Upper-Income Taxpayers Look for Ways to Sidestep Obama Tax-Hike Plan

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
http://abcnews.go.com/Business...tory?id=6975547&page=1

President Barack Obama's tax proposal ? which promises to increase taxes for those families with incomes of $250,000 or more -- has some Americans brainstorming ways to decrease their pay, even if it's just by a dollar.

A 63-year-old attorney based in Lafayette, La., who asked not to be named, told ABCNews.com that she plans to cut back on her business to get her annual income under the quarter million mark should the Obama tax plan be passed by Congress and become law.

So far, Obama's tax plan is being looked at skeptically by both Democrats and Republicans and therefore may not pass at all.

"We are going to try to figure out how to make our income $249,999.00," she said.

"We have to find a way out where we can make just what we need to just under the line so we can benefit from Obama's tax plan," she added. "Why kill yourself working if you're going to give it all away to people who aren't working as hard?"

The attorney says that in order to decrease her income she'll have to let go of clients, some of whom she's been counseling for more than a decade.

"This means I'll have to tell some of my clients we can't help them and being more selective in general about who we help," she said. "I hate to do it."

Obama's budget proposal calls for $989 billion in new taxes over the next 10 years, most of which will be earned from increased taxes on individuals who make more than $200,000 and from families who make more than $250,000.
The expiration of the Bush administration's tax cuts at the end of 2010 would garner an estimated $338 billion, $179 billion would come from the elimination of some itemized deductions for higher-income taxpayers and $118 billion would be brought in from a hike in the capital gains tax. The remaining $353 billion would come from taxes on businesses.

Dr. Sharon Poczatek, who runs her own dental practice in Boulder, Colo., said that she too is trying to figure out ways to get out of paying the taxes proposed in Obama's plan.

"I've put thought into how to get under $250,000," said Poczatek. "It would mean working fewer days which means having fewer employees, seeing fewer patients and taking time off."

"Generally it means being less productive," she said.

"The motivation for a lot of people like me ? dentists, entrepreneurs, lawyers ? is that the more you work the more money you make," said Poczatek. "But if I'm going to be working just to give it back to the government -- it's de-motivating and demoralizing."

Gary Schatsky, a financial adviser and the president of N.Y.-based Objectiveadvice.com, said that it is possible to successfully remove yourself from the bracket Obama plans to target in his new plan.

"It's very possible that there are plenty of things you can do with general tax planning techniques ? attempting to recognizes loses, pushing gains to years when your income is lower and increasing retirement plan contributions ? to come below $250,000," said Schatsky.

"If the value of all your itemized deductions goes from a 33 percent level to a 28 percent level than there would be a reason for people to do dramatic things to reduce their incomes," said Schatsky.

But Colorado dentist Poczatek says those who support the increase in taxes misunderstand what it means for those who will end up paying more.

"I'd like these people to know that we pay a lot of taxes, and have been paying a lot of taxes through the past administration," said Pcozatek.

"We make a lot of money, it's true, but we also already pay a lot of taxes," she said.

"So maybe we got a little bit successful but we worked very hard," she said. "It's taken us over 30 years and it didn't happen overnight. Every day is a lot of work.

"We're working for it and we're still overtaxed."



Welcome to the new USA: Where hard work only matters to a limit and it makes more sense to work less and/or have a spouse quit work than it does to be a 'maker of things'. Instead you can be a maker of less things.

I know numerous 2 income families in this ballpark. They're certainly preparing for the class war Zero has declared.

Good for these people; they are preserving the American dream.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Normally if you enter a new tax tier you only pay the higher taxes on the money above that tier. Is this different? I believe people do pay cap gains tax on their highest tier, so there are some scant few cases in which it truly does make sense to decrease income, but they are rare exceptions. My guess is this story has managed to find somebody just enough on the fence that it may make sense for them to make less money.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
My wife is quitting at the end of March. The expected tax hikes is one of the reasons why. I can do just as well, given the tax credits, removal from AMT and recouping deductions from making less overall household income.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Normally if you enter a new tax tier you only pay the higher taxes on the money above that tier. Is this different? I believe people do pay cap gains tax on their highest tier, so there are some scant few cases in which it truly does make sense to decrease income, but they are rare exceptions. My guess is this story has managed to find somebody just enough on the fence that it may make sense for them to make less money.

Generally that is true, but there is still the effect of scale. To what end am I rewarded if I earn more if I have to pay more to the government. Additionally, part of the tax increase that Obama supports is a result of losing mortgage and charitable deduction for large income earners. Their effective tax rate will skyrocket from a result of losing those deductions.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Normally if you enter a new tax tier you only pay the higher taxes on the money above that tier. Is this different? I believe people do pay cap gains tax on their highest tier, so there are some scant few cases in which it truly does make sense to decrease income, but they are rare exceptions. My guess is this story has managed to find somebody just enough on the fence that it may make sense for them to make less money.

Generally that is true, but there is still the effect of scale. To what end am I rewarded if I earn more if I have to pay more to the government. Additionally, part of the tax increase that Obama supports is a result of losing mortgage and charitable deduction for large income earners. Their effective tax rate will skyrocket from a result of losing those deductions.

I was under the impression AMT would already hit these people and those deductions arent applicable anyways?
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: dullard
Those people don't understand taxes or math.

It's more than just math, it's the intricacies of the tax code. It's the loss of deductions, it's the AMT, it's the loss of credits. Now they want to increase the rate. Even if it's psychological, the effect is people don't see a point to making more money.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: dullard
Those people don't understand taxes or math.

It's more than just math, it's the intricacies of the tax code. It's the loss of deductions, it's the AMT, it's the loss of credits. Now they want to increase the rate. Even if it's psychological, the effect is people don't see a point to making more money.

Don't forget adding 12.4% FICA to this.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Normally if you enter a new tax tier you only pay the higher taxes on the money above that tier. Is this different? I believe people do pay cap gains tax on their highest tier, so there are some scant few cases in which it truly does make sense to decrease income, but they are rare exceptions. My guess is this story has managed to find somebody just enough on the fence that it may make sense for them to make less money.

Generally that is true, but there is still the effect of scale. To what end am I rewarded if I earn more if I have to pay more to the government. Additionally, part of the tax increase that Obama supports is a result of losing mortgage and charitable deduction for large income earners. Their effective tax rate will skyrocket from a result of losing those deductions.

I was under the impression AMT would already hit these people and those deductions arent applicable anyways?

Currently, there is an overall deduction cap. However, Obama's plan, from what I've seen, wants to completely remove deductions for mortgage interest and severely reduce charitable contribution deduction allowances. Please correct me if I'm wrong (no sarcasm intended).
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Normally if you enter a new tax tier you only pay the higher taxes on the money above that tier. Is this different? I believe people do pay cap gains tax on their highest tier, so there are some scant few cases in which it truly does make sense to decrease income, but they are rare exceptions. My guess is this story has managed to find somebody just enough on the fence that it may make sense for them to make less money.

Correct but at some point people will simply not attempt to earn money that would put them in a higher marginal tax bracket. If the government is going to confiscate say 50% of every additional dollar one earns over a certain income point, why bother. An example only, but shows the reasoning behind this.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: dullard
Those people don't understand taxes or math.

It's more than just math, it's the intricacies of the tax code. It's the loss of deductions, it's the AMT, it's the loss of credits. Now they want to increase the rate. Even if it's psychological, the effect is people don't see a point to making more money.

Don't forget adding 12.4% FICA to this.

For self-employed only and up to $112000 in income. After that, you're only paying the medicare portion of 1.45%.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: ayabe
Man the crocodile tears are just so overwhelming.

No one's crying, just don't be surprised if the expectation of this tax plan isn't realized.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
You better believe it. The best thing financially I could do is get "divorced" since my wife has no income. Then I have to figure out is the best way to allocate the kids for tax credits. She can go on welfare, food stamps, etc. She could transfer all her student loans to her credit cards (probably buy some nice stuff for our new house too), then delcare bankruptcy.

Thanks Obama for providing me a bail out!
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: dullard
Those people don't understand taxes or math.

It's more than just math, it's the intricacies of the tax code. It's the loss of deductions, it's the AMT, it's the loss of credits. Now they want to increase the rate. Even if it's psychological, the effect is people don't see a point to making more money.

Don't forget adding 12.4% FICA to this.

For self-employed only and up to $112000 in income. After that, you're only paying the medicare portion of 1.45%.

Currently. But Obama talked about changing that in his campaign.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_31/news/28201-1.html

Obama proposes keeping the cap on Social Security taxes at its current $102,000 (which is adjusted each year for inflation), but then resuming the payroll tax on people making more than $250,000.

 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: winnar111
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: dullard
Those people don't understand taxes or math.

It's more than just math, it's the intricacies of the tax code. It's the loss of deductions, it's the AMT, it's the loss of credits. Now they want to increase the rate. Even if it's psychological, the effect is people don't see a point to making more money.

Don't forget adding 12.4% FICA to this.

For self-employed only and up to $112000 in income. After that, you're only paying the medicare portion of 1.45%.

Currently. But Obama talked about changing that in his campaign.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_31/news/28201-1.html

Obama proposes keeping the cap on Social Security taxes at its current $102,000 (which is adjusted each year for inflation), but then resuming the payroll tax on people making more than $250,000.

aahhhh, thanks. forgot about that.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Normally if you enter a new tax tier you only pay the higher taxes on the money above that tier. Is this different? I believe people do pay cap gains tax on their highest tier, so there are some scant few cases in which it truly does make sense to decrease income, but they are rare exceptions. My guess is this story has managed to find somebody just enough on the fence that it may make sense for them to make less money.

Generally that is true, but there is still the effect of scale. To what end am I rewarded if I earn more if I have to pay more to the government. Additionally, part of the tax increase that Obama supports is a result of losing mortgage and charitable deduction for large income earners. Their effective tax rate will skyrocket from a result of losing those deductions.

I was under the impression AMT would already hit these people and those deductions arent applicable anyways?

