Taxing Matters

Posted by Tina

Well, well, well…progressives have some taxing matters to think about but it isn’t raising taxes on the jet industry. A story in the Daily Mail reminds us of who fails to pay taxes:

The parent company of Fox News — News Corp. — paid the U.S. government $4.8 billion in taxes over the last four tax years (2007-2010).
GE, which owned most of MSNBC until late last year, paid zero taxes in 2010.
In fact, GE received a $3.2 billion welfare check from Uncle Sam.

GE’s CEO Immelt is also Obama’s go-to-guy for business advice! Yes there’s a simple exxplanation about how and why GE made out like a bandit…but have you noticed…an awful lot of people with dubious tax issues have been Democrats or are associated with democrats….why is that? I thought these people were all for paying taxes…lots of them!

A walk down memory lane reminds us that John Kerry was caught trying to hide his new yacht and avoid paying taxes by mooring it in another state…Charlie Rangle tried to hide rental income from an offshore villa…Tim Geitner’s
appointment was nearly scuttled because of his failure to pay what he owed….in fact a Google search quickly serves to remind that most of Obama’s early appointments had tax problems. There are many more examples.

The American people need a lot of things right now but more debt and higher taxes don’t make the list. Most of us are burdened by higher prices, being out of a job, being upside down in our houses or are just worried about what
coming new taxes might mean to us. One thing we know for sure, we don’t need new taxes or more debt.

WE NEED JOBS!!!

WE NEED CONGRESS TO MAKE AN ADULT DECISIONS TO CUT SPENDING!!!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Taxing Matters

  1. Pie Guevara says:

    Today Obama stated that 80% of Americans want tax increases. The man is either completely disconnected, or lives in a Orwellian fantasy land, or both. Probably both.

    Barely 10 weeks ago Obama sought a debt ceiling increase with ZERO debt reduction.

    He has completely ignored his own debt commission’s recommendations.

    He presented a budget that adds 10 trillion to the debt over the next decade.

    He double-talks about going against his own party about entitlement reforms and cuts but not once has he proposed a single structural change.

    And now he poses as the budget balancer, ready to roll up his shirt sleeves?

    Oh, puhleeeeeease.

    The ONLY thing ever to come from this man is self serving political manipulations.

    Yes, Republicans, call his bluff. Call it now. Obama owns this economy. Shove it down his throat.

  2. Laughing says:

    Americans don’t want higher tax rates. Rates are high enough now. Americans want to get rid of the loopholes which allow the super rich to avoid paying their fair share.
    George Stinbrenner is one of the richest 1% of taxpayers. Does he pay 37% of his income in federal income tax? No. He pays about 4%. The biggest lie being circulated by the phony conservatives is that the rich pay more than anybody. This is not correct. They pay far less as a percentage of their incomes that you or I do.
    I heard a fellow on the radio last week say loopholes are the law and people are simply following the law. This is half true.
    What the fellow on the radio did not mention is that, well, folks like George Steinbrenner for one, hire lawyers to write laws for them that you and I are not allowed to follow. What made America great at one time is that we all had to follow the same laws. Now the rich write their own laws. Is it coincidence that 2/3 of Americans see our country in decline? We didn’t stick to our principles and now we are failing as a nation.
    We Americans don’t want higher taxes. Taxes are less now than even under Ronald Reagan. We Americans want everyone to pay their fair share.
    That’s all.

  3. Pie Guevara says:

    Hmmm, yet another statement packed with distortions, falsehoods and foolishness from Laughing. Well, he (she) just had to get in the threadbare “fair share” slogan and give us all a good groan.

    No conservative politician I know of has taken a stance against closing tax loopholes. Heck, no conservative non-politician I know of has either. And certainly not anyone who writes the Post Scripts blogs.

    In fact, the exact opposite is true. In fact, Republican legislators favor a comprehensive tax-reform effort of which the closing tax loopholes are a necessary part.

    By the way, George Steinbrenner doesn’t pay ANY taxes at all anymore. Nor does he take advantage of any tax loopholes. He died July 13, 2010.

  4. Tina says:

    Laughing: “The biggest lie being circulated by the phony conservatives is that the rich pay more than anybody. This is not correct.”

    The rich pay most of the income tax burden. /that is a fact. It is also a fact that some 48% pay no income tax:

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/printer/27099.html

    Today, a record number of Americans52 million, or 36 percent of all filershave no direct connection with the basic cost of government because they pay no income taxes. If we add this group to the people who have some income but don’t file a tax return, the ranks of American households outside the income tax system rise to 48 percent…the top 1 percent of taxpayers now pays a greater share of the income tax burden than the bottom 90 percent combined.

    “They pay far less as a percentage of their incomes that you or I do.”

    It seems to me that given the statistics above that should not be a problem for you. all of the so-called needy people are being excused and you are only responsible for your portion of 10% of the tax burden.

    “I heard a fellow on the radio last week say loopholes are the law and people are simply following the law. This is half true.
    What the fellow on the radio did not mention is that, well, folks like George Steinbrenner for one, hire lawyers to write laws for them that you and I are not allowed to follow.”

    What laws were written for George Steinbrenner that you are “not allowed” to follow?

    I know I can’t “follow” the law that gives a tax subsidy to corn growers or wind farms because I’m not involved in those efforts but when it comes to the standard income tax code I can use whatever laws apply given my personal earnings and expenses. What exactly are you talking about?

    One more thing, who decides what is fair? What is your standard?

  5. Pie Guevara says:

    Re: “One more thing, who decides what is fair? What is your standard?”

    My guess is that Laughing is aiming at taxing the dead. It is time for the dead to pay their fair share. That pesky Steinbrenner won’t pay a dime in taxes for 2011.

    It is simply outrageous.

  6. J Soden says:

    So, you want a fair tax? How about those receiving governmenmt handouts? Shouldn’t they pay taxes on those benefits? The folks who receive Social Security benefits do but welfare, food stamp and unemployment benefits are not taxed. Fix THAT loophole!

    A flat tax would eliminate the loophole situation, but then all of those lobbyists would be out of business. Not to mention tax lawyers and many accountants. But, the tax would be fair . . . .

    But that doesn’t address Congress’ proclivity for spending Other People’s Money. Or continuing to increase our debt. You can fix that problem with a Balanced Budget requirement in the Constitution. Maybe. . . . but I doubt if you’ll find any democrat in Congress willing to vote for fiscal sanity.

  7. juanita says:

    thanks Tina, another great post.

    I’d like to make a simplistic comment – 4 percent of George Steinbrenner’s earnings was enough to float a small town for a year. I’d say, that’s enough. Why do we penalize our bigger earners for making money? That’s stupid. For every dollar Steinbrenner made, the Yankees poured at least $20 into the economy – and that’s probably a naive estimate on my part. I know a whole family who lived off Yankee stadium for generations, doing everything from management to selling peanuts.

    Look at stupid Dodger’s owner – bottomed out the team for his own enrichment – Steinbrenner ran the Yankees for years like a public trust, and the public really trusted him. He was more like a public servant than a business owner. He worked for the public, and he did a good job.

    Who do politicians work for? Themselves? They sure seem to get rich, no matter what our situation.

  8. Laughing says:

    Why do you insist on changing the subject? I was not talking about the poor. Many people say that when a debater changes the subject, they are admitting they have lost the debate.
    If you would like to know which laws the rich have written for themsleves, go get a copy of the book, “Free Lunch.” by David Cay Johnston.
    Mr. Guevara is correct. NO Conservative politicians oppose closing loopholes. Unfortunately, the Republican Party opposes closing loopholes.
    Mr. Guevara is also quite incorrect! Dying does not relieve anyone of their tax obligations, even the samll ones.
    Also, please check out the tax laws for hedge fund managers. Imagine if you could defer your taxes (of millions of dollars) forever.
    You and I cannot defer our taxes forever. We have to pay our taxes every year. A different set of laws applies to us.

    You really seem opposed to learning anything new. You don’t investigate the sources your critics give you. Do you hate learning? I understand. Many people do. They can’t stand to find out how wrong they have been. It takes courage to learn. If you spread lies, you too, are a liar. Do you want to be known as a liar? What good will that do you?
    I hope you get some courage and read something other than the Washington Examiner.

  9. Pie Guevara says:

    Re: “Mr. Guevara is also quite incorrect! Dying does not relieve anyone of their tax obligations, even the samll ones.”

    Interesting hypothesis. I should not even bother with this lunacy, but what the heck …

    Dear, the dead do not pay taxes, the inheritors (the living) do.

    What is this, the Liberal version of “Night Of The Living Dead”? “Laughing Meets The Mummy”? “Schedule 666: An instructional video on how to help your deceased relatives file their income taxes”?

  10. Pie Guevara says:

    Re: “Unfortunately, the Republican Party opposes closing loopholes.”

    Nonsense.

    Opposition to closing loopholes is, of course, not a Republican Party policy. In fact comprehensive tax reform that includes closing tax loopholes is.

    I am pretty sure Republicans are opposed to taxing the dead. So on that score, as long as they control the House, you are never going to be able to float that one, Laughing.

  11. Tina says:

    Laughing: “Many people say that when a debater changes the subject, they are admitting they have lost the debate.”

    An effort to give your assertion a broad perspective is not changing the subject. You claimed that conservatives are lying when they say rich pay more in taxes “than anybody”. Then you attempted to prove the ridiculous assertion using a single example and without specific information regarding his tax returns. I reasserted the facts regarding the percentage of tax payed by the wealthy as opposed to nearly half of the citizenry that pays nothing thus illustrating that conservatives are not lying.

    Accusing me of changing the subject is changing the subject!

    “If you would like to know which laws the rich have written for themsleves, go get a copy of the book, “Free Lunch.” by David Cay Johnston.”

    If you would like to make a point then make it! Otherwise you are reduced to being an annoying, demanding, manipulative blowhard. Surely if you have read the book, and found it credible and fascinating, you could give at least one example of a law written specifically for Stenibrenner (or other wealthy person) as you assert!

    “Unfortunately, the Republican Party opposes closing loopholes.

    Republicans have been trying to spark interest in simplifying the tax code and eliminating loop holes since at least the 1990’s. They have suggested big sweeping changes and small incremental changes to simplify and eliminate confusing laws that are easily sidestepped:

    http://www.gop.com/index.php/briefing/comments/relief_from_the_tax_man

    (April 2010) Alternative Budget Would Simplify Tax Code, Make 2001 And 2003 Tax Cuts On Income, Capital Gains And Dividends Permanent. Our budget does not raise taxes, and makes permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax laws. In fact, we cut taxes and reform the tax system. Individuals can choose to pay their federal taxes under the existing code, or move to a highly simplified system that fits on a post card, with few deductions and two rates. But House Dems Rejected Republican Proposal, Instead Passing Record-Breaking $3.55 Trillion Budget.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312785,00.html

    Sunday, November 25, 2007 (AP) WASHINGTON Republican presidential hopeful Fred Thompson proposed an income tax plan Sunday that would allow Americans to choose a simplified system with only two rates: 10 percent and 25 percent.

    http://www.watchblog.com/republicans/archives/004522.html

    Nov 2006 Republican candidate for president Michael Smith: The Fair Tax proposed by “Americans for Fair Taxation” has continued to grow its list of congressional sponsors. We won’t hear much about this under a Democratically-controlled Congress, but fiscal conservatives should insist that any candidate for federal office support this plan, or have a full fledged proposal of equal merit.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aPrYNKUvyyG8&refer=news_index

