CADsortaGUY
Lifer
No you are wrong. That money doesn't "only" go to the "rich". And yes THAT(ten cent argument) is Bush's tax-cut - look at the changes in the tax ratesOriginally posted by: rchiu
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
<sigh> Did I just tell you that the "rich" will get a bigger amount...BECAUSE THEY PAY A BIGGER AMOUNT! It's a pretty simple concept to grasp....or atleast I thought it was
Well, the inheritance tax helps because it is essentially it taxes the transfer of money that doesn't represent a transaction.
The divident tax is basically a double tax.
CkG
<Double Sigh> If you give 10 cents back for every dollar any tax payer pays, yes then rich get a bigger amount because they pay bigger amount propotionally. But is that Bush's tax cut? Bush tax cut gives money back to stock holders and people with rich relatives. Those money only goes to the higher income group so it is not evently distributed. Is it that hard a concept to grasp?
You earn money - you invest in a company(take ownership shares) - the company makes profit and is taxed on that profit - you(invester/owner) gets a dividend and are again taxed. So you got taxed as a company "owner/investor" and you get taxed when you get paid a return on that investment.And no the dividend tax is not double taxation. A corporation is a totally seperate legal entity from the stock holders so what is wrong with taxing two totally seperate entities? Plus dividend is not always related to profit, so how is taxing profit equals to taxing dividend?
Huh? /me looks at thread title...then back at your statement....Even if dividend tax is double taxation, so how does reducing dividend tax help the economy and if it is the best thing to do right now in this economy? Again the debate here is not about if the tax cut was the reasonable thing to do but if it benefits the economy.
The dividend reduction will spur more investment - thus giving capital for businesses to grow and employ more people.
So I'll see your "double sigh" and raise it a "triple-dog sigh"
CkG