• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

The tax rate on the rich is not the problem, it's the loopholes

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,890
638
126
You shouldn't have to, I agree. That's money that's just going towards Obamabucks for the poor/disabled/old and useless anyway. What have they provided for the economy? Government and the 47% of the population they support are the problem.
You must be young. Only the young view the world around them as you do. I know, because I was once young too.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Closing tax code loopholes won't be the silver bullet that will single handily cure all the deficit woes outright, so it is not worth bothering with.
Think of the straw that broke the camel's back.

Each loophole is a little straw.
Each unneeded governmetn position thta is a support only to a fiefdom is a straw.
Each "pork" program is a straw.
Lests pick up all the straw and then see what is next.

At present, the government is not even looking at the low hanging fruit to get started because they are afraid that such might snowball into hard choices.
 

QuantumPion

Diamond Member
Jun 27, 2005
6,010
1
76
Taxes are only "punishing success" if you believe that paying for the privilege to live in the best country on Earth is a punishment.
Wait...living in America is a privilege [sic] now? So the declaration of independence and the constitution are out the window? We're back to paying tribute to the King for the privilege [sic] of living under this benevolent rule? :rolleyes:
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
19,275
2,100
126
Again, trying to excuse the inexcusable. You aren't ever going to be in a position to benefit from this sort of thing, so why fool yourself into thinking otherwise?

Adultery isn't illegal, yet I doubt you'd sit there saying "women aren't paid to review the laws" if she cheated on you.
I am curious to know what 'loopholes' the rich benefit from that you cannot? I would also point out that there are many 'loopholes' for the middle class that are phased out so the 'rich' are unable to take advantage of them

On a side note I am personally shocked that a bunch of rich men who depend on donations from other rich men/organizations to retain power would concoct legislation that, in some way, might lessen the tax burden of rich men/rich organizations. Shocked I tell you.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
I am curious to know what 'loopholes' the rich benefit from that you cannot? I would also point out that there are many 'loopholes' for the middle class that are phased out so the 'rich' are unable to take advantage of them

On a side note I am personally shocked that a bunch of rich men who depend on donations from other rich men/organizations to retain power would concoct legislation that, in some way, might lessen the tax burden of rich men/rich organizations. Shocked I tell you.
He is unable to structure his income such that those "loopholes" do not help.

Apparently, he has no income from capital gains or municipal bonds or federal bonds.
No real estate investments

No student loans
Has not been in college for a few years or have any family members in college

No money put aside for medical bills

No retirement money being put aside.

Does not have the ability to start a business.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
27,783
9,944
136
Closing tax code loopholes won't be the silver bullet that will single handily cure all the deficit woes outright, so it is not worth bothering with.
You shouldn't have to, I agree. That's money that's just going towards Obamabucks for the poor/disabled/old and useless anyway. What have they provided for the economy? Government and the 47% of the population they support are the problem.
Double points for trolling the conservatives with their own bullshit. :thumbsup:
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,212
126
The problem isn't the tax rate on the rich. They don't have enough to make a significant difference. The real issue is that we need more people working and getting good wages. Neither party has addressed or even seriously brings up the root causes and potential solutions to those.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Taxes for 100K decent paying jobs created each month will more than offset the one time rape of 1000 people.

Then cut spending 5 percent every year for 3 years - across the board.
The first year is easy.
The second year requires some thought and catches the leftovers from Year 1
The third year requires proper evaluation.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,599
17
81
The problem isn't the tax rate on the rich. They don't have enough to make a significant difference. The real issue is that we need more people working and getting good wages. Neither party has addressed or even seriously brings up the root causes and potential solutions to those.
That was something I ran across recently too: The employment rate. You could have low unemployment, but also have relatively few people working. And our employment rate certainly isn't very good.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,212
126
That was something I ran across recently too: The employment rate. You could have low unemployment, but also have relatively few people working. And our employment rate certainly isn't very good.
Nor is compensation. The median income is falling even if there are jobs. I mean it's great to hire ten people back who lost jobs, but if they were making 60k before and half that or less now I don't see much reason to brag about it. Of course that cuts revenues and we have shortfalls. The Reps say that's good, the Dems want to ignore the real concerns and attack the rich which won't mean a damn thing to the underemployed unless we're going to fund yet another program to not raise those wages.

Oh well, dumb is as dumb does.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
I'm still looking for a list of loopholes (not intentional tax code). OP? Anyone?
There is nothing that is classified/labeled as a loophole.

There are accidental flaws in the implementation of the tax code as written by congress.

A loophole example in this respect is that you can commute as far as you need for an educational class. The class can be 300 miles away and the mileage to/from is deductible. A local school may also have the same class 10 miles away; but you are not required to attend it.

Also, the straight line distance is not required for expenses. You can drive an extra 50 miles to avoid a $10 toll. the extra 50 miles can be worth $25 off your taxable income the toll which is only $10 off the taxable income

Both of the above examples could be considered loopholes in the tax code.
They fly in the face of common sense, but they are both legit.
 

