Forum Groups

 

Forums / Politics / Taxes

Taxes

24 posts
  1. Wahlin Scott B
    Wahlin Scott B avatar
  2. Dennis Cook
    Dennis Cook avatar
    1 posts
    1/25/2012 7:01 AM
    What they fail to mention is that Romney already paid the 35% tax at the corporate level and then after investing his after tax dollars, paid 15% on only the interest earned.

    So Romney is making his money work twice for the govt and no one gives him credit for it.

    You guys want to raise the capital gains tax, you will virtually eliminate investment



  3. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    1/25/2012 7:01 AM
    Dennis,

    While I agree to the point that Gov. Romney might have already (or the corporation that earned it) has paid 35%, depends on the deductions the company took. To be taxed again at 15% is a good idea to debate, I can see how it could be seen as a double taxation, a good reason to have the discussion to fix how our tax codes need to be fixed. (of course I can see a small business such as say a restaurant that is successful, the restaurant pays taxes on it revenue, but the owner/employee also has to pay a tax on his salary, so is he considered being double taxed? something for debate as well, I guess since the business is a person it should pay it's taxes just like a person?) I guess my question is, what is the difference between the companies that Romney makes capital gains and a small business owner.

    But to answer you statement Dennis, to say that it will virtually eliminate investments I would like you to explain that. The people that have the money to invest still want to invest money, that is how they make it, I can't believe that most investors would not keep investing as they want to continue to earn more money. Heck are you saying they might have to actually go work for a living instead to make their money because income is getting taxed the same as capital gains? (I hope not to be disparaging, hey anyone that can make the kind of money Gov. Romney can make without holding a job is ok in my book, and I do understand he is taking risks, something I'm not, of course I'm not in a situation to take risks either, which is ok).

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  4. Dennis Cook
    Dennis Cook avatar
    1 posts
    1/25/2012 8:01 AM
    Melvin Waldron, CGCS said: Dennis,

    While I agree to the point that Gov. Romney might have already (or the corporation that earned it) has paid 35%, depends on the deductions the company took. To be taxed again at 15% is a good idea to debate, I can see how it could be seen as a double taxation, a good reason to have the discussion to fix how our tax codes need to be fixed. (of course I can see a small business such as say a restaurant that is successful, the restaurant pays taxes on it revenue, but the owner/employee also has to pay a tax on his salary, so is he considered being double taxed? something for debate as well, I guess since the business is a person it should pay it's taxes just like a person?) I guess my question is, what is the difference between the companies that Romney makes capital gains and a small business owner.

    But to answer you statement Dennis, to say that it will virtually eliminate investments I would like you to explain that. The people that have the money to invest still want to invest money, that is how they make it, I can't believe that most investors would not keep investing as they want to continue to earn more money. Heck are you saying they might have to actually go work for a living instead to make their money because income is getting taxed the same as capital gains? (I hope not to be disparaging, hey anyone that can make the kind of money Gov. Romney can make without holding a job is ok in my book, and I do understand he is taking risks, something I'm not, of course I'm not in a situation to take risks either, which is ok).

    Mel


    Mel, by investing his money he is allowing other businesses to use that money for their expansion. He is also taking a risk that he will lose money. If capital gains were paid at 35%, do you seriously think as many people would continue to take the risk? i dont think so. He is basically loaning money, and paying 15% tax on the return. Have the govt take another 20% of their return and people will not invest or "loan" money. That will cause a huge crisis in our economy if their is no capital for businesses.

    I kind of wonder when people started thinking of money as goverments. it is not the govts money, but they sure know how to write laws to steal it for themselves because they think they know how to spend it better. Ever notice that anything the govt does is more expensive than when the private sector does it? Anyone ever thank investors for paying 35% initially and then investing their after tax dollars again to only get taxed again at 15%?

    I wonder how many millions of dollars Romney has paid to the federal, state and local govts? I wonder how much those govts were able able to do with that money, all because of one persons paid taxes. Thanks Mitt



  5. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    1/25/2012 8:01 AM
    Dennis Cook said: What they fail to mention is that Romney already paid the 35% tax at the corporate level and then after investing his after tax dollars, paid 15% on only the interest earned.