Currently, there is an overall deduction cap. However, Obama's plan, from what I've seen, wants to completely remove deductions for mortgage interest and severely reduce charitable contribution deduction allowances. Please correct me if I'm wrong (no sarcasm intended).

I can believe that was\is his intentions. I was under the impression the AMT did away with this anyways.
/shrug

 

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
Gee, a particular dollar amount is set for a tax increase and those that make that amount try to find a way to make a dollar under said amount....who would have seen this coming?

Hell, If I made 250,000 I would find every way possible to make 249,999 to....only a complete boob who loves paying higher taxes wouldn't.
 

ayabe

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2005
7,449
0
0
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: ayabe
Man the crocodile tears are just so overwhelming.

No one's crying, just don't be surprised if the expectation of this tax plan isn't realized.

There's a fundamental disconnect going on here, most people in this country would never consider quitting their job/or spouse or limiting their income on purpose because they couldn't afford to.

The top tax bracket is 35% which will go to 39% I believe under this plan, that works out to 10,000 a year more in taxes for a household making 250,000 a year. Sorry that's chump change for someone with that income.

So yeah if someone in this situation wants to have their spouse quit their 70,000+ a year job to save 10K in taxes, that's retarded. Yeah I'm just throwing numbers out there, but it makes no mathematical sense whatsoever.

Unless the spouse was working for peanuts, it makes ZERO sense.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Originally posted by: alchemize
You better believe it. The best thing financially I could do is get "divorced" since my wife has no income. Then I have to figure out is the best way to allocate the kids for tax credits. She can go on welfare, food stamps, etc. She could transfer all her student loans to her credit cards (probably buy some nice stuff for our new house too), then delcare bankruptcy.

Thanks Obama for providing me a bail out!

You're forgetting the human factor. When she declares bankruptcy she'll be smacked down for trying to get her student loans discharged. She probably wouldn't be approved for welfare because she's still being supported by you.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
What's funny is who Obama really is sticking it to under this plan are upper-middle class coasters. Us folks in flyover country don't mind so much as 250K is still a lot of money, but in San Fran or New York that's not that much coin for a two earner family with a million plus dollar mortgage that's underwater.
 

MooseNSquirrel

Platinum Member
Feb 26, 2009
2,587
318
126
This just in, Larry Ellison has reduced his salary from 72 million to 249 999 to avoid paying higher taxes.

S&M
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
That's cool, they are on the bubble. It's those who make a lot more who could afford the roll back on Bushes tax cuts. They did well before and they'll do just as well now.
 

winnar111

Banned
Mar 10, 2008
2,847
0
0
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: ayabe
Man the crocodile tears are just so overwhelming.

No one's crying, just don't be surprised if the expectation of this tax plan isn't realized.

The top tax bracket is 35% which will go to 39% I believe under this plan, that works out to 10,000 a year more in taxes for a household making 250,000 a year. Sorry that's chump change for someone with that income.

So yeah if someone in this situation wants to have their spouse quit their 70,000+ a year job to save 10K in taxes, that's retarded. Yeah I'm just throwing numbers out there, but it makes no mathematical sense whatsoever.

Unless the spouse was working for peanuts, it makes ZERO sense.


And when quitting that 70k job saves you 40k in taxes, it makes quite a bit more sense. Most people, when they're approaching a cliff, choose not to put their toes over it.

http://article.nationalreview....E5MjU4MzE3ZDRlMzJjMDU=

The way this will work in practice goes like this: Assume someone in the top tax bracket wants to make a $1,000 donation to a local homeless shelter. Currently they would be eligible for a deduction at the top 35 percent rate, so the donation costs them only $650. This proposal would allow deductions at only the 28 percent rate, meaning the donation will now cost $720, an increase of over 11 percent. In other words, $70 that could have gone to the homeless shelter will now go to the government. In the aggregate, then, charities can expect to lose about 7 percent of their contributions from givers in the higher tax brackets. The new top tax rate of 39.6 percent in 2011 makes the math even more punitive, making the cost of donations 19 percent higher.

 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Originally posted by: ayabe
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: ayabe
Man the crocodile tears are just so overwhelming.

No one's crying, just don't be surprised if the expectation of this tax plan isn't realized.

There's a fundamental disconnect going on here, most people in this country would never consider quitting their job/or spouse or limiting their income on purpose because they couldn't afford to.

The top tax bracket is 35% which will go to 39% I believe under this plan, that works out to 10,000 a year more in taxes for a household making 250,000 a year. Sorry that's chump change for someone with that income.

So yeah if someone in this situation wants to have their spouse quit their 70,000+ a year job to save 10K in taxes, that's retarded. Yeah I'm just throwing numbers out there, but it makes no mathematical sense whatsoever.

Unless the spouse was working for peanuts, it makes ZERO sense.

It's all the other "penalties" for making that number. CPA has already explained them regarding deductions, plus the social security increases. 10,000 is not chump change especially when it could be much higher when you take into account the other penalties.

The effect of this massive taxation will be a loss of productivity.