Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 110

Thread: Most Americans should be done paying their taxes by now,

  1. #31 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,393
    Thanks
    71,849
    Thanked 35,458 Times in 27,020 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,562 Times in 18,153 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax#Early_examples


    The US federal government imposed the first personal income tax, on August 5, 1861, to help pay for its war effort in the American Civil War - (3% of all incomes over US$800) (equivalent to $21,800 in 2017).[11][verification needed] This tax was repealed and replaced by another income tax in 1862.[12][verification needed] It was only in 1894 that the first peacetime income tax was passed through the Wilson-Gorman tariff. The rate was 2% on income over $4000 (equivalent to $113,000 in 2017), which meant fewer than 10% of households would pay any. The purpose of the income tax was to make up for revenue that would be lost by tariff reductions.[13] The US Supreme Court ruled the income tax unconstitutional, the 10th amendment forbidding any powers not expressed in the US Constitution, and there being no power to impose any other than a direct tax by apportionment.
    In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution made the income tax a permanent fixture in the U.S. tax system. In fiscal year 1918, annual internal revenue collections for the first time passed the billion-dollar mark, rising to $5.4 billion by 1920.[14] The amount of income collected via income tax has varied dramatically, from 1% in the early days of US income tax to taxation rates of over 90% during WW2.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxati..._United_States

  2. #32 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    73,347
    Thanks
    101,787
    Thanked 54,700 Times in 33,596 Posts
    Groans
    3,145
    Groaned 5,061 Times in 4,679 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    he lies anyway

    he doesn't know the history
    He wouldn’t stop working to join the revolution, so he’s a home in my books, just a blow hard. He’ll collect SS and Medicare just let me everyone else, just like Ayn Rand

  3. #33 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    28,635
    Thanks
    26,355
    Thanked 14,217 Times in 9,773 Posts
    Groans
    563
    Groaned 604 Times in 571 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    its the way the founders planned it asshole

    we know you hate everything American

    MOVE

    Wrong. Socialist Democrat Woodrow Wilson had to have the Constitution amended to be able to confiscate citizen wages.


    "I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."
    — Joe Biden on Obama.

    Socialism is just the modern word for monarchy.

    D.C. has become a Guild System with an hierarchy and line of accession much like the Royal Court or priestly classes.

    Private citizens are perfectly able of doing a better job without "apprenticing".

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Bigdog For This Post:

    Truth Detector (04-18-2018)

  5. #34 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    19,400
    Thanks
    1,745
    Thanked 6,394 Times in 5,099 Posts
    Groans
    1,397
    Groaned 908 Times in 849 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    the Donny has billions and cant pay on time
    Why are you ignoring the Is report that says more than 10 million file tax extensions.

    Idiot troll.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cancel 2018.2 For This Post:

    Bigdog (04-18-2018), Truth Detector (04-18-2018)

  7. #35 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,383
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phantasmal View Post
    lol, go live off the grid, then you don’t have to worry what you pay for!
    so you can't show us, got it.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  8. #36 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,796
    Thanks
    124,726
    Thanked 27,281 Times in 22,620 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PhantasticallySTUPID View Post
    I like police, fire, roads, safe drugs, safe food, clean water, clean air, voting, safety, a military defense, all those things my tax dollars supply for me.
    Another brain dead leftist idiot who thinks Government isn't getting enough to provide for these basic services.
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  9. #37 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,383
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by evince View Post
    he lies anyway
    says the biggest liar and delusional moron on the board
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  10. #38 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Delray Beach FL
    Posts
    114,796
    Thanks
    124,726
    Thanked 27,281 Times in 22,620 Posts
    Groans
    3,768
    Groaned 3,239 Times in 2,979 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    Whether you file an extension or not, the money is still due by April 15th (or this year the 17th) you fucking idiot.
    Aren't leftists amazingly stupid? But then, they wouldn't be leftists if they had brains or intelligence.
    "When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."


    A lie doesn't become the truth, wrong doesn't become right, and evil doesn't become good just because it is accepted by a majority.
    Author: Booker T. Washington



    Quote Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
    Unless you just can't stand the idea of "ni**ers" teaching white kids.