    So Romney is making his money work twice for the govt and no one gives him credit for it.

    You guys want to raise the capital gains tax, you will virtually eliminate investment



    It's kind of silly to assume that raising the capital gains tax will virtually eliminate investment.



  6. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    1/25/2012 8:01 AM
    Average American income tax rate 11%. 50% of working Americans pay no federal income tax. Now he may pay 14% income tax rate but how much more in real dollars does he pay. How much good do you think his charitable giving has done. Buffet fails to mention how much he has and stands to gain by sitting so close to POTUS. (Buffet rule) We are witnessing just one of the men that has a huge influence on this presidency and certainly the one with the most influence and money. Look at this, a single parent with three children at 14,500 has more disposable income than a family that makes 60,000.



  7. McCallum David K
    McCallum David K avatar
    1/25/2012 8:01 AM
    According to his just released tax returns for 2010 he and his wife donated $ 7,000,000 to charity. Anyone here come close to that? A pretty good chunk on his income. Wish I could do the same.



  8. Peter Bowman
    Peter Bowman avatar
    11 posts
    1/25/2012 8:01 AM
    David McCallum said: According to his just released tax returns for 2010 he and his wife donated $ 7,000,000 to charity.


    Throw in Joe Biden's $369.00 and between them their at $7,000,369.



  9. Sandy Clark
    Sandy Clark avatar
    0 posts
    1/25/2012 9:01 AM
    Why is it that the dems are so concerned about Romney, his money and so-called vulture capitalism? Has anyone given a thought to the Vulture Socialism by the government? Romney and all venture capitalists work with invested money provided, to gain a return on that investment. When the governments Vulture Socialism is involved, money is taken from the private sector (by force)and utilized to pick winners with no return to the tax payers. That green energy thing has worked really well so far if you like dumping money down the toilet! I love the charity comparisons of Romney compared to the President and good old Joe! The Presidents speech last night just proved further to me that he and his team no nothing about job creation and are so into class warfare that pitting Americans against each other is a good thing in their socialistic world!



  10. Dennis Cook
    Dennis Cook avatar
    1 posts
    1/25/2012 9:01 AM
    James Schmid said:
    Dennis Cook said: What they fail to mention is that Romney already paid the 35% tax at the corporate level and then after investing his after tax dollars, paid 15% on only the interest earned.

    So Romney is making his money work twice for the govt and no one gives him credit for it.

    You guys want to raise the capital gains tax, you will virtually eliminate investment



    It's kind of silly to assume that raising the capital gains tax will virtually eliminate investment.



    James, when Reagan became president and the taxes were rediculously high, there wasnt much investment going on in this country. When he lowered the rate, investment took off and we had the boom of the 80's.

    Its just a fact



  11. James Schmid
    James Schmid avatar
    1 posts
    1/25/2012 9:01 AM
    Dennis Cook said:
    James Schmid said:
    Dennis Cook said: What they fail to mention is that Romney already paid the 35% tax at the corporate level and then after investing his after tax dollars, paid 15% on only the interest earned.

    So Romney is making his money work twice for the govt and no one gives him credit for it.

    You guys want to raise the capital gains tax, you will virtually eliminate investment



    It's kind of silly to assume that raising the capital gains tax will virtually eliminate investment.



    James, when Reagan became president and the taxes were rediculously high, there wasnt much investment going on in this country. When he lowered the rate, investment took off and we had the boom of the 80's.

    Its just a fact


    So you are claiming that because Regan lowered (from what to what?) the "rediculously high" ( how high?) tax rates investment took off and we had the boom of the 80's. And it's just a fact? And there were no other factors involved?



  12. McCallum David K
    McCallum David K avatar
    1/25/2012 12:01 PM
    I think Charlie's Angels were also a factor.



  13. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    1/26/2012 5:01 AM
    David McCallum said: According to his just released tax returns for 2010 he and his wife donated $ 7,000,000 to charity. Anyone here come close to that? A pretty good chunk on his income. Wish I could do the same.


    All that money went to the Mormon church. I don't know what charitable work they do for anyone outside the church.



