Quantcast

If Millionaires can Pay Only 14,1% Tax: Why do they want a tax cut?

JMCC 2012/09/23 23:49:54
Because trickle down economics works...
Because they need and deserve it...
Undecided
None of the above
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Bearing in mind that many pay less than this of course...
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • arkiii 2012/09/24 00:56:28
    None of the above
    arkiii
    +5
    Millionaires do not want a tax cut. You don't know the difference between paying taxes on wages and taxes earned on passive income. educate yourself....

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Red 2012/09/24 02:17:39
  • ruru 2012/09/24 02:14:43
    None of the above
    ruru
    +2
    The top 10% pay 70% of the income tax.
  • JMCC ruru 2012/09/24 08:48:47
    JMCC
    +2
    In terms of percentage or ratios, they pay less than those who tax is removed at source.

    Are you saying they can't afford it?
  • Mike 2012/09/24 01:32:17
    None of the above
    Mike
    +2
    greed knows no bounds
  • arkiii 2012/09/24 00:56:28
    None of the above
    arkiii
    +5
    Millionaires do not want a tax cut. You don't know the difference between paying taxes on wages and taxes earned on passive income. educate yourself....
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/24 08:50:02
    JMCC
    +2
    "passive income" - sounds like "entitlements" to me,
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/24 14:22:38
    arkiii
    +1
    JMCC- please educate yourself so that you do not come off sounding like an idiot..
    Passive income - Earnings from a business that does not require direct involvement from the owner or merchant or rent from property or royalties from publishing a book or from licensing a patent or other form of intellectual property, such as computer software product.
    Entitlements- government programs providing benefits to members of a specified group, also funds supporting or distributed by such a program and the belief that one socio-economic group is more deserving of or entitled to those privileges. I am guess that you are part of the "Entitled" group?
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/24 16:33:52
    JMCC
    Definition of entitlement
    noun
    [mass noun]

    the fact of having a right to something: full entitlement to fees and maintenance should be offered
    the amount to which a person has a right:
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/24 19:54:34
    arkiii
    +1
    Nice Try JMCC...... but notice that the definition you are providing is not the one that refers to government handout programs of "entitlement". In certain cases, I'm "entitled" to to full refunds or fees. The "entitlements" you were referring to in you first post and failed to address are the government handout "entitlements". Very different use of the word....People who just feel they are "entitled" regardless of if they really are.....
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/24 20:01:03
    JMCC
    If someone has contributed or invested in something with the expectancy of payment - then this is entitlement.

    Under the laws of usury dividends and interest would have been illegal as they were considered another form of taxation.

    It is all a matter of perspective - I am able to see both sides...
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/24 20:29:18
    arkiii
    typical liberal double talk. You are mixing definitions to suit your argument. You fail to see that the accepted definition of "entitlement" in our argument is one in which the government gives to those that it feels are "entitled" . Quit throwing up smoke screens and straw men......You will never convince anyone that "passive income" is the same as "entitlements". You loose this argument, pick another one.....
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/24 20:44:50
    JMCC
    Actually I am neither a Liberal or a US citizen.

    You projected your own meaning on the word "entitlement" - whilst I was using the Oxford English Dictionary.
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/25 01:01:35
    arkiii
    JMCC ....I did not project anything. Either you do not know how we Americans are using the word "entitlement" as it pertains to government and how it is not at all the same as passive income, or you know but just like to argue. You obviously got called on it and are now trying to backpedal... By the way, I am an American citizen and i use the American Standard Dictionary......
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/25 01:05:51
    JMCC
    Ok so let's examine this shall we?

    An entitlement as you define it and as I understand it is a payment received after having paid a contribution, correct?

    Irrespective of whether that comes from the government or a private institutional investment - the person is legally entitled.
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/25 01:20:43
    arkiii
    I have never said that... Read my post. Entitlements as we are both using them in this argument are government handouts to people who either feel they are "entitled" to them or the government has decided that they are "entitled" to them. In either case, these people have never contributed a penny to receive what they are "entitled" to.... they are receiving someone else's hard earned money. You are then comparing that definition of "entitlement" to passive income which is so totally different. Passive Income is someone putting in their "own money" and receiving what they are "entitled" to. Very different.....That is also why they are taxed differently. If they were the same as you claim, you would expect entitlements to be taxed like passive income is taxed.... Let's move on... Admit you lost this one..... Can we still be friends?
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/25 01:23:09
    JMCC
    We can be friends, yet I am unable to say that I lost as I see things differently to you is all.
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/25 01:45:14
    arkiii
    +1
    I did not think you would. That's OK....I think we both know that "entitlements" and "passive income" are not the same thing and no matter whose dictionary you use....... but i think we beat this horse enough. what else can we disagree on? ;-)
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/25 01:47:11
    JMCC
    Probably whether or not the law of usury should be reintroduced...