    Quote Originally Posted by AProudLefty View Post
    Address the topic, not other posters.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Truth Detector For This Post:

    Bigdog (04-18-2018), NOVA (04-18-2018)

  12. #39 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,393
    Thanks
    71,849
    Thanked 35,458 Times in 27,020 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,562 Times in 18,153 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxati...tes#Income_tax



    The history of income taxation in the United States began in the 19th century with the imposition of income taxes to fund war efforts. However, the constitutionality of income taxation was widely held in doubt [Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Company, 157 U.S. 429 (1895)] "[11] until 1913 with the ratification of the 16th Amendment.



    Legal foundations



    Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution assigns Congress the power to impose "Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises," but Article I, Section 8 requires that, "Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."[12]


    In addition, the Constitution specifically limited Congress' ability to impose direct taxes, by requiring it to distribute direct taxes in proportion to each state's census population. It was thought that head taxes and property taxes (slaves could be taxed as either or both) were likely to be abused, and that they bore no relation to the activities in which the federal government had a legitimate interest. The fourth clause of section 9 therefore specifies that, "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken."


    Taxation was also the subject of Federalist No. 33 penned secretly by the Federalist Alexander Hamilton under the pseudonym Publius. In it, he explains that the wording of the "Necessary and Proper" clause should serve as guidelines for the legislation of laws regarding taxation. The legislative branch is to be the judge, but any abuse of those powers of judging can be overturned by the people, whether as states or as a larger group.


    What seemed to be a straightforward limitation on the power of the legislature based on the subject of the tax proved inexact and unclear when applied to an income tax, which can be arguably viewed either as a direct or an indirect tax. The courts have generally held that direct taxes are limited to taxes on people (variously called "capitation", "poll tax" or "head tax") and property.[13] All other taxes are commonly referred to as "indirect taxes".[14]


    Pre-16th Amendment



    In order to help pay for its war effort in the American Civil War, Congress imposed its first personal income tax in 1861.[15] It was part of the Revenue Act of 1861 (3% of all incomes over US $800; rescinded in 1872). Congress also enacted the Revenue Act of 1862, which levied a 3% tax on incomes above $600, rising to 5% for incomes above $10,000. Rates were raised in 1864. This income tax was repealed in 1872.


    A new income tax statute was enacted as part of the 1894 Tariff Act.[16][17] At that time, the United States Constitution specified that Congress could impose a "direct" tax only if the law apportioned that tax among the states according to each state's census population.[18]


    In 1895, the United States Supreme Court ruled, in Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., that taxes on rents from real estate, on interest income from personal property and other income from personal property (which includes dividend income) were direct taxes on property and therefore had to be apportioned. Since apportionment of income taxes is impractical, the Pollock rulings had the effect of prohibiting a federal tax on income from property. Due to the political difficulties of taxing individual wages without taxing income from property, a federal income tax was impractical from the time of the Pollock decision until the time of ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment (below).


    16th Amendment




    Amendment XVI in the National Archives


    Main article: Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution


    In response to the Supreme Court decision in the Pollock case, Congress proposed the Sixteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1913,[19] and which states:

    The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

    The Supreme Court in Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad, 240 U.S. 1 (1916), indicated that the Sixteenth Amendment did not expand the federal government's existing power to tax income (meaning profit or gain from any source) but rather removed the possibility of classifying an income tax as a direct tax on the basis of the source of the income. The Amendment removed the need for the income tax on interest, dividends and rents to be apportioned among the states on the basis of population. Income taxes are required, however, to abide by the law of geographical uniformity.


    Congress enacted an income tax in October 1913 as part of the Revenue Act of 1913, levying a 1% tax on net personal incomes above $3,000, with a 6% surtax on incomes above $500,000. By 1918, the top rate of the income tax was increased to 77% (on income over $1,000,000, equivalent of 15,300,000 in 2012 dollars[20]) to finance World War I. The average rate for the rich however, was only 15%.[21] The top marginal tax rate was reduced to 58% in 1922, to 25% in 1925 and finally to 24% in 1929. In 1932 the top marginal tax rate was increased to 63% during the Great Depression and steadily increased, reaching 94% (on all income over $200,000, equivalent of 2,500,000 in 2012 dollars[22])in 1945. During World War II, Congress introduced payroll withholding and quarterly tax payments.[23]

  13. #40 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic State
    Posts
    26,917
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 5,373 Times in 4,319 Posts
    Groans
    1,505
    Groaned 2,440 Times in 2,029 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    There is a difference between using tax law and hiring an army of accountants and attorneys to manipulate tax law for your benefit, it's called civic responsibility
    Manipulate tax law ?.....hows that done....?
    Put blame where it belongs
    ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
    It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
    The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.