  14. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    1/26/2012 6:01 AM
    Dennis Cook
    James, when Reagan became president and the taxes were rediculously high, there wasnt much investment going on in this country. When he lowered the rate, investment took off and we had the boom of the 80's.

    Its just a fact


    There were notable tax increases under Reagan.

    In 1983, for example, he signed off on Social Security reform legislation that, among other things, accelerated an increase in the payroll tax rate, required that higher-income beneficiaries pay income tax on part of their benefits, and required the self-employed to pay the full payroll tax rate, rather than just the portion normally paid by employees.

    The tax reform of 1986, meanwhile, wasn't designed to increase federal tax revenue. But that didn't mean that no one's taxes went up. Because the reform bill eliminated or reduced many tax breaks and shelters, high-income tax filers who previously paid little ended up with bigger tax bills.

    "Some of these taxpayers were substantial contributors to the Republican Party and to the president's re-election campaign, and had direct access to the White House. Reagan rebuffed their pleas," wrote J. Roger Mentz, the Treasury assistant secretary for tax policy in 1986, in a Tax Notes commentary last year.

    All told, the tax increases Reagan approved ended up canceling out much of the reduction in tax revenue that resulted from his 1981 legislation.



  15. McCallum David K
    McCallum David K avatar
    1/26/2012 7:01 AM
    Steve.........most but not all and as far as I know a donation to a church.........any church, mosque or synagogue counts I think. I was merely the messenger.



  16. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    1/26/2012 8:01 AM
    David McCallum said: According to his just released tax returns for 2010 he and his wife donated $ 7,000,000 to charity. Anyone here come close to that? A pretty good chunk on his income. Wish I could do the same.


    David, I applaud him for his donations to charity, my bet is that if many of us were in his same situation, we would be just as giving.

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  17. Steve Nelson
    Steve Nelson avatar
    0 posts
    1/26/2012 10:01 AM
    From one Republican's point of view (mine):

    1. Romney's 14% tax rate is a problem. A perception problem and a real one. It comes at a time when things of this nature are being heavily scrutinized. It is a clear example of some of the things wrong with the tax code. It will be used against him by his opponents in the party primary.

    2. Reagan, the greatest president of our time, did in fact raise taxes by removing many of the loopholes. He may have lowered rates, but people paid more.

    3. Nancy Pelosi is correct, the Republican candidates this year are the 'second string.' This means my party has pretty much given up on defeating Obama in 2012.

    3. Charlies Angels were awesome. That Farrah Fawcett poster was one of the greatest of all time.



  18. Stephen Okula
    Stephen Okula avatar
    3 posts
    1/26/2012 3:01 PM
    Steve Nelson, CGCS said: From one Republican's point of view (mine):

    1. Romney's 14% tax rate is a problem. A perception problem and a real one. It comes at a time when things of this nature are being heavily scrutinized. It is a clear example of some of the things wrong with the tax code. It will be used against him by his opponents in the party primary.

    2. Reagan, the greatest president of our time, did in fact raise taxes by removing many of the loopholes. He may have lowered rates, but people paid more.

    3. Nancy Pelosi is correct, the Republican candidates this year are the 'second string.' This means my party has pretty much given up on defeating Obama in 2012.

    3. Charlies Angels were awesome. That Farrah Fawcett poster was one of the greatest of all time.


    Good post, Steve. You are a political oddity; an intelligent, informed, and articulate Republican.



  19. Jon Gansen
    Jon Gansen avatar
    1 posts
    1/26/2012 4:01 PM
    Steve Nelson, CGCS said: From one Republican's point of view (mine):

    1. Romney's 14% tax rate is a problem. A perception problem and a real one. It comes at a time when things of this nature are being heavily scrutinized. It is a clear example of some of the things wrong with the tax code. It will be used against him by his opponents in the party primary.

    2. Reagan, the greatest president of our time, did in fact raise taxes by removing many of the loopholes. He may have lowered rates, but people paid more.

    3. Nancy Pelosi is correct, the Republican candidates this year are the 'second string.' This means my party has pretty much given up on defeating Obama in 2012.

    3. Charlies Angels were awesome. That Farrah Fawcett poster was one of the greatest of all time.


    There is no problem. He paid over 6 million.. He donated more than that. Why should he pay more?
    It takes close to 10 billion to operate the federal gov. per day take all of his income it still makes no difference. It was done within the law. How come warren buffett gets a free pass and gates. Rush said it today cuz if your liberal they leave you alone. Do you suppose buffett tells his tax guy I dont need you I will just pay my 35% on income and 15% on capital gains. Picking on Romney or any(depends who you are) "Rich guy" is quite an effective way to appeal to angry people who are more interested in punishing success.


    Nancy Pelosi???? I dont think I would quote her. If the Republican candidates are second string Id take that over the 3rd stringer we have now.



  20. Steven Kurta
    Steven Kurta avatar
    2 posts
    1/26/2012 11:01 PM
    Nilla's, please.

    All donations to organized charities and churches are tax deductible.

    Donating is a tax shelter. It's how you protect your money, if you have enough of it to protect.

    I can't wait to see his return for the years when he had the swiss bank account.
    And If I were a Republican, I'd be nervous that he's not being forthcoming with that. That's a hell of a skeleton to have pop out of the closet this fall if it turns out to be monies derived from some undesirable deals.
    I'd want that one WAY out of the way before then. But hey, it'll make for good television when the story does break.



  21. Melvin Waldron
    Melvin Waldron avatar
    43 posts
    1/27/2012 7:01 AM
    On charitable donations, just saw on the news crawl this morning that Buffet donated stock worth about 46.something million. Of course that's stock, who knows what is will be worth this afternoon.

    Mel

    Melvin H. Waldron III, CGCS, Horton Smith Golf Course, City of Springfield/Greene County MO

  22. McCallum David K
    McCallum David K avatar
    1/27/2012 9:01 AM
    Buffet said that his secretary paid double his 17% rate........well if my math is correct that is damn (is that permittable) near 34%. At that rate she must be in portion of Americans BHO considers to be rich.........I'm guessing an income of $ 250,000 +. She's probabaly wishing for a tax break herself.

    Gus kudo's for being selected by Steve O as a political oddity.......intelligent, articulate and an all around nice guy.



  23. Steve Nelson
    Steve Nelson avatar
    0 posts
    1/27/2012 11:01 AM
    David McCallum said: Gus kudo's for being selected by Steve O as a political oddity.......intelligent, articulate and an all around nice guy.


    I think it must have been the part about Farrah F. Technically you should be included in that compliment DMAC since you were the one that brought up Charlies Angels in the first place.



  24. Dennis Cook
    Dennis Cook avatar
    1 posts
    2/14/2012 2:02 PM
    Steven Kurta said: Nilla's, please.

    All donations to organized charities and churches are tax deductible.

    Donating is a tax shelter? It's how you protect your money, if you have enough of it to protect.

    I can't wait to see his return for the years when he had the swiss bank account.
    And If I were a Republican, I'd be nervous that he's not being forthcoming with that. That's a hell of a skeleton to have pop out of the closet this fall if it turns out to be monies derived from some undesirable deals.
    I'd want that one WAY out of the way before then. But hey, it'll make for good television when the story does break.

    how is donating to charity a tax shelter? when you give away 7 million dollars you lose 100% of that 7 million dollars. Your not protecting anything. All you do is lower your income by that amount (well actually the entire amount is not deductible). So in actuallity if he gives away 7 million plus has to pay taxes on a portion of that 7 million, how is that a tax shelter?

    lets do the math
    GIVE AWAY 7 MILLION + PAY TAXES ON A PORTION OF THAT 7 MILLION = MORE THAN 7 MILLION DOLLARS

    kEEP THE 7 MILLION DOLLARS - 15%tax($1,050,000) = $5,950,000 REMAINING

    Which way would Romeny have more money in his own pocket? Yes by keeping it and paying the taxes on it.

    Which way cost Romney the most? Yes, giving it away and still paying taxes on it. So what did Romeny choose? He chose the more expensive option and that was to give it away! Wow he is such a bad guy, such a mean republican.

    Tax shelter my butt



View or change your forums profile here.