evidence to support this given that the US dollar remains strong despite steadily rising cost of living and cost of goods, despite the stagnant wages and use of veritable slave labor in super cheap markets.

All you're doing is fearmongering at this point, trying to scare people into believing that somehow ensuring fair pay for workers would spell doom and disaster, despite a lack of evidence to support any such things.
 
2020-09-29 10:09:10 AM  

Ishkur: vikingfan73: You seem to be forgetting

I'm not forgetting anything. All those things are accounted for in "labor costs", which means more than just salaries. Distribution, marketing, shipping, taxes, supplies, utilities and rent are other costs.

A lot of those costs are fixed, however. Labor is not. It is very flexible, which is why when a business looks to save money and cut costs, the first thing it looks at is labor: Salaries, pensions, benefits.

Very rarely is the reason for doing this the price point of the product.


Yup.  If the Theorem is that increasing payroll will increase the cost of goods, then there are two logical corollaries.
1. Increasing the cost of goods leads to increased payroll.
and
2. Decreasing payroll will decrease the cost of goods.

Neither of those things are true, nor have they ever been true as far as history tells us.

We live in a demand driven economy.  So it works as follows:
1. You have exactly as many employees as you can afford up to the point where you are meeting market demand at your optimized price point.
2. Demand changes.
2a. Demand goes down
3a. You reduce the price point
and/or
4a. You reduce payroll as you are now meeting a lower demand

2b. Demand goes up
3b. You increase the price point
and/or
4b. You increase payroll to meet a higher demand

The size of your payroll and the cost of your product are the connected knobs you can turn AFTER demand changes.

In a vacuum, it's easier to reduce payroll.  However, that's a tragedy of the commons.  If all companies start exclusively reducing payroll in response to reduced demand, then all companies in all sectors experience lower demand, leading to a feedback loop.

Paradoxically, the very principles that drive economic expansion in a capitalist system are actually the disease that will ultimately kill it.
 
Displayed 89 of 89 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.