Nearly half of U.S. pays no federal income tax

[chickenona]

I've never had a huge problem with Lickety's political views except for his harsh stance on handling the rising number of senior citizens. Arguing that we should deny the elderly quality of life procedures like hip replacements because "it's too expensive and they're of no use" is sociopathic.

Somebody should really remind him that he's not that far away from being one of these "useless" elderly himself.

[PoisondOne]

I saw Steve Forbes speak yesterday and it got me thinking about this thread...

Did you know...
the tax code contains over 3.7 million written words?
the tax code is a staggering 7,500 pages in length?
that since 2001 there have been over 3,250 changes to the tax code?
that more than 500 of those changes occurred in 2008?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVtVA48kYYg

If nothing else, what he has to say is interesting and brings a little more to this discussion. I'm not buying it hook, line and sinker; however, I find a lot of common sense to what he says here in that clip.

There has to be a way to simplify this thing so the average American can understand it. I can't find one reason in the world for it to be so complex that employees of the IRS can't answer questions when you call.

Do we know what is in this thing? Can we ensure we aren't paying taxes on the same item multiple times? How much time does a business spend a year complying with the code? How much time does an individual spend a year complying with the code? How much additional money do both businesses and individuals spend complying with the code?

For shits and giggles, I had two different people prepare my taxes last quarter...both numbers were INSANELY different yet they both had the same information to work off of...and the IRS said that both were correct. Does anyone else see a problem with that?

[Ugmo]

I saw Steve Forbes speak yesterday and it got me thinking about this thread...

Did you know...
the tax code contains over 3.7 million written words?
the tax code is a staggering 7,500 pages in length?
that since 2001 there have been over 3,250 changes to the tax code?
that more than 500 of those changes occurred in 2008?

I don't know that it should be surprising that the code that governs the primary source of revenue for the U.S. government is somewhat complex. It's a little more important than a grocery list, after all. Now, maybe it is too complex, but I don't know that Steve Forbes' figures really give much of an indication either way. Kinda like how the Republicans argued against the health care bill by attacking its length. Really, a health care overhaul bill that could potentially affect 16 percent of the GDP requires a lot of writing? Who woulda thunk it!

Isn't this the dude whose platform centered around a flat tax of 20 percent back when he was running for president? I get a sneaking suspicion the thing he's most interested in is lowering his own taxes.

[MickeyG]

For shits and giggles, I had two different people prepare my taxes last quarter...both numbers were INSANELY different yet they both had the same information to work off of...and the IRS said that both were correct. Does anyone else see a problem with that?

Ha, ha, ha that's awesome.

You're right, what a fucked up system. There's a ton of shit that needs fixing all through the government, but unfortunately none of it will get fixed because of party politics. Shame.

[MasterOfMeatPuppets]

For shits and giggles, I had two different people prepare my taxes last quarter...both numbers were INSANELY different yet they both had the same information to work off of...and the IRS said that both were correct. Does anyone else see a problem with that?

If you filed two different tax returns, yes.

[Ugmo]

You're right, what a fucked up system. There's a ton of shit that needs fixing all through the government, but unfortunately none of it will get fixed because of party politics. Shame.

The worst part to me is the election cycle. Having a national election every two years means that the parties are constantly in campaign mode. If you take a standard parliamentary system in which there is a national election every four or five years, they get down to governing as soon as the election is over. A coalition is formed, a coalition agreement hammered out, and the opposition party helps to govern by making sure the coalition doesn't get too crazy.

In the U.S. the opposition immediately starts scheming on how to win back seats in the next election. Just makes it difficult to get anything done when only one party is interested in governing and both parties are interested in one-upping the other.

[MickeyG]

Agreed, Ugmo, but it also seems to me there is little middle ground in the US. You're one or the other, even though it has been proven that centrists do well. And when people talk about say, a Bill Clinton, he gets dismissed as being a centrist as if he must have compromised his far left views just to become President.

It's like Metallica softening their sound to appeal to the masses. Sell-outs!!!