  14. The Following User Says Thank You to NOVA For This Post:

    Truth Detector (04-18-2018)

  15. #41 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    73,347
    Thanks
    101,787
    Thanked 54,700 Times in 33,596 Posts
    Groans
    3,145
    Groaned 5,061 Times in 4,679 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    so you can't show us, got it.
    Nah, just don’t want to do it. Why don’t you live off the grid if you are so disgusted by our system? Can’t? Won’t? You like the conveniences of a society? Just don’t want to pay for them like all you anti-tax nutters?

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Phantasmal For This Post:

    Cypress (04-18-2018)

  17. #42 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,383
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phantasmal View Post
    Nah, just don’t want to do it. Why don’t you live off the grid if you are so disgusted by our system? Can’t? Won’t? You like the conveniences of a society? Just don’t want to pay for them like all you anti-tax nutters?
    again, look at the meme I posted. you lose.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  18. #43 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,835
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,004 Times in 13,819 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,035 Times in 2,831 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    So you really do think liberals and Democrats don't hire army of accountants and attorneys to help with their taxes? Interesting. I understand as a liberal you would like to believe it not to be true but you could not be more wrong.
    No, the vast majority of Americans don't hire an army of accountants and attorneys to help with their taxes, they can't afford an army of accounts and attorneys nor are they looking to manipulate the tax law as much as they can to prove "it makes them smart"

  19. #44 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,835
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,004 Times in 13,819 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,035 Times in 2,831 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Do you and Bourbon think Buffett is doing his civic responsibility here?


    Warren Buffett’s Nifty Tax Loophole


    Warren Buffett is fond of saying his tax rate is lower than his secretary’s. He does not publicize his tax returns, but for the tax year 2010, he paid $6.9 million on taxable income of $39.8 million, according to partial disclosures he made in 2011.

    What is astounding about those numbers is not the 17.3% tax rate, but that Buffett’s $39.8 million of taxable income is only about 0.05% of his reported net worth ($71 billion according to Forbes, which put him third on its list of the 400 wealthiest people in the world for 2015).

    Proportionately, that’s like someone with an ever-expanding net worth, currently $10 million, reporting taxable income of only $5,000 and paying a federal tax bill of only $900.

    So, how does he do it? Buffett’s principal holding is an economic interest of about 20% of Berkshire Hathaway, the huge conglomerate he has been building since the 1960s. It has a market value of about $350 billion. Berkshire hasn’t paid any cash dividends since 1967. Rather, the company accumulates its prodigious after-tax income ($19.9 billion in 2014) and cash flow ($32 billion in 2014) to get bigger by buying companies, lots of companies. Among its large recent acquisitions were Lubrizol, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, and a shared acquisition of H.J. Heinz.

    The Berkshire Model is to buy companies rich in cash flow with histories of paying dividends, then cancel those dividends and retain the cash flow going forward for future acquisitions.

    HOW MUCH TAX is Warren Buffett able to avoid by fixing Berkshire’s dividend at zero? The dividend yield of the Standard & Poor’s 500 is about 2%. The price/earnings ratio of the S&P 500 is about 18. Thus, for the S&P 500, approximately 30% of earnings are paid out to shareholders. These dividends are taxable at a current maximum rate of 23.8%.
    If Berkshire followed the average of the S&P 500, it would have paid out about $6 billion in dividends in 2014, and Buffett’s share would have been about $1.2 billion.

    At a 23.8% tax rate, that would have given Buffett a tax bill of $280 million, or about 40 times the taxes he said he actually paid in 2010.

    Thus the Treasury has been getting exiguous tax revenue from one of its wealthiest citizens. Buffett is virtually immune to higher individual income-tax rates, while he promotes higher rates for other rich people, who may have a net worth a hundredth of 1% (0.01%) of his own.

    Since, according to his publicly stated plans, Buffett intends to leave the bulk of his estate to charity, his estate won’t be paying much tax, either.

    The Buffett Loophole and the Berkshire Model are allowing one individual to build one of the great American fortunes while avoiding individual taxes. Talk about someone not paying his share!

    FOR 2014, BERKSHIRE ITSELF recorded a provision for $7.9 billion in taxes, most of which was “deferred.” In fact Berkshire, like many other companies, is able to defer much of its taxes, in its case $61 billion. This is money it acknowledges it owes the government but has yet to pay.

