....lybob Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Ha! From what I've seen there are $18 trillion in qualified plans. Those are plans where the contributions have been pre-tax, grown tax deferred and now a vast majority of them are not going to be taxed under your plan seeing most retirees don't make that much money. You know, I'm starting to dig your plan. it's about time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 But aren't stock options awarded as bonuses now reported as income when they're awarded? That was part of the fallout from Enron's implosion, to make CEO salaries more "transparent." Screw it. I'll just incorporate and pay 15% on...something. Different accounting treatments. The implied value of stock option grant is reported as compensation expense on the company's GAAP income statement. That's not the same as recognizing the expense for income tax purposes. Employees who receive stock options don't recognize the income until that grant is exercised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Different accounting treatments. The implied value of stock option grant is reported as compensation expense on the company's GAAP income statement. That's not the same as recognizing the expense for income tax purposes. Employees who receive stock options don't recognize the income until that grant is exercised. It's not the same NOW. Is it the same under lybob's plan, is what I'm asking. Since he's one of those people that argues that CEO salaries are excessively inflated based on the corporate reporting, not income tax filings... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 it's about time I dig it because it's !@#$ing stupid and would allow almost every American (if they were smart) to pay no taxes on all their retirement income. So you really propose to let hundreds of billions (or potentially traillions) of future tax dollars that will be owed to the government under the current tax system to all of a sudden not need to be paid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 What about my stock options? And what are corporations being taxed on again? 12% of what, exactly? profits - revenues greater than operating costs I dig it because it's !@#$ing stupid and would allow almost every American (if they were smart) to pay no taxes on all their retirement income. So you really propose to let hundreds of billions (or potentially traillions) of future tax dollars that will be owed to the government under the current tax system to all of a sudden not need to be paid? yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 It's not the same NOW. Is it the same under lybob's plan, is what I'm asking. Since he's one of those people that argues that CEO salaries are excessively inflated based on the corporate reporting, not income tax filings... Yeah, good luck in the courts taxing "income" that hasn't vested and can't be realized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Hammers aren't income. They're capital. Will these capital assets be taxable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 If you make less than 100k they are tax free as for people being !@#$ed aren't people always being !@#$ed Gotta hand it to you. Nothing makes me smile more than when a Dead Dog Liberal like yourself...a tireless champion of rhetoric for those who are constantly getting !@#$ed...finally admits that you have no problem with !@#$ing the American people since they're so used to getting !@#$ed anyway. Is it any wonder your ideology is getting treated right now like Ned Beatty on a canoe trip? Keep up the good work, Scooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 profits - revenues greater than operating costs yep So you want to lower the corporate tax rate? Yeah, good luck in the courts taxing "income" that hasn't vested and can't be realized. You're still applying current practice to lybob's "income is income" plan. There's nothing he said that even implies that unvested options can't be taxed as income if they're reported as a compensation expense under his plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 So you want to lower the corporate tax rate? I want to reduce the statutory rate from 35% to 12% how that lower statutory rate combined with 0 deductions would effected the effective tax rate on corporations is unknown it might raise it a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 I want to reduce the statutory rate from 35% to 12% how that lower statutory rate combined with 0 deductions would effected the effective tax rate on corporations is unknown it might raise it a bit. Zero deductions from...profit? Zero deductions from revenue minus deductions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Zero deductions from...profit? Zero deductions from revenue minus deductions? revenue minus operating expenses - operating expenses (worker wages, worker pension, machinery, energy/utilities,materials, property costs) - not operating expense (dividends, campaign donations, acquisitions) if you pay out a 100 million in dividends or campaign donations or to buy another corporation that must come from profit so you owe the government 12 mil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Corporations should pay ZERO income tax. It all gets passed down to the consumer anyway. It's a cost of doing business. When costs go up, prices go up. Edited June 2, 2015 by reddogblitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 revenue minus operating expenses - operating expenses (worker wages, worker pension, machinery, energy/utilities,materials, property costs) - not operating expense (dividends, campaign donations, acquisitions) if you pay out a 100 million in dividends or campaign donations or to buy another corporation that must come from profit so you owe the government 12 mil. Are 401k's an operating expense? How about health care? Vacation/sick time? Advertising? R&D? Financial servicing expenses? Executive bonuses? Futures holdings for hedging FOREX risk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Are 401k's an operating expense? No 401ks How about health care? Single payer Vacation/sick time? Yes Advertising? Yes R&D? Yes Financial servicing expenses? Depends on what the money was borrowed for Executive bonuses? Yes if American citizen Futures holdings for hedging FOREX risk? No Edited June 2, 2015 by ....lybob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Are 401k's an operating expense? No 401ks How about health care? Single payer Vacation/sick time? Yes Advertising? Yes R&D? Yes Financial servicing expenses? Depends on what the money was borrowed for Executive bonuses? Yes if American citizen Futures holdings for hedging FOREX risk? No So you're allowing all sorts of non-operating deductions (and you're not even sure which ones), while forbidding at least one. And simultaneously changing how health care and retirement are handled in this country. And double-taxing some of it. Great plan. Not only do you not have the answers, you don't even know which questions to ask. You really are an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Corporations should pay ZERO income tax. It all gets passed down to the consumer anyway. It's a cost of doing business. When costs go up, prices go up. It amazes me how many people don't understand this. They seem to think that taxing a corporation is somehow going to stick it to the stereotypical rich, greedy, CEO and his/her cabal of executives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 It amazes me how many people don't understand this. They seem to think that taxing a corporation is somehow going to stick it to the stereotypical rich, greedy, CEO and his/her cabal of executives. No, what they think is that since corporations have been cutting worker benefits and support for decades, government has to fill in the gap, and therefore corporations must pay for the government programs covering benefits corporations eliminated. Like how the ACA requires corporations to provide employee health care, yet disincentivizes that provision so corporations benefit from not providing it and paying more in taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 So you're allowing all sorts of non-operating deductions (and you're not even sure which ones), while forbidding at least one. And simultaneously changing how health care and retirement are handled in this country. And double-taxing some of it. Great plan. Not only do you not have the answers, you don't even know which questions to ask. You really are an idiot. The tax code is so convoluted it's nearly impossible to change anything without setting of a chain reaction cluster !@#$. I have a woman who I'm working who is 20 years younger than her husband who passed last fall. He left her a $1m IRA that she promptly rolled into her own IRA. Not sure who gave her that advice but regardless even though she has $2.3m intestable and $5k a month cash flow from rentals she has to wait until she's 59 1/2 (she's 56) to stop working. I don't think she's going to like my message when I meet with her and tell her she can't stop working and continue her current lifestyle for another 3 years. Her net worth is north of $5m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 It amazes me how many people don't understand this. They seem to think that taxing a corporation is somehow going to stick it to the stereotypical rich, greedy, CEO and his/her cabal of executives. Progressives can't exist without an enemy. They wait for their political lords to point at the enemy and scream, and then the progressives all join in and scream at the enemy. This usually happens right before the political lords go into a back room with the enemy and explain that if they'll just let the progressives scream at them for a while, they'll cut them some deals to make it worth their while. Listen to Hillary get her nutsuckers to scream at big banks, then go look at the list of donors to her "foundation." But progressives, unable to genuinely think for themselves, just keep screaming at the enemy until someone finds a new enemy to yell at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts