"the really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway."

[Chewbacca]

"the really rich people figure out how to dodge taxes anyway."

Guess who recently said this! Answer in link below!

Click here for the answer

[Magness]

It's a silly sounding statement, but it's actually very true.

They "dodge" taxes by simply availing themselves of all of those vast number of tax deductions that CONGRESS has placed in the tax code. It is highly hypocritical to complain about people actually using those deductions, because (a) Congress put those deductions into the tax code and (b) they did it for good reasons. That is, most if not all deductions exist to give people an incentive to do something, like invest in low income housing, or charitable deductions, mortgage interest, or many, many other things.

Let's look at just one of these deductions, the low income housing deduction. Congress passed this one in the 60's or 70's IIRC to give rich people an incentive to invest in building low income housing. It takes MASSIVE CHUTZPAH to whine about a person actually daring to take the low income housing deduction after they just spent 100's of thousands, if not millions of dollars to build that housing for poor people!!!

It like this with all deductions in the tax code. They were all placed there to create an incentive to do something that Congress thought was worthwhile.

If people want to get away from rich people dodging taxes, then go with a no deductions flat tax. Or stop bitching when rich people take legitimate deductions that were placed in the tax code by Congress.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Magness: [QB] Let's look at just one of these deductions, the low income housing deduction. Congress passed this one in the 60's or 70's IIRC to give rich people an incentive to invest in building low income housing. It takes MASSIVE CHUTZPAH to whine about a person actually daring to take the low income housing deduction after they just spent 100's of thousands, if not millions of dollars to build that housing for poor people!!!

Well, they are going to turn around and charge rent for that housing -- if not to the poor living in it, then to HUD, so.... they *are* taking a deduction for making money. But, the tax code generally allows you to deduct money spent making money, as a rule. It's that whole Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism thingy that Weber wrote about.

It like this with all deductions in the tax code. They were all placed there to create an incentive to do something that Congress thought was worthwhile.

Yes. The Tax Code is a tool to incentivise behavior.

If people want to get away from rich people dodging taxes, then go with a no deductions flat tax. Or stop bitching when rich people take legitimate deductions that were placed in the tax code by Congress.

Howabout a no deductions incremental tax instead? That'd be more fair.

Anyway, Bush in not all right in his statement. A businessman with $2 million in the bank will find a way to invest it and save money via deductions. The numerous folks I work with, though, whose incomes range in the $200-$500K area don't spend so much time dodging taxes. They just end up paying more. That's the core group of people Kerry's plan will catch: professionals making $200K and up a year, who are not investors/entrepeneurs (who tend to keep their money tied up anyway). Of course, one easy way that even the busy professional can keep his money from getting taxed is venture capitalism -- which carries its own risks.

Look, in the end, rolling back the tax breaks on the wealthiest 1% WILL collect more funds. Period. Maybe some of those will be deducted, but not all.

[Magness]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: [QB] quote: Originally posted by Magness: [QB] Let's look at just one of these deductions, the low income housing deduction. Congress passed this one in the 60's or 70's IIRC to give rich people an incentive to invest in building low income housing. It takes MASSIVE CHUTZPAH to whine about a person actually daring to take the low income housing deduction after they just spent 100's of thousands, if not millions of dollars to build that housing for poor people!!!

Well, they are going to turn around and charge rent for that housing -- if not to the poor living in it, then to HUD, so.... they *are* taking a deduction for making money. But, the tax code generally allows you to deduct money spent making money, as a rule. It's that whole Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism thingy that Weber wrote about.[/QUOTE]The point of the deduction is to give incentive to BUILD that low income housing. So what if they end up charging rent? The point is that deduction is to get rich people to invest in the creation of MORE low income housing.

That's not the real point however. Complaining about people who properly USE a legit deduction for its intended purpose is grossly hypocritical.

quote: It like this with all deductions in the tax code. They were all placed there to create an incentive to do something that Congress thought was worthwhile.

