Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Washington Post)   So if Congress doesn't act, half of America can't get a tax refund until late March   ( divider line
    More: Fail, congresses, Alternative Minimum Tax, tax refunds, income taxes  
•       •       •

3863 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Nov 2012 at 10:08 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2012-11-13 10:14:45 PM  
5 votes:
400 people have more wealth than 155 million people combined
"But somebody might abuse welfare if we raise taxes on the rich!"

2012-11-13 10:21:51 PM  
4 votes:
Blame the dumb lbieral Socialist tax monster.
i.imgur.comView Full Size
2012-11-13 10:12:47 PM  
3 votes:

EnviroDude: Time for a flat tax. A fair tax

"The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion." -Adam Smith
2012-11-13 08:36:42 PM  
3 votes:
There are really no words to describe my stunned disappointment that people have been commenting in this thread for almost four hours now, it's going green in less than two, and yet nobody has made any comment to the effect that people who get tax refunds are essentially giving the government a year-long interest-free loan and are, therefore, financially incompetent sheeple or some other variant of the term. What the hell is this. Sometimes I don't think I even know who the hell you people are anymore.
2012-11-13 04:55:00 PM  
3 votes:
Maybe we should just get rid of the AMT completely since it undermines the tax code with a "GOTCHA!". If you want people to pay more tax, raise taxes and close loopholes instead of hiding it like a hotel does with their "resort fees".
2012-11-13 10:31:49 PM  
2 votes:
Fark the AMT with a rusty railroad spike but who the hell files their taxes before the very last minute? March? I haven't even started putting it off at that point.
2012-11-13 10:17:47 PM  
2 votes:
Getting sick of this "Fiscal cliff" boogeyman. I get the feeling we're being coaxed into a panic to make it easier to screw us when the time comes.
2012-11-13 05:05:47 PM  
2 votes:
Half of all taxpayers don't even file their returns before April 1st.
2012-11-15 09:17:25 AM  
1 vote:

Debeo Summa Credo: You arbitrarily chose $300k as the individuals income to make your point. Sure, it would increase such a person's taxes by a small amount (actually, less than 0.83% because you omitted the taxes they'd pay on their first $250k in earnings). It would increase someone makeing $250k by zero percent! Why didn't you choose that person?

Ok. 500k then?

35% of 250k = 87.5k = 17.5% of total income
40% of 250k = 100k = 20% of total income.

2.5% effective tax rate increase.
Total 12.5k income tax hike.

That's "little"

80b? Still big. Massive, possibly.

If you look at someone making $1m, it would increase their taxes on income over $250k by $750k*(.396-.35)=$37,200. If they were paying $317k in total taxes before (assume 20% on the first 250k), their taxes went up by over 11%!

If you look at someone making $10m, their total taxes would go up from about $3.5m to $3.9m, a 'massive' 13% increase.

Let's look at a 1m earner, in raw, real, terms. Assuming every dollar of that is regular income. And ignoring all other taxes owed, and any loopholes. We will assume s/he is single.

In 2012, they'd have owed $326,759.60. 32.68% Effective Tax Rate

If their marginal rate goes up from 35 to 40%, they will owe $357,342.10. 35.73% Effective Tax Rate

Net Increase In Effective Tax Rate: 3.05%

You think this is spin. I think you're being disingenuous. The impact is small on the individual. Losing that revenue is... not small anymore.

You are trying to make Carney out to be a liar of this minutia of language. It's just not there, and even if it was, it doesn't farking matter. This entire conversation is a red herring, and I'm done with it. Carry on with your bad self.
2012-11-14 11:59:02 PM  
1 vote:

o5iiawah: fusillade762: Still waiting for someone to explain how the Federal debt affects me

The resulting inflation caused by the Federal reserve conjuring money out of thin air to borrow to service the debt causes prices to rise.

So unless you post from a cave and live in the bush, hunting your food like Ted Nugent, enjoy that.

img2.statista.comView Full Size

Yeah, look at that inflation rate. It's CRAZY!
2012-11-14 08:28:06 AM  
1 vote:

EnviroDude: Time for a flat tax. A fair tax

Flat tax would only be "fair" in the purportional amount taxed to earned but in reality places an unfair burden on lower income earners. 20% of a minimum wage earner's wages would be devastating in relation to the cost of living, 20% of a high income earners wages would go relatively unnoticed. For someone who earns $100 weekly, a tank of gas may make up 33% of their post taxed earnings, as opposed to ~ 3% for someone earning $1000 weekly.

Farkers are already upset with the highest income earners are only paying 20% of their income on taxes- would you now expect the lowest wage income earner to pay their share as well? Why you hate the poor?

The real issue isn't about trying to target the highest wage earners to extract their wealth but rather to prevent the hoarding and keep the money in circulation. Why not put a cap on wealth and earnings, a cap on bonuses, tax capital gains on all earnings made by investors who are under 60 years of age, make derivatives from offshore accounts taxable, and treat all products manufactured offshore as imports, regardless of where the parent company resides.