[Ugmo]

Agreed, Ugmo, but it also seems to me there is little middle ground in the US. You're one or the other, even though it has been proven that centrists do well. And when people talk about say, a Bill Clinton, he gets dismissed as being a centrist as if he must have compromised his far left views just to become President.

Clinton didn't compromise his views to become president... he compromised his views to remain president after he lost the health care reform battle, and ultimately the country was worse off for it.

[vanitybinge]

I saw Steve Forbes speak yesterday and it got me thinking about this thread...

Did you know...
the tax code contains over 3.7 million written words?
the tax code is a staggering 7,500 pages in length?
that since 2001 there have been over 3,250 changes to the tax code?
that more than 500 of those changes occurred in 2008?

I don't know that it should be surprising that the code that governs the primary source of revenue for the U.S. government is somewhat complex. It's a little more important than a grocery list, after all. Now, maybe it is too complex, but I don't know that Steve Forbes' figures really give much of an indication either way. Kinda like how the Republicans argued against the health care bill by attacking its length. Really, a health care overhaul bill that could potentially affect 16 percent of the GDP requires a lot of writing? Who woulda thunk it!

Isn't this the dude whose platform centered around a flat tax of 20 percent back when he was running for president? I get a sneaking suspicion the thing he's most interested in is lowering his own taxes.

There are few people who understand the $$$ystem as well as Forbe$. Maybe I'm just being optimistic, but I don't think he's promoting these ideas just for himself. Watching the success of people in this country is his passion. The length is important, for precisely the reasons he and PoisondOne stated. If the system is too complex and buries itself under too much sand, how can you be sure you're getting what you deserve or paying what you owe correctly?

The confusion of our tax system leads a lot of people to give up on it, some people will strive to understand it, and some of those will find all the loopholes they can to take advantage of it, thereby taking advantage of you and I!

We should consider the system that works for our neighbors and adapt it. I listen to my share of Corporate Avaneger (TAXES ARE STEALING!) but at the same time I see the point. this same discussion was had in Tom Clancy's novel Patriot Games. The tax code was stackecd on a table in it's entirety and the table collapsed under the weight of it. No one could claim to understand the whole thing, just trying to read it all would send you to the nuthouse.

This system needs an enema.

[Ugmo]

The confusion of our tax system leads a lot of people to give up on it, some people will strive to understand it, and some of those will find all the loopholes they can to take advantage of it, thereby taking advantage of you and I!

Well, not me, but I get your point.

Steve Forbes' idea of a 20 percent flat tax seems disastrous to me. So everyone's taxes are going do drop by up to 19 percent (and people who currently don't make enough to pay any taxes are going to suddenly have to start paying 20 percent), yet tax revenues are somehow going to remain level? How does he figure? Or maybe he never addressed the revenues side at all.

[vanitybinge]

The confusion of our tax system leads a lot of people to give up on it, some people will strive to understand it, and some of those will find all the loopholes they can to take advantage of it, thereby taking advantage of you and I!

Well, not me, but I get your point.

Steve Forbes' idea of a 20 percent flat tax seems disastrous to me. So everyone's taxes are going do drop by up to 19 percent (and people who currently don't make enough to pay any taxes are going to suddenly have to start paying 20 percent), yet tax revenues are somehow going to remain level? How does he figure? Or maybe he never addressed the revenues side at all.

First of all he said 17%, 20 was way back in the day. The economy has changed a bit since then.

If you're going to do the math you've got to take into account the population of the US vs the pop of EU countries who've adapted the flat tax rate, as well as the ratio of rich/poor and how much would be lost. However, if the returns are greater in the number of households who correctly file their taxes, that also must be opposed to the number of missing and incorrect returns we have now.

I think in the end it would indeed mean a steadier, more level flow of revenue because once you take away the loopholes and the bullshit, you end up with more people paying in correctly, and hopefully, more people getting back the money they deserve, which in my opinion should be all of it.

[Ugmo]

If you're going to do the math you've got to take into account the population of the US vs the pop of EU countries who've adapted the flat tax rate, as well as the ratio of rich/poor and how much would be lost. However, if the returns are greater in the number of households who correctly file their taxes, that also must be opposed to the number of missing and incorrect returns we have now.