Yes. The Tax Code is a tool to incentivise behavior.[/QUOTE]IMHO, it should not be. The tax code should for one thing and one thing only, to collect revenue to fund the government.

quote: If people want to get away from rich people dodging taxes, then go with a no deductions flat tax. Or stop bitching when rich people take legitimate deductions that were placed in the tax code by Congress.

Howabout a no deductions incremental tax instead? That'd be more fair.[/QUOTE]No it wouldn't. IMHO any time you set different rates for people of different income levels you engaging in economic discrimination and are a bigot.

The ONLY fair tax situation is one where everyone is treated equally and the same under the law. "Affordability" is an inherently discriminatory concept, really designed for nothing more than engaging in jealousy based class warfare arguments. Affordability should never be an issue in the paying of taxes for one group versus another group.

If a person makes 10x more than me, then they should pay 10x more in taxes. Not 5x and not 20x. Anything other than 10x is discriminatory.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Magness: It's a silly sounding statement, but it's actually very true.

I know its true, but I would expect a leader to condemn tax-dodging and speak of reform rather than pass it off as a fact of life.

[Timber Loftis]

Well, Magness, thanks for educating me as to exactly how I'm a bigot. Sorry, but just because it is your opinion that an incremental tax is wrong, it doesn't make it truth. Oh, and there is not protection against economic discrimination for the rich, and there is almost no protection for the poor. You won't find those listed as protected classes in most court cases -- unless it's being used as an excuse to prevent voting.

Chewie, taking a valid deduction is not illegal, even if you call it "tax dodging." The IRS polices illegal "tax-dodging" doggedly, and metes out harsh convictions. If you ever have the pleasure of being audited, you will know what a pain it is. The deductions/credits/floors/caps/ceilings/rollovers/ammortizations are all there to be used -- in fact they are your "cookie" reward for behaving the way Congress wants. If you don't like them, lobby Congress, don't denigrate the tax payer.

[Magness]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Well, Magness, thanks for educating me as to exactly how I'm a bigot. Sorry, but just because it is your opinion that an incremental tax is wrong, it doesn't make it truth. Oh, and there is not protection against economic discrimination for the rich, and there is almost no protection for the poor. You won't find those listed as protected classes in most court cases -- unless it's being used as an excuse to prevent voting.

Timber, I have no patience with lawyers or politicians.

Just because the law does or does not say something doesn't mean that it's right (or wrong).

I decided that I'll never take verbal crap from liberals anymore. I will not accept being called a bigot for disagreeing with a liberal. I've made it my personal policy to make liberals eat what they've sown. I ram the language of bigotry down their throats. Disagree with *me* and you are a bigot.

[Chewbacca]

Chewie, taking a valid deduction is not illegal, even if you call it "tax dodging."

Yeah I know I was using the word "dodging" in the same context as it was used in the OP.

The larger issue, in my opinion, is how huge corporates avoid taxation by using loopholes in the law and going off-shore. These are things that can be fixed with leglislation, but that would involve getting politicians to bite the corporate hands that feed them.

[Timber Loftis]

I don't call people bigots if they disagree with me. Disagreement is welcome. Discrimination and bigotry and homophobia are what they are. The dictionary is quite helpful, because it provides some idea of what these terms mean.

If making someone eat their words means raising your voice, ranting, or cussing, well then I'm sure you'll find it easy to accomplish that.

Supportable arguments are supportable. Ducking the issue, tossing up straw men, switching points or stances, or lobbing insults are all nice indicators that someone is not as right as they think they are.

The larger issue, in my opinion, is how huge corporates avoid taxation by using loopholes in the law and going off-shore. These are things that can be fixed with leglislation, but that would involve getting politicians to bite the corporate hands that feed them.

Yes, well, off-shoring is atrocious in my view, and should be made illegal. However, doing that without offending the WTO Treaty is easier said than done. National legislation is not a cure-all where the WTO DSB is concerned.

[Chewbacca]

Well I'm fairly ignorant about how the WTO relates to corporations avoiding taxes by going off-shore so I'll simply trust your greater knowledge on the issue T.L. and assume that it'll take more more than just unlikely laws to plug that leak.

[ 08-10-2004, 06:06 PM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]