Capping wealth. - Do you believe that capping wealth at 50M per family will cause "undue hardship" or discourage innovation? Think again! Any income over 50M cap could be credited (in case of "tough times") while the rest in reinvested into the new innovators willing to step up to the plate for their share of the 50M pie. Don't worry about the money train pulling in the station at 50M- you'll be receiving a small stipend of untaxed 1-2% earnings on any capitol investment above 50M. Plus you have the government's word (promissary notes?) that you will be covered in time of need. As for the rest of that wealth- it will be circulating about the economy instead of holed up in a vault or private investment somewhere.

Cap earnings and bonuses. A ceiling on the highest earnings would be win-win for the business who will no longer have to financially compete with other businesses to retain their top wage earners, and for top wage earners to retain their positions instead of feeling the need to seek higher wages elsewhere. As the pay will be capped and bonuses, smaller business will be able compete for more skilled labor. Again, don't worry about losing innovators as they will be attracted by the top dollar, capped or not.

Capital gains. If they make up a bulk of your earnings, they should be taxed as regular income. If capital gains make up less than earned income they are taxed purportionally to that income. The exception would be for students over 16 or attending college (presumeably earnings would be going toward tuition or future business venture) and retirees over 55. I'm inclined to say 64, however I do not see the point of penalizing anyone who has remained fiscally responsible and were able to retire earlier at 55.

Socking money away in foreign accounts- If you live in America, share in the benefits and protections of being an American, then why not pay your share of the burden as well.

Penalizing business that take their business outside the country. Self evident. You sought the benefits of running your business outside this country, your products will be taxed as any other foreign good. By the way foreign investors- have we got a tax break for you should you choose to start up a business in our country.

Of course with all this new found wealth and cash floating around, they'll be a heavy demand on limited natural resources so out of control inflation will be inevitable
2012-11-14 07:12:44 AM  
1 vote:
Two things:
a) The AMT patch is just as stupid as the debt ceiling debate. OMG LIFE IS GOING TO BE RUINED UNLESS WE DO THE SAME THING WE'VE BEEN DOING FOR 20 YEARS. It is a contrived congressional controversy. There is no reason it can't be fixed permanently.
2) anyone who argues for a flat tax is an idiot. It is amazingly regressive and makes a massive shift of the tax burden. The only way to avoid this is to include specific deductions and refunds to ease the transition on the poor. So, you end up lessening the strain on upper incomes, keeping the transition the same for lower incomes, and screwing over the middle class. Every version of the flat tax I've seen discussed ends up being a poorly formed progressive tax structure with a huge bump in the middle for people to get beat up.
D) The "people need to have skin in the game" argument as it relates to income tax is idiotic (which makes sense because it is related to the idiots from my previous point). Poor people pay sales taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, and payroll taxes and they take up a far greater percentage of their income than rich people. And, they make so little income that they don't have enough to reasonably live while also paying income tax. That's the people that you are demonizing with the "they don't pay income tax!" (Which gets intentionally distorted by people leaving off the income part) Rich people are afforded more protection in society. They are far and away benefitted more by a strong government and functioning America. Their companies are similarly protected. But, god forbid that family of four with a total pretax income of 37k get a break on income tax. Those bastards are cheating the system!
2012-11-14 12:29:41 AM  
1 vote:
Okay, me screams into the void:

A flat tax means that we change from the current progressive tax schedule (those who make more pay a greater share) to a flat tax schedule (everyone pays the same share of what they make).

Basically, the government needs $X to provide services that cost $Y.

In an ideal world, X>Y.

Currently, X<Y

We collect taxes where X increases with the tax rate on the highest income parts of the nation.

Reduce (or flatten) that increase, and you reduce X. (Unless you raise the burden on the lower income folks)

X is already too low.

So either you must reduce Y (nominally Republican), or you must increase X (nominally Democrat), or you must increase the share on lower incomes to offest the reduction on higher incomes (nominally Tea Party) 

Compare this logic problem to the results of the recent election.
2012-11-14 12:14:48 AM  
1 vote:
Meh. Your tax return will be the least of your worries. You'll be lucky to have a job during the Great Teabag Recession.
2012-11-14 12:03:16 AM  
1 vote:

skullkrusher: well that was a clusterfark of bad html and incomplete thoughts ^

It was moderately awesome. Choose your own adventure, response style.
2012-11-13 09:30:36 PM  
1 vote:
I would just like to say that people who get tax refunds are essentially giving the government a year-long interest-free loan and are, therefore, financially incompetent sheeple.
2012-11-13 09:14:18 PM  
1 vote:

EnviroDude: Time for a flat tax. A fair tax

Which one?
2012-11-13 09:12:20 PM  
1 vote:

Pocket Ninja: There are really no words to describe my stunned disappointment that people have been commenting in this thread for almost four hours now, it's going green in less than two, and yet nobody has made any comment to the effect that people who get tax refunds are essentially giving the government a year-long interest-free loan and are, therefore, financially incompetent sheeple or some other variant of the term. What the hell is this. Sometimes I don't think I even know who the hell you people are anymore.

Welcome to Obama's America.
2012-11-13 09:07:11 PM  
1 vote:
2012-11-13 08:32:27 PM  
1 vote:
Late March? Full Size
Displayed 20 of 20 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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.