The flat tax has been a disaster in the European countries that adopted it (such as the Baltic states). Revenues increased in Russia because so many people there had been evading taxes prior to the introduction of the new tax system. In the U.S. the number of tax evaders is too small to make a difference.

[vanitybinge]

If you're going to do the math you've got to take into account the population of the US vs the pop of EU countries who've adapted the flat tax rate, as well as the ratio of rich/poor and how much would be lost. However, if the returns are greater in the number of households who correctly file their taxes, that also must be opposed to the number of missing and incorrect returns we have now.

The flat tax has been a disaster in the European countries that adopted it (such as the Baltic states). Revenues increased in Russia because so many people there had been evading taxes prior to the introduction of the new tax system. In the U.S. the number of tax evaders is too small to make a difference.

Is it just a disaster in Russia (Which is a disaster of a country in itself) or all the countries that adopted it? Has Greece adopted this system?

[Ugmo]

Is it just a disaster in Russia (Which is a disaster of a country in itself) or all the countries that adopted it? Has Greece adopted this system?

I don't think Greece has it. Not that I know of. The Baltic states adopted it, and they have been in massive trouble as a result, since their economy was devasted by the housing crisis and tax revenues have plummeted.

I don't think it has been a disaster in Russia. Tax revenues jumped from where they had been and leveled off after a year or two, but as I said, everybody with money in Russia had previously been evading taxes (just like the Greeks for that matter). In the U.S. it is a pretty small number of people who evade taxes, so the disadvantages of a flat tax would far outweight the benefits. Or at least that's the way it seems to me. The numbers just don't seem to add up.

[vanitybinge]

Is it just a disaster in Russia (Which is a disaster of a country in itself) or all the countries that adopted it? Has Greece adopted this system?

In the U.S. it is a pretty small number of people who evade taxes, so the disadvantages of a flat tax would far outweight the benefits. Or at least that's the way it seems to me. The numbers just don't seem to add up.

I don't think it's as much, infact I'm sure it's not nearly as much about getting Evader Ed to pay his taxes with a simple color in the lines tax form as much as it is about making the system simpler to understand by making it less complex to begin with. A flat tax rate may or may not be the answer, but with simplicity as the goal we will ultimately see a system that collects a FAIR amount to build streetlights and armor troops and then gives it back to the people who payed it. If I pay out $5k in taxes for example, I should get all $5k back next year!

The fact that you can send the same form to forty different agents and get back forty different results is just not kosher.

I don't have the solution, but if I were in the position, I would give Forbe$' idea serious consideration, and if it doesn't add up, fine, but I'll say it again, I should get back what I payed out.

[thejuggernaut]

Flat tax then eliminate tax shelters over a certain bracket.

Impose a goods and services tax on everything except for real food, housing and clothing.

Either cut welfare, or make them EARN the welfare which would drive away a large number of illegals.

[vanitybinge]

Flat tax then eliminate tax shelters over a certain bracket.

Impose a goods and services tax on everything except for real food, housing and clothing.

Either cut welfare, or make them EARN the welfare which would drive away a large number of illegals.

Is that how they do it in the woods of Canadia? How is it up there? Are you setting fires like the Greeks? or is everyone enjoying a fair and fruitful system that gives back what the worker puts in?

[thejuggernaut]

Flat tax then eliminate tax shelters over a certain bracket.

Impose a goods and services tax on everything except for real food, housing and clothing.

Either cut welfare, or make them EARN the welfare which would drive away a large number of illegals.

Is that how they do it in the woods of Canadia? How is it up there? Are you setting fires like the Greeks? or is everyone enjoying a fair and fruitful system that gives back what the worker puts in?

The tax system is progressive, but there is a goods and services and they did crack down on immigration.

Now if only they can fix that progressive tax and do something about welfare, the economy would be even stronger than it is.

Quebec and BC are monsters of their own, but they serve their purpose as good siphon points.

[vanitybinge]

The tax system is progressive, but there is a goods and services and they did crack down on immigration.
/color]

Can you elaborate on the progressive part?

[thejuggernaut]

The tax system is progressive, but there is a goods and services and they did crack down on immigration.
/color]

Can you elaborate on the progressive part?

??

[vanitybinge]

What I mean is, what's progressive about it and how does it differ from ours?

[thejuggernaut]

What I mean is, what's progressive about it and how does it differ from ours?

Federal >

* 15% on the first $40,970 of taxable income, +
* 22% on the next $40,971 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $40,970 and $81,941), +
* 26% on the next $45,080 of taxable income (on the portion of taxable income between $81,941 and $127,021), +
* 29% of taxable income over $127,021.

Provincial >

Provinces / Territories Rate(s)

Newfoundland and Labrador
7.7% on the first $31,278 of taxable income, +
12.8% on the next $31,278, +
15.5% on the amount over $62,556


Prince Edward Island
9.8% on the first $31,984 of taxable income, +
13.8% on the next $31,985, +
16.7% on the amount over $63,969

Nova Scotia
8.79% on the first $29,590 of taxable income, +
14.95% on the next $29,590, +
16.67% on the next $33,820 +
17.5% on the amount over $93,000

New Brunswick
9.3% on the first $36,421 of taxable income, +
12.5% on the next $36,422, +
13.3% on the next $45,584, +
14.3% on the amount over $118,427

Quebec Contact Revenu Québec

Ontario
5.05% on the first $37,106 of taxable income, +
9.15% on the next $37,108, +
11.16% on the amount over $74,214

Manitoba
10.8% on the first $31,000 of taxable income, +
12.75% on the next $36,000, +
17.4% on the amount over $67,000

Saskatchewan
11% on the first $40,354 of taxable income, +
13% on the next $74,943, +
15% on the amount over $115,297

Alberta
10% of taxable income

British Columbia
5.06% on the first $35,859 of taxable income, +
7.7% on the next $35,860, +
10.5% on the next $10,623, +
12.29% on the next $17,645, +
14.7% on the amount over $99,987

Yukon
7.04% on the first $40,970 of taxable income, +
9.68% on the next $40,971, +
11.44% on the next $45,080, +
12.76% on the amount over $127,021

Northwest Territories
5.9% on the first $37,106 of taxable income, +
8.6% on the next $37,108, +
12.2% on the next $46,442, +
14.05% on the amount over $120,656

Nunavut
4% on the first $39,065 of taxable income, +
7% on the next $39,065, +
9% on the next $48,891, +
11.5% on the amount over $127,021

[vanitybinge]

That seems a bit low compared to our rates, is it true the sales tax is a rape?

[thejuggernaut]

That seems a bit low compared to our rates, is it true the sales tax is a rape?

You have a higher top rate but ours kicks in lower.

Sales tax, it depends, obviously.

However, there is a federal tax called GST (Goods and Services Tax) which I DO agree with.

I'd like to see the income tax lowered and made flat, and jack up the GST - taxed less on what you earn, more on what you do with it.

[absolutely fabulous]

For shits and giggles, I had two different people prepare my taxes last quarter...both numbers were INSANELY different yet they both had the same information to work off of...and the IRS said that both were correct. Does anyone else see a problem with that?

what?? you submitted two forms?
i might be paranoid, but prepared to be audited in the next few years.

[absolutely fabulous]

But I also mentioned crooks too. Crooks and bottom feeders are one in the same really, they want something for nothing. But the people who work hard, work smart, and do things honestly should keep what they've earned.

In a perfect world I would agree with you, but super-low taxes like the U.S. has right now is a recipe for 400 billion dollar deficits even in good economic times, because you can't cut spending enough to make up the difference.

but, inevitable, you have to cut government spending,
which is not happening.

[EvilMadman]

But I also mentioned crooks too. Crooks and bottom feeders are one in the same really, they want something for nothing. But the people who work hard, work smart, and do things honestly should keep what they've earned.

In a perfect world I would agree with you, but super-low taxes like the U.S. has right now is a recipe for 400 billion dollar deficits even in good economic times, because you can't cut spending enough to make up the difference.

but, inevitable, you have to cut government spending,
which is not happening.