    Oct. 18 (2005) (Bloomberg) — U.S. President George W. Bush’s tax advisory panel backed two proposals to rewrite current law, one that would simplify the income tax and another to replace it with a modified flat tax. Both would eliminate many popular deductions and sharply reduce levies on investment income.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,140076,00.html

    (Dec 2004) – President Bush and House Speaker Dennis Hastert (search) have both said the idea of a national sales tax deserves a serious look.

    http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031398.htm

    Dateline: 03/13/98 – Two bills, currently before the House, propose plans radically changing the way taxes are collected: H.R. 1040 – The Armey-Shelby Flat Tax and H.R. 2001 – The National Retail Sales Tax Act include changes ranging from putting our entire annual tax return on a post card, to completely doing away with the IRS and the taxation of income.

    http://www.cstr.org/leadership/christian.html

    Ernest Christian has been a consistent and persistent advocate of tax reform. He assisted the late Senator Roth and others in a proposed redesign of business taxation (S. 1105) in 1985. He helped design two other fundamental tax reform proposals that were the subject of congressional hearings in the 1980s and 1990s; was the leading draftsman of the comprehensive rewrite of the income tax code sponsored by Senators Domenici and Nunn (S. 722) in 1995, which was acclaimed by many as the high watermark of tax reform to that date; and updated and simplified a newer and simpler version in 2003 for Congressman Phil English (H.R. 269).

    “please check out the tax laws for hedge fund managers.”

    One opinion that differs from yours:

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/43639285

    Last Thursday, Senator Carl Levin (D) called the tax treatment of carried interest the unconscionable tax break given to hedge-fund managers. …

    This is the latest demonstration of how the debate over how to tax hedge fund managers is increasingly framed in moral language rather than economics. …

    Under current law, investors in hedge funds and hedge fund managers pay the same tax capital gains rateswhich max out at 15 percenton the gains from hedge fund investment activity. This makes sense: Were taxing the activity of investing in way that is neutral to the source of the invested capital. Since its economically irrelevant whether the capital is invested by its owner or the agent of the owner, it makes sense to have tax law treat it as irrelevant.

    Introducing differential taxes would introduce a new externality into financial markets, throwing sand into the gears of the economy.

    The economist Ronald Coase long ago taught us the economy operated better with fewer transaction costs preventing economic resources being allocated to their most valued use. Raising taxes on resources simply because the investment decisions are made by a hedge fund manager rather than the original owner introduces a cost that will distort the efficient allocation of capital.

    Senator Levins tax proposals would privilege investors who have already accumulated wealth while penalizing those who have not. From a populist perspective, isnt this the real unconscionable tax break?

    “You and I cannot defer our taxes forever”

    http://www.nytimes.com/keyword/tax-deferral/5

    You and I can defer taxes on gains in our IRA’s and certain other instruments:

    …retired from his job as an instrument technician four years ago, he took the $200,000 in his company retirement account and soon thereafter put it into an individual retirement account. Because he has since earned about 10 percent a year on his I.R.A. through investments in stock mutual funds and Treasury notes, he has been able to withdraw $900 a month to supplement his Social Security and other income — and still wind up with more than $240,000 in the account today.

    These laws allow the average Joe to accumulate wealth.

    To my knowledge there is no law that treats hedge fund managers differently from you or me…and you refuse to name one specifically.

    “You really seem opposed to learning anything new….Blah blah blah…I hope you get some courage and read something other than the Washington Examiner.”

    They say when you resort to insults you have lost the argument…of course first you have to actually make an argunment rather than issuing a complaint followed by a stream of unsults.

    🙂

  12. Tina says:

    J Soden…great comments!

    This bears repeating:

    “I doubt if you’ll find any democrat in Congress willing to vote for fiscal sanity”

    In fact they’ve blocked efforts at real reform or change for decades.

    They are currently attempting to Tip ONeal us on this debt ceiling business…promises, promises and never the delivery.

  13. Pie Guevara says:

    Re Tina’s Response to Laughing:

    Excellent post. But don’t expect Laughing to pay any attention to it or respond in kind with some real meat.

    Anything beyond the idiotic Steinbrenner thing is probably way outside of Laughing’s skill set.

    Laughing has no point other than to annoy people with asinine assertions and lame tactical diversions in a stupid little game that pathetically attempts to pose as real debate.

    I nearly spit up my coffee in laughter when Laughing declared victory with the statement, “Many people say that when a debater changes the subject, they are admitting they have lost the debate.”

    That has to be one of the most asinine liberal “debate” tactics there is, especially when it is so horribly misapplied.

    As for Laughing mentioning the book, “Free Lunch.” Yep, my bet is that Laughing hasn’t even read it. Not a single citation from it and I doubt any will be forthcoming.

  14. Laughing says:

    For the tax year 2010, News Corp had income of 32.7 billion dollars. That may or may not be in the top 1%. I do not know.
    “The parent company of Fox News — News Corp. — paid the U.S. government $4.8 billion in taxes over the last four tax years (2007-2010).”
    4.8 billion is a little bit less than 15% for one year’s income. I guess they made about 4X that over four years, which means they are in the 4% bracket.
    You are correct. The article shows who does not pay their fair share.
    Thank you for pointing that out.

    If Ms. Guevara is looking for a typist, she should check with a temp service. Not only is she too lazy to do her own research, but she is a fool if he thinks I owe her anything.

  15. Tina says:

    Laughing I would say that a company that paid $4.8 billion to the United States Treasury in four years has done more than it’s part tax wise. You disagree because from your perspective a man that provides approximately 51,000 jobs directly, and Lord only knows how many indirectly, still isn’t doing enough. A man whose businesses provide daily news and entertainment to millions of people around the world and billions of advertising opportunities isn’t doing enough.

    If he can take advantage of legal aspects of the tax code and pay a meager $4.8 billion instead of some greater amount then good for him. I don’t know of anyone who would do it any differently were they in his place…evidence the number of people who send the government an extra check every year just because they want to give more than they legally owe!

    I have no doubt the man lives well…but then…he’s obviously earned it.

    Here are a few of the things that probably impacted his tax returns:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/aug/05/news-corp-losses

    Rupert Murdoch’s global media empire, News Corporation, slumped to a $3.4bn (2bn) net loss for the 12 months to June as a combination of plunging advertising revenue, impairment charges and online losses contributed to the company’s worst year in recent memory.

    http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world_business/view/1138019/1/.html

    WASHINGTON: News Corp. sold Myspace on Wednesday for a fraction of its purchase price, bringing the curtain down on Rupert Murdoch’s tie-up with a one-time social networking star that ended up being eclipsed by Facebook.

    http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/news-corp-ltd/recent/2

    After spending a little more than $1.5 billion on Internet assets over the last four years, News Corp. acknowledged Wednesday that they had lost nearly one-third of their value.

    Frankly I can’t imagine the number of tax experts employed by News Corp or the number of forms that must be filled out for the various taxing authorities every year. They probably need a UPS truck to deliver them. The bill for meeting his tax obligations alone is more than I’d ever hope to make in a lifetime. I do know I’m happy not to have all that responsibility.

    If you don’t like the tax code work to change it.

    “The article shows who does not pay their fair share.”

    Whatever percentage any individual taxpayer in the top income brackets paid (depending on their personal circumstances and the law) they STILL PAY THE GREATEST OVERALL PERCENTAGE OF TAXES COLLECTED.

    I reject your use of the word “fair”. Our government has no right to arbitrarily take the property of individuals and certainly not because it thinks it should to be fair. Property rights are, and bloody well should be, sacrosanct in the USA.

Comments are closed.