    XD
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/25 02:12:13
    arkiii
    we have those in US? do they not have them in UK?
  • morris44 arkiii 2012/09/24 16:51:04
    morris44
    Why should tax on passive income be less than regular income?
  • arkiii morris44 2012/09/24 19:58:23
    arkiii
    +1
    educate yourself..... Passive income has already been taxed once. You take after tax money and re-invest it. If you make money on certain investments, you pay a capital tax but you have already paid income tax on that money.... Do you feel the government should tax you on your parents money that they leave you when they die? they have already paid taxes on that. The government is always looking for ways to get extra money our of us. Hence, the death tax....
  • morris44 arkiii 2012/09/25 18:04:39
    morris44
    +1
    I am educated. Double taxation is a myth invented to confuse you. Each entitiy in the chain pays taxes separately. The income I get from a dividend is taxed once for me.

    I believe, as Citizens for Tax Justice do, that the rate on gains from investments should be equal to the income tax rate.

    Educate Yourself:
    "My compliments to the author of “ An Opinion on Dividends’ Taxation ” who stated that double taxation of dividends is a myth.

    In addition to his logical presentation, corporate income is subject to the “art” of accountancy which is ofttimes elastic: Declared dividends are precise, exact and determined by the whim of corporate boards.

    In the case of a corporation with a current deficit that declares a cash dividend, where is the double taxation?

    The myth of double taxation—like other myths—is politically inspired. "
    From:
    http://www.journalofaccountan...

    And more:
    "An Opinion on Dividend’s Taxation.
    By William N. McNairn
    August 2003
    There is no factual evidence that dividends are double-taxed. To claim they are is a complete falsification indulged in by many who would know better if they examined the facts.

    Dividends are taxed only once to stockholders. The income taxes the corporation pays are completely different than those paid by stockholders—they...














    I am educated. Double taxation is a myth invented to confuse you. Each entitiy in the chain pays taxes separately. The income I get from a dividend is taxed once for me.

    I believe, as Citizens for Tax Justice do, that the rate on gains from investments should be equal to the income tax rate.

    Educate Yourself:
    "My compliments to the author of “ An Opinion on Dividends’ Taxation ” who stated that double taxation of dividends is a myth.

    In addition to his logical presentation, corporate income is subject to the “art” of accountancy which is ofttimes elastic: Declared dividends are precise, exact and determined by the whim of corporate boards.

    In the case of a corporation with a current deficit that declares a cash dividend, where is the double taxation?

    The myth of double taxation—like other myths—is politically inspired. "
    From:
    http://www.journalofaccountan...

    And more:
    "An Opinion on Dividend’s Taxation.
    By William N. McNairn
    August 2003
    There is no factual evidence that dividends are double-taxed. To claim they are is a complete falsification indulged in by many who would know better if they examined the facts.

    Dividends are taxed only once to stockholders. The income taxes the corporation pays are completely different than those paid by stockholders—they are calculated at different rates and under different rules and regulations.

    To say that stockholders pay corporate income taxes is at complete odds with the facts. The corporation is well-established as an entirely separate and distinct legal entity. The stockholders do not manage corporate operations or have title to its assets. They are not management and cannot take possession of a pro rata share of corporate buildings or other assets. Stockholders do not declare dividends or run the corporation’s daily operations—they simply own a piece of paper that entitles them to a share of net assets on dissolution and to dividends if corporate management declares any.

    It is true the ups and downs in a corporation’s profitability will affect all parties interested in its operations whether they are employees, lenders, taxing authorities or stockholders, but it is not true they are all double-taxed simply because the corporation pays taxes on its income. So, let us therefore hear the end of the myth of the double taxation of dividends. It just doesn’t hold up under any honest study of the facts. "

    William N. McNairn, CPA
    Palos Verdes Estates, California



    Other Sources:

    http://www.ctj.org/taxjustice...

    http://pragmatos.net/2008/09/...
    (more)
  • arkiii morris44 2012/09/26 02:55:51
    arkiii
    Morris, i like the way you bait and switch. Your original post declared "why should tax on passive income be less than regular income?"
    Now you are bringing up an article on double taxation of corporate dividends? I know that I never brought up double taxation of corporate dividends? did you? You might want to educate yourself a little bit more about the differences between passive income, regular income, and corporate taxes. You are either trying to put up a smoke screen or you don't understand the difference. I am not talking about what a corporation pays in taxes, i am talking about what an individual has to pay if he invests money and makes a profit on that money. the key word is "individual" not "corporation".
  • morris44 arkiii 2012/09/26 18:06:08
    morris44
    Same issue different wrinkle.

    And stop telling me to educate myself you pompous gassbag!

    An individuals after tax income when invested, creates NEW INCOME.
    This new income is then taxed. This new income has not been taxed yet.

    Get it?