No, Ugmo. Raising taxes won't help the deficits or the budget problems, EVER! Because no matter how much revenue the government brings in, it will go right back out just as fast as received, if the spending levels remain static or should increase (as it most surely will increase).

A friend on MySpace sent me this list...

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
Capital Gains Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel permit tax
Gasoline Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax Interest expense (tax on the money)
Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Local Income Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Septic Permit Tax
Service Charge Taxes
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)
Sales Taxes
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Road Toll Booth Taxes
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone federal excise tax
Telephone federal universal service fee tax
Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes
Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax
Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax
Telephone state and local tax
Telephone usage charge tax
Toll Bridge Taxes
Toll Tunnel Taxes
Trailer Registration Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

Insanity!

And they left out the AMT, and probably a lot others.

None one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and the nation was prosperous, had no national debt, and a secure middle class.

Government can't possibly tax us much more then it already does. They will eventually have to find a way to cut spending, or risk ending up like Greece/Eurozone nations.

If government spending was the way to wealth, the Soviet Union would have won the Cold War. -Steve Forbes

[vanitybinge]

A hundred years ago we had no Federal Reserve. That bitch was designed to put us in eternal debt, it has nothing to do with the taxes. Until the Fed is gone, we will always be in debt. Fact.

[MasterOfMeatPuppets]

No, Ugmo. Raising taxes won't help the deficits or the budget problems, EVER! Because no matter how much revenue the government brings in, it will go right back out just as fast as received, if the spending levels remain static or should increase (as it most surely will increase).

A friend on MySpace sent me this list...

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
Capital Gains Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel permit tax
Gasoline Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax Interest expense (tax on the money)
Inventory tax IRS Interest Charges (tax on top of tax)
IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Local Income Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Septic Permit Tax
Service Charge Taxes
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)
Sales Taxes
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Road Toll Booth Taxes
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone federal excise tax
Telephone federal universal service fee tax
Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes
Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax
Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax
Telephone state and local tax
Telephone usage charge tax
Toll Bridge Taxes
Toll Tunnel Taxes
Trailer Registration Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

Insanity!

And they left out the AMT, and probably a lot others.

None one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, and the nation was prosperous, had no national debt, and a secure middle class.

Government can't possibly tax us much more then it already does. They will eventually have to find a way to cut spending, or risk ending up like Greece/Eurozone nations.

If government spending was the way to wealth, the Soviet Union would have won the Cold War. -Steve Forbes

The national debt on 07/01/1910 was $2,652,665,838.04, the 16th Amendment, which introduced a national income tax was ratified in 1913 and many of those taxes on your list are state and local administrative fees.

[PoisondOne]

For shits and giggles, I had two different people prepare my taxes last quarter...both numbers were INSANELY different yet they both had the same information to work off of...and the IRS said that both were correct. Does anyone else see a problem with that?

what?? you submitted two forms?
i might be paranoid, but prepared to be audited in the next few years.

No, I didn't submit two forms...I actually took them to someone who works for the IRS and asked which one was correct since they were drastically different. I questioned the first one I had done, so I went elsewhere to have someone else look at the numbers because something didn't seem right (in fact, I knew it wasn't). The problem was the IRS employee told me that both were correct and both numbers worked out fine. Of course, I sent in the one that favored ME the most

If that doesn't tell anyone our tax code is too long to be fully understood, I don't know what does. Seriously, businesses and individuals spend more time figuring out how to comply with tax codes than we should have to each year. The system is bloated and is too complex as it is (like most things the government has a hand in). It really needs to be reworked so that EVERYONE can understand it.

If I understood Forbes correctly, he said that a lot of our revenue issues stem from the loopholes that allow the wealthiest corporations (and their respective upper echelon employees) to skirt paying many taxes that the US relies on for revenue...if we instill a flat tax/progressive tax and nix the loopholes, the US will be in fine form in no time financially. The US may not have many people who actually evade taxes in the truest form, but we do have many wealthy folks who are able to jump through hoops to get out of paying their fair share back into the system...