    Deferred tax liabilities are the difference between taxes that will come due in the future and what the company owes today. Accounting rules require this difference to be recognized as a liability, but it ultimately acts as a sort of “float” that the government allows companies in the midst of an acquisition—which Berkshire almost always is.

    In 2012, the year before it was acquired for $28 billion by Berkshire (and a Brazilian partner), H.J. Heinz paid more than $600 million in dividends. Those dividends were taxed and provided revenue to the U.S. Treasury. After the acquisition, the dividends stopped. Tax revenue from those dividends stopped.

    In 2010, the year before it was acquired by Berkshire for $9 billion, Lubrizol paid $90 million in dividends. After the acquisition, the dividends stopped, as did tax revenue on the dividends.

    In 2009, the year before it was acquired by Berkshire for $44 billion, Burlington Northern Santa Fe paid $546 million in dividends. After the acquisition, the dividends stopped, as did tax revenue on the dividends.

    LAST YEAR, Berkshire entered into what became known as a “cash-rich split-off” that, according to the New York Times, might have allowed it to avoid $1 billion in taxes. Berkshire traded its stock in Procter & Gamble, which carried a low cost basis of $336 million, for P&G’s Duracell unit plus $1.7 billion in cash, a total value of $4.7 billion. The point was to reduce capital-gains taxes that would have been due on a sale of Berkshire’s P&G stock.

    It seems that Buffett and his businesses are serial deprivers of tax revenue to the U.S. Treasury. Yet that does not deter him from loudly advocating higher income tax rates for others.

    However unethical the Buffett Loophole and the Berkshire Model may seem, however much they may appear to be gaming the tax code, no one has claimed they are illegal.
    Now consider Section 531 of the Internal Revenue Code, which imposes a 20% tax on the accumulated but undistributed income of a corporation. And Section 532 of the Code states that the tax shall apply to “every corporation…availed of for the purpose of avoiding of the income tax with respect to its shareholders…by permitting earnings and profits to accumulate instead of being divided or distributed.”

    The Buffett Loophole and the Berkshire Model provide clear examples of the purpose of Sections 531 and 532. Buffett and Berkshire are accomplishing precisely what the code is trying to prevent: shareholders getting away without paying taxes.

    Enforcement of these two sections has been sporadic, subject to the judgment of the Internal Revenue Service. An official commentary on the code, Federal Tax Coordinator 2d, D-3003, states that, for enforcement of the accumulated-earnings tax, “Congress did not want the taxing authorities second-guessing the responsible managers of corporations as to whether and to what extent profits should be distributed or retained, unless the taxing authorities were in a position to prove their position was correct.”

    CAN THE IRS CONTEND that Berkshire’s purchase of Duracell was not essential for its Heinz holding, for its Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad, or for its core insurance businesses? Of course.

    Can the IRS see that by looking the other way it has unreasonably feathered Buffett’s nest, allowing him to avoid paying reasonable taxes? Of course it can. It chooses not to see anything.

    The relationship between the Wizard of Wall Street and our president is symbiotic. The two scratch each other’s back at the expense of the commonweal. How nice for our president, who is so eager to spread the wealth around, to have one of our richest citizens militating for higher taxes on the rich. How nice for Buffett to play to an adoring crowd of wealth-spreaders. How strange that it’s not his wealth that they are spreading around.


    https://www.barrons.com/articles/war...ole-1428726092
    The "whataboutism" was predictable, least Buffet admits he pays little tax and goes out of his way to point out the absurdity of the unequal tax system, the Don on the other hand brags because he doesn't pay tax, huge difference

  20. #45 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,835
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,004 Times in 13,819 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,035 Times in 2,831 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
    Do you and Bourbon think Buffett is doing his civic responsibility here?


    https://www.barrons.com/articles/war...ole-1428726092
    The "whataboutism" was predictable, least Buffet admits he pays little tax and goes out of his way to point out the absurdity of the unequal tax system, the Don on the other hand brags because he doesn't pay tax, huge difference

Similar Threads

  1. paying taxes is patriotic, right?
    By SmarterthanYou in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-15-2017, 09:06 AM
  2. Is paying taxes one of the duties of a citizen?
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-03-2012, 04:14 PM
  3. 47% of Americans "weasel out of" paying taxes
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-01-2011, 05:21 PM
  4. 47% will not be paying Federal Income Taxes
    By TuTu Monroe in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-07-2009, 10:18 AM
  5. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-23-2008, 10:49 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •