Obama Plans to Name Task Force to Overhaul Tax Code

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Noone is being "overtaxed" though. All that's going to happen is that some tax cuts for people who don't need them are going to be allowed to expire which in turn will subsidise tax cuts for the middle class.

Everyone acts like this is some sort of daylight robbery.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Noone is being "overtaxed" though. All that's going to happen is that some tax cuts for people who don't need them are going to be allowed to expire which in turn will subsidise tax cuts for the middle class.

Everyone acts like this is some sort of daylight robbery.

This quotation comes from the words of DANIEL WEBSTER and those of JOHN MARSHALL in the Supreme Court case, McCulloch v. Maryland.

Webster, in arguing the case, said: “An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy,” 17 U.S. 327 (1819).

In his decision, Chief Justice Marshall said: “That the power of taxing it [the bank] by the States may be exercised so as to destroy it, is too obvious to be denied”, and “That the power to tax involves the power to destroy … [is] not to be denied”.

http://www.bartleby.com/73/1798.html

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Well either you've got the middle class subsidising the rich or the rich subsidising the middle class.

The question surely is what's fair. Having a very large section of the population paying higher taxes while their wages remain static and the cost of living skyrockets doesn't seem particularly fair to me.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Well either you've got the middle class subsidising the rich or the rich subsidising the middle class.

The question surely is what's fair. Having a very large section of the population paying higher taxes while their wages remain static and the cost of living skyrockets doesn't seem particularly fair to me.

The balance that has to be drawn in a market driven economy, is how much of the means of production can be removed in the form of taxes, before the mean of production can no longer sustain itself. In the case of a recession, there is a diminishing return, as in an expanding economy, there is an increasing return. It is all a matter of timing.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Mister_Bill

[Peikko 1,575]

#######. As I said before, the rich are not crippled by taxes, they are only taxed at the higher rate on a portion of their income and it's not even that high relatively. I am not in the highest bracket, but I sure as hell would like to be and I wouldn't begrudge paying the higher rate Of course, the other thing to do is ensure that taxes are spent efficiently, hence the need for health care reform and other measures.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

#######. As I said before, the rich are not crippled by taxes, they are only taxed at the higher rate on a portion of their income and it's not even that high relatively. I am not in the highest bracket, but I sure as hell would like to be and I wouldn't begrudge paying the higher rate Of course, the other thing to do is ensure that taxes are spent efficiently, hence the need for health care reform and other measures.

So, you don't think there is a limit on how much capital can be removed from the economy, in good times, or bad?

[Peikko 1,575]

Removed? You mean when the government spends the money that somehow counts less than when we do? Crikey, that stimulus is doomed I tell ya!

Anyway, we are talking about personal taxes, not corporation taxes, not sure how that should work to be honest, not thought about it much.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Here is a chart of an unsustainable trend:

[britty 1]

#######. As I said before, the rich are not crippled by taxes, they are only taxed at the higher rate on a portion of their income and it's not even that high relatively. I am not in the highest bracket, but I sure as hell would like to be and I wouldn't begrudge paying the higher rate Of course, the other thing to do is ensure that taxes are spent efficiently, hence the need for health care reform and other measures.

When you get to the highest bracket, if that ever happens, let me know and I would be happy to pass down some tips on handling your new "rich" status.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Removed? You mean when the government spends the money that somehow counts less than when we do? Crikey, that stimulus is doomed I tell ya!

Anyway, we are talking about personal taxes, not corporation taxes, not sure how that should work to be honest, not thought about it much.

Corporations are not monolithic entities. They have stockholders, and employees, all of whom pay personal income taxes, and payroll taxes.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Mister_Bill

[Peikko 1,575]

Yes, but that's not really the point is it? None of those employees taxes are not coming out of the bottom line of the corporation. They pass straight through. Same with stock holders. It's really not that relevant.

#######. As I said before, the rich are not crippled by taxes, they are only taxed at the higher rate on a portion of their income and it's not even that high relatively. I am not in the highest bracket, but I sure as hell would like to be and I wouldn't begrudge paying the higher rate Of course, the other thing to do is ensure that taxes are spent efficiently, hence the need for health care reform and other measures.

When you get to the highest bracket, if that ever happens, let me know and I would be happy to pass down some tips on handling your new "rich" status.

I am not ashamed that I don't earn that much - it would be nice and as I don't have a problem with the tax system, I don't suppose I would need to find ways to avoid paying taxes.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Yes, but that's not really the point is it? Any of those employees taxes are not coming out of the bottom line of the corporation.

Are you sure? Labor is a cost of doing bussiness. Besides the employer contributions and benefits, there are wages paid, a portion of which is taxed through the employees' personal and payroll tax deductions.

Edited March 26, 2009 by Mister_Bill

[Peikko 1,575]

The employer pays contributions to SSN, I presume, but not to the taxes themselves, or at least that is how it works in the UK. Not having done the payroll over here, I obviously don't know for sure.

As for the cost of doing business, sure, labour costs are always going to be part of that cost, but again, the tax contribution is paid by the employee, not the employer. However, as far as corporation taxes themselves go, I don't know about those.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The employer pays contributions to SSN, I presume, but not to the taxes themselves, or at least that is how it works in the UK. Not having done the payroll over here, I obviously don't know for sure.

As for the cost of doing business, sure, labour costs are always going to be part of that cost, but again, the tax contribution is paid by the employee, not the employer. However, as far as corporation taxes themselves go, I don't know about those.

The system here is such that the employee doesn't realize what taxes are being paid on his/her behalf, only what the amount of the paycheck is each pay period. If a refund is paid at the end of the year, then the employee is happy. Lot's of misdirection is going on here. But, all those deductions and taxes are paid quarterly, monthly, or bimonthly, depending on the size of the bussiness, how the payroll is paid, and the type of tax or deduction. I am not a corporation, so I can not tell you how that tax is paid. Small corporations pay taxes at the personal tax rates. Investors and stock holders pay capital gains tax, and taxes on dividends on the profit returned to them.

[Peikko 1,575]

I'll ask my boss tomorrow. I know that in the UK the only contributions the employer makes are to SS, but that is a smaller price to pay than what those companies over here pay toward medical insurance, and in the UK, despite what some will tell you, the employee gets a much better deal for less cost to the employer and employee combined.

The employer contributions in the UK are done month by month and the tax is paid exactly there is no guesswork as to what the accurate contributions are, so no refunds at the end of the year like there are over here. Refunds are possible, but not for that reason.

As I understand it, corporation is a separate tax on profit that the corporation makes. I can understand why corporations do not want those profits to be excessively taxed, particularly if they are intent on re investment. However, again as I understand it, if re investments are made, then there are tax breaks for the corporations.