    Stop with the "already been taxed once" lie. The new investment income has not been taxed yet. It's fricken new.
  • arkiii morris44 2012/09/27 00:53:10
  • Nameless 2012/09/24 00:27:07
    None of the above
    Nameless
    +1
    They are completely out of touch with reality, JMCC.
  • cutter's falls 2012/09/24 00:23:32 (edited)
    None of the above
    cutter's falls
    +3
    I think the real quistion is
    why are you so worried what other people pay in taxes?

    maybe /could be,
    you will get more goverment free stuff

    I'll wait and see the bashing applied to Apple now that their profits are closing in on a
    trillion
    wait, thats not a evil corporation as is oil is
    or nuclear
    or coal
    and yet! without those businesses
    Apple wouldn't have a product at all
    maybe apple should list stuff that help make thier product
    coal
    nuclear
    equals electricity used for automation

    mining for metals
    euals the guts of thier product
    and OIL
    the pretty wrapper plastic made from OIL

    you should ask about Apple's profit vs thier fair share of taxes

    or dingy harry's hat durty little man's tax returns
    and land deals!
    I think the real quistion is
    why are you so worried what other people pay in taxes?

    maybe /could be,
    you will get more goverment free stuff

    I'll wait and see the bashing applied to Apple now that their profits are closing in on a
    trillion
    wait, thats not a evil corporation as is oil is
    or nuclear
    or coal
    and yet! without those businesses
    Apple wouldn't have a product at all
    maybe apple should list stuff that help make thier product
    coal
    nuclear
    equals electricity used for automation

    mining for metals
    euals the guts of thier product
    and OIL
    the pretty wrapper plastic made from OIL

    you should ask about Apple's profit vs thier fair share of taxes

    or dingy harry's hat durty little man's tax returns
    and land deals!
    (more)
  • JMCC cutter'... 2012/09/24 00:26:19 (edited)
    JMCC
    +1
    Did you know that more than 70% of shares are owned by the 1%?

    If the wealthy paid 20 or even 35%, how much debt would the country be in?

    Tech companies are the worst for tax avoidance, so if you think any of that is coming to the US think again.
  • cutter'... JMCC 2012/09/24 00:51:32
    cutter's falls
    +4
    what made you think I thought (any of that is comming to me)?.
    just think of the money people would have if they didn't own cars
    or makeup
    bought drugs, or computers, booze , cigarettes
    or Ebooks or Iphones or other stuff they think! they need

    prolly be rich or much better off
    never planted a big ass garden have you
    well what you do,
    is you plant it in 3rd's.
    for the animals will shurely get thier share
    and then between family an friends , normally a 1/3 is given away
    so what you have left,
    is about what you figured on having when you planted
    the damn garden in the first place.

    coyote fur, I get about 10.00 a pelt
    let's see,
    I shoot it
    skin it
    tann it
    I can make anywhere from 35.00 to 50.00 on a pair of mitts
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/w...
    let the rich have thier money
    I'll keep warm
  • rustysh... JMCC 2012/09/24 07:03:03
  • JMCC rustysh... 2012/09/24 08:52:31
    JMCC
    +1
    Actually it would wipe the debt and leave you with more than $5 Trillion left over to spend.
  • morris44 JMCC 2012/09/24 16:54:07
    morris44
    +2
    Rusty is busy passing on propaganda that the Right has fed him and his conservative friends. They put out this thing showing that if we took the wealth of all "rich" people, the debt wouldn't be brought to zero---in 1 year.

    Silly use of statistics, suggesting anyone expects debts to be eliminated in only 1 year.
  • rustysh... JMCC 2012/09/24 18:27:50
  • JMCC rustysh... 2012/09/24 18:36:57
    JMCC
    Having worked with the mercantile bank Zurich i can assure you that it is a lot more than that.
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/24 20:07:31
    arkiii
    JMCC, why should we believe you just because you worked with the mercantile bank in Zurich. Doing what? I can say I worked at the Federal Reserve...Let's see facts.....
  • JMCC arkiii 2012/09/24 20:11:07
    JMCC
    I was an analyst and it is your right to believe or not.
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/25 00:55:29
    arkiii
    Have you offered your services to Obama. He can certainly use the help and it sounds like you and he would get along just fine....
  • arkiii JMCC 2012/09/24 20:05:22
    arkiii
    Seriously! You want to take 100% of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett's money to fix the governments current economic problems. Sure, lets close down Microsoft .....Millionaires and Billionaires are not the problem.....Government spending is the problem......
  • words t... JMCC 2012/09/24 20:21:37
    words to live by
    Actually, if the government taxed millionares at 100%.. The received amount would run the federal government for 3 months.
  • JMCC words t... 2012/09/24 20:50:03
    JMCC
    Would that include the corporate and private offshore accounts?

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/18 22:53:27

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals