So you make over $250.000 per year

[KMFJD]

The tax increase is not the answer, They need to cut spending and taxes. Otherwise its not going to work

You are damn right, the first thing you do when you try to pay of your debt is to decrease your income! Math Bitches!

 

[Jaskalas]

His profits last year were about $270.000. Under the new tax laws his take home would be about $75.000 a year.

Wouldn't the higher taxes only apply to the portion of his income above $250,000? Let's say the rate IS 72%. That's 72% of everything above 250k. Not the whole $250k.

I'm curious so please help me out if I'm wrong here.

 

[sze5003]

Wouldn't the higher taxes only apply to the portion of his income above $250,000? Let's say the rate IS 72%. That's 72% of everything above 250k. Not the whole $250k.

I'm curious so please help me out if I'm wrong here.

I think it's higher taxes on those making 250k and up. Unless it is like you say then each would be taxed differently.

 

[echo4747]

Not to argue the point whether income taxes for those earning over 250k should be raised or not. Since a large portion of those earning 250k+ are probably small business owners, don't you just think they will pass these costs of their goods/services on to the customer. So in effect people of all income brackets will be paying for increased income taxes

 

[Pens1566]

Wouldn't the higher taxes only apply to the portion of his income above $250,000? Let's say the rate IS 72%. That's 72% of everything above 250k. Not the whole $250k.

I'm curious so please help me out if I'm wrong here.

Yes. The 39% is only applied to the amount of income above a certain level.

 

[Incorruptible]

Not to argue the point whether income taxes for those earning over 250k should be raised or not. Since a large portion of those earning 250k+ are probably small business owners, don't you just think they will pass these costs of their goods/services on to the customer. So in effect people of all income brackets will be paying for increased income taxes

Thats exactly what will happen, they will just pass it on to customers

 

[echo4747]

Thats exactly what will happen, they will just pass it on to customers

Not only that .. but.. you will be paying even more if you live in a state that has a sales tax

 

[Incorruptible]

Not only that .. but.. you will be paying even more if you live in a state that has a sales tax

Tell that to the idiots who support the tax

 

[shira]

Not to argue the point whether income taxes for those earning over 250k should be raised or not. Since a large portion of those earning 250k+ are probably small business owners, don't you just think they will pass these costs of their goods/services on to the customer. So in effect people of all income brackets will be paying for increased income taxes

Thats exactly what will happen, they will just pass it on to customers

Well, no.

A tax increase on income over $250,000 is not a "higher cost." The business owner's taxable income will remain the same. He can, of course, CHOOSE to increase his charge to customers by an amount that will increase his income to make up the difference. But you're forgetting that there are other, non-rich business owners out there competing with this one. The taxes of these other owners will NOT go up. Presumably, these other owner will keep their charges unchanged. So, if the "rich" business owner tries to increase his fees, he'll lose customers.

What will most likely happen is that that the rich business owner will hold the line on his charges to retain his customers, and he (and not his customers) will pay the increased tax.

 

[JTsyo]

I don't understand why the GOP has made the top end tax rate such an issue. Is that really something they can find support for? It seems to be a weird issue, which would only effect a few percent of voters, to make a stand on. It feels like there's something else behind it. Also are Republicans truly against it on principal or are they just following the party line?

 

[superccs]

I can make up facts out of hearsay and propaganda as well, how easy. My neighbor is a liberal scumbag and told me that Obama is going to legalize pot tomorrow and make it illegal to be stupid.

 

[Incorruptible]

I don't understand why the GOP has made the top end tax rate such an issue. Is that really something they can find support for? It seems to be a weird issue, which would only effect a few percent of voters, to make a stand on. It feels like there's something else behind it. Also are Republicans truly against it on principal or are they just following the party line?

There should be NO tax increases at all. We have a spending problem, why is it all these politicians want more spending but never cuts?

Raising taxes wont solve the root issue which is the spending

 

[echo4747]

Well, no.

A tax increase on income over $250,000 is not a "higher cost." The business owner's taxable income will remain the same. He can, of course, CHOOSE to increase his charge to customers by an amount that will increase his income to make up the difference. But you're forgetting that there are other, non-rich business owners out there competing with this one. The taxes of these other owners will NOT go up. Presumably, these other owner will keep their charges unchanged. So, if the "rich" business owner tries to increase his fees, he'll lose customers.

What will most likely happen is that that the rich business owner will hold the line on his charges to retain his customers, and he (and not his customers) will pay the increased tax.

I think some of what you say will happen... but not very much... I am willing to bet that the cost of raw materials/goods/services is going up (and up more than the cost of inflation)

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Not to argue the point whether income taxes for those earning over 250k should be raised or not. Since a large portion of those earning 250k+ are probably small business owners, don't you just think they will pass these costs of their goods/services on to the customer. So in effect people of all income brackets will be paying for increased income taxes

Not necessarily. They may end up having to actually <gasp> be a little less rich. If a couple businesses in a given field raise their prices for the purpose of obtaining higher profit margins, there's nothing to prevent a competitor from maintaining lower prices while increasing volume to earn a larger total aggregate profit.

 

[Ausm]

Ok when Obama eliminates the bush tax cuts and goes after people that make over $250.000 and with the new proposition in California that taxes people that make over $250.000 a year most are at a effective rate of 72% for taxes...

I know a guy that owns a heating and air company. Has 15 people working for him but often puts in 16 hour days to keep costs down. His profits last year were about $270.000. Under the new tax laws his take home would be about $75.000 a year. He just told me. A whole bunch of stuff but honestly some well paid professionals are going to be out of work.

LOLwuuut???

 

[1prophet]

Not to argue the point whether income taxes for those earning over 250k should be raised or not. Since a large portion of those earning 250k+ are probably small business owners, don't you just think they will pass these costs of their goods/services on to the customer. So in effect people of all income brackets will be paying for increased income taxes

Up to a point, then an underground, off the books economy can spring up making legitimate business people struggle even more.

 

[boomerang]

Well, no.

A tax increase on income over $250,000 is not a "higher cost." The business owner's taxable income will remain the same. He can, of course, CHOOSE to increase his charge to customers by an amount that will increase his income to make up the difference. But you're forgetting that there are other, non-rich business owners out there competing with this one. The taxes of these other owners will NOT go up. Presumably, these other owner will keep their charges unchanged. So, if the "rich" business owner tries to increase his fees, he'll lose customers.

What will most likely happen is that that the rich business owner will hold the line on his charges to retain his customers, and he (and not his customers) will pay the increased tax.

Geithner is rumored to be leaving his post. You should throw your name into the ring for the job because you'd bring a level of genius to the position that has been absent for the last four years. Or try for Bernanke's job.

 

[echo4747]

Whats the problem with just letting all the Bush tax rates expire (not just households over 250k/yr) at the end of the year? it would bring in more revenue that could be used to directly paydown national debt.

 

[Ausm]

Whats the problem with just letting all the Bush tax rates expire (not just households over 250k/yr) at the end of the year? it would bring in more revenue that could be used to directly paydown national debt.

It's called Grover Norquist, for some reason the Rightist genuflect to this scumbag.

 

[fskimospy]

Ok when Obama eliminates the bush tax cuts and goes after people that make over $250.000 and with the new proposition in California that taxes people that make over $250.000 a year most are at a effective rate of 72% for taxes...

I know a guy that owns a heating and air company. Has 15 people working for him but often puts in 16 hour days to keep costs down. His profits last year were about $270.000. Under the new tax laws his take home would be about $75.000 a year. He just told me. A whole bunch of stuff but honestly some well paid professionals are going to be out of work.

This doesn't make any sense. First of all if he's paying 72% in taxes as a small business owner he really needs to hire a better accountant.

Secondly, his decision to put people out of work is utterly nonsensical. These taxes are on his PROFITS, not his REVENUES. Pay for employees is not counted in profits, therefore hiring or firing them based on the percentage of his profits that the government is taxing makes no sense. If an employee makes you $20,000 in profit per year, would you eliminate his position if he only made you $18,000 next year? Why would you forego $18,000 just because you couldn't have $2,000?

Employees should be hired or fired depending on if their work is net profitable or not, not on what the taxes on those profits might be later. If he's laying people off based on income taxes, he's a bad businessman.

 

[redgtxdi]

Not necessarily. They may end up having to actually <gasp> be a little less rich. If a couple businesses in a given field raise their prices for the purpose of obtaining higher profit margins, there's nothing to prevent a competitor from maintaining lower prices while increasing volume to earn a larger total aggregate profit.

Easier said than done. Today's small business market is already working at razor thin margins. In my line of work, our distribution costs have gone up about 5% in the last decade. Higher insurance, workers comp, and logistic costs have shrunk margins even more, all the while margins were being dropped to compensate for an increasingly competitive market.

Combine that with the fact that small business owners typically reach into their pockets to compensate for low profit/loss years to keep the biz rolling and it's not all as rosy as one might think being a "rich" business owner.

😉

 

[soundforbjt]

Easier said than done. Today's small business market is already working at razor thin margins. In my line of work, our distribution costs have gone up about 5% in the last decade. Higher insurance, workers comp, and logistic costs have shrunk margins even more, all the while margins were being dropped to compensate for an increasingly competitive market.

Combine that with the fact that small business owners typically reach into their pockets to compensate for low profit/loss years to keep the biz rolling and it's not all as rosy as one might think being a "rich" business owner.

😉

That may be true with some small businesses and it's been like that almost forever.

Remember the Koch brothers are legally a "small" business. Should they be getting the "breaks" small businesses are allowed, even though they're only a small business by one definition and not by size?

 

[1prophet]

That may be true with some small businesses and it's been like that almost forever.

Remember the Koch brothers are legally a "small" business. Should they be getting the "breaks" small businesses are allowed, even though they're only a small business by one definition and not by size?

Using Koch brother abuse to deny other small businesses is no different than punishing everyone on welfare because of the few that game the system.

 

[hal2kilo]

LOLwuuut???

Talk about tax to Republicans and all of the sudden they can't do math and understand marginal rates.

I think it's a pavlovian response.

 

[Attic]

I don't understand why the GOP has made the top end tax rate such an issue. Is that really something they can find support for? It seems to be a weird issue, which would only effect a few percent of voters, to make a stand on. It feels like there's something else behind it. Also are Republicans truly against it on principal or are they just following the party line?

They'll have to rethink their stance there, it certainly held them back from finding support from independants as well as moderate liberals. Stubborness and lack of clarity cost Repubs this election cycle. The conservative message is about oppurtunity and freedom, same as libs, there is a difference of opinion on how to get there that gets overshadowed by politics. The message needs to be refocused on opportunity through fiscal conservatism. Folks need to earn more period, how to achieve that is not through a proxy comprised of a convoluted tax system and kickbacks, it's through incentivising higher pay for lower and middle class.

Further on taxes, there was a Democrat politician from Illonois who proposed new tax brackets, i'm surprised this method to increase revenue has not been more disussed as we enter into fiscal cliff and debt related discussions surroud revenue inceases and spending cuts. The top one percent earn an average of over 1.2 million a year, yet the top tax bracket kicks in at 370k. The top one percent gains protection from tax increases as a result of the highest tax bracket affecting many more people than whom the top one percent represent.