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
41,500
4,279
136
Seems more like a PITA to use/claim. Nothing that I can use to retire early and "cheat" the govt out of my $$?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Seems more like a PITA to use/claim. Nothing that I can use to retire early and "cheat" the govt out of my $$?
Create a business outside of the US jurisdiction. Have it due business with your own US corporation.

Funnel the income from the US corp to the offshore corp.
 

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
19,275
2,100
126
Seems more like a PITA to use/claim. Nothing that I can use to retire early and "cheat" the govt out of my $$?
You are thinking too small. Distance from Alaska to Chile is about 19,500 miles. Move to Alaska and attend class in Chile. Lets assume 500 miles a day which makes it out to be 39 days to get to class. So you could drive back and forth to class 8 times a year. 156,000 miles has to be quite a deduction!
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
699
126
The problem isn't the tax rate on the rich. They don't have enough to make a significant difference. The real issue is that we need more people working and getting good wages. Neither party has addressed or even seriously brings up the root causes and potential solutions to those.
Ding...ding....ding....ding.

Don't worry about importing everything, the service jobs left behind will be just fine. We promise. /crosses_fingers_behind_back.

:colbert::whiste:
 

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
41,500
4,279
136
You are thinking too small. Distance from Alaska to Chile is about 19,500 miles. Move to Alaska and attend class in Chile. Lets assume 500 miles a day which makes it out to be 39 days to get to class. So you could drive back and forth to class 8 times a year. 156,000 miles has to be quite a deduction!
I'm going with this. I'll be retired in no time. WOOT for loopholes.:rolleyes:
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Wait, hold on.

If a tax accountant does something, it's not their fault? How does that work?

If they aren't responsible for doing these things, why is it that they're getting paid for it?
How is it not their fault?

Tax law has a ton of penalties and requirements for professional (tax return) preparers. E.g., in applying tax law to our clients' situations we are mandated to follow a 'list' of authority, meaning we have to apply tax law the way that authority tells. (Authority means, court cases, the law itself, IRS regulations etc in that order.)

So, if the court says we have to treat Carried Interest as 15% LTCG, even if we personally disagree, we HAVE to do it.

I.e., we are prohibited by law from just 'doing it our way'. Moreover, and I think this s/b obvious but your post implies you are unaware of it, a "profession" means being aware of, understanding and following a standardized set of professional guidelines. In the case of tax law, unlike GAAP, these standards are NOT set by accountants. To suggest that it's somehow accountants' fault for following rules mandated to us by the courts or Congress is wrong.

And here we go, people trying to excuse the inexcusable, and compare widely-advertised schemes setup for normal people to take advantage of, with the actions of well-trained accountants scouring the fine print of tax laws.
You're damned right we scour the fine print (and a whole lot more) of tax laws. Doing anything less is unprofessional and could result in grave penalties for us.

Heck, the IRS itself WANTS us to know these rules in detail. They want everybody on the same page treating everything the same way. In the past decade or so they have changed their approach to that of trying to make sure as many as possible understand the law. Their approach now is, as they themselves say, "people want to comply, but have trouble because it's too complicated" instead of the former "people are trying to cheat".

Fern
 
Last edited:

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
I'm still looking for a list of loopholes (not intentional tax code). OP? Anyone?
I'd say the Carried Interest provision is one of the most obvious loopholes. It was certainly never intended by Congress to be applied the way it is now, but the courts have interpreted it that way and we are stuck with it until Congress can find/agree upon a fix.

Almost everything mentioned in P&N as a loophole is actually an intentional benefit passed by Congress for some economic incentive etc.

I think it should be noted in any discussion of loopholes that 'gray areas' are different, not the same thing at all. Gray areas are becoming more and more prevalent over the past decade or two because the law has become increasingly more complex. The result has been that the IRS is declining their role of providing guidance on how to comply. They are refusing to issue Regulations and are and simply saying that will take cases on a "facts and circumstances" basis. This leaves huge gray areas that will only be more defined as the IRS takes people to court and we get a resolution, but that takes forever. It is a veeery slow process.

We have a real mess on our hands as it stands now.

Fern
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
You are thinking too small. Distance from Alaska to Chile is about 19,500 miles. Move to Alaska and attend class in Chile. Lets assume 500 miles a day which makes it out to be 39 days to get to class. So you could drive back and forth to class 8 times a year. 156,000 miles has to be quite a deduction!
I'm going with this. I'll be retired in no time. WOOT for loopholes.:rolleyes:
This school in Chile has to be on the approved list of schools.

You might be better living in Barrow Alaska and driving to University of Miami.:cool:
UofM is on the approved list. :thumbsup:

You will have to itemize though. 1040/Schedule A/Form 2106.
 

zephyrprime

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,505
1
81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophitia
You shouldn't have to, I agree. That's money that's just going towards Obamabucks for the poor/disabled/old and useless anyway. What have they provided for the economy? Government and the 47% of the population they support are the problem.
You must be young. Only the young view the world around them as you do. I know, because I was once young too.
That's not what my experience has been. My experience is the young tend to be liberal and the old conservative. Viewpoints like Sophita come primarily from the old in my experience.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY