Facebook Posts on tax-2017

Title Post
Reach Like Comments Shares Clicks Hide Hideall Cost Topic
Evolution of Tax Reform into Billionaire Tax Relief 2017-12-28 76 2 1 4 tax
Need a Last Minute Charitable Deduction? 2017-12-28 29 - 4 tax
Discretionary Income 2017-12-28 27 1 1 4 tax
Getting to 60 on Tax Reform 2017-12-04 9 1 1 3 1 tax
What happens next on the Republican tax bill? 2017-12-01 9 - 2 tax
Taxation of Principal Residences 2017-12-01 4 - tax
If the Republican tax bill gets signed into law, express 2017-11-29 12 2 1 2 tax
Craft Beer and Taxes - an object lesson 2017-11-27 23 1 1 1 1 tax
Reasons to dislike the one-flat-tax framework 2017-11-27 5 - tax
Bypassing progressive income tax by unrecaptured section 2017-11-27 8 - 2 tax
Double Taxation of Dividends 2017-11-20 7 - 1 1 tax
How do you tax Discretionary Income? 2017-11-20 6 - tax
Which California Representatives voted against the 2017-11-17 6 - 1 tax

Columns of Post Tables

The table above has these entries. Post entries with just one line for Reach were not boosted. Boosted posts have two lines for Reach and several other items. The upper line reflects all interactions, the bottom line just those resulting from paid ads.

UPDATED Thu Mar 4 09:46:38 PST 2021


Evolution of Tax Reform into Billionaire Tax Relief

What Trump campaigned on:

Deductions and credits were limited to $150,000, so taxes
on the wealthy went up, to pay for working and middle-class
tax reductions in a revenue-neutral way.

What Trump proposed in April - the first two are the
critical points:

1) Corporate tax rate 15% -
  there are actually some good reasons for lowering the
  corporate tax rate, but not that much.
2) Flow-through tax rate 15% -
  so business owners like Trump only pay 15% instead of
  the maximum personal tax bracket 39.6%.
3) Eliminate alternative minimum tax -
  so business owners like Trump don't have to worry about
  the maximum AMT personal tax rate of 28%.
4) Eliminate estate tax -
  so wealthy individuals like Trump can leave all their
  accumulated fortunes to their heirs.
5) Window dressing -
  small cuts to deceive the masses into thinking it's all
  about them, despite that almost all W-2 wage earners
  get nothing from the four points listed above.

What the Republicans proposed in September -

1) Corporate tax rate 20% -
  instead of Trump's 15%
2) Flow-through tax rate 25% -
  instead of Trump's 15%
3) Eliminate alternative minimum tax - 4) Eliminate estate
tax - 5) Window dressing -
  slightly different from Trump's window dressing, but
  still almost all W-2 wage earners get nothing from the
  four points listed above.

What Trump signed in December:

1) Corporate tax rate 21% -
  instead of 20%
2) Flow-through tax rate reduced -
  the details are impenetrable:
  but the motivation is obvious:
3a) Eliminate corporate alternative minimum tax - 3b)
Reduce personal alternative minimum tax -
  higher zero brackets mean fewer people subject to it,
  but reducing the highest tax bracket on regular tax
  means more people subject to it
4) Reduce estate tax -
  the zero brackets are doubled
5) Window dressing -
  slightly different from previous window dressing, but
  still almost all W-2 wage earners get nothing from the
  four points listed above.
6) Repeals individual mandate of Obamacare -
  as young healthy people drop out, tax subsidies will
  decline, but insurance rates will increase, so tax
  subsidies will increase
7) Opens Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil
  drilling - that's certainly germane to tax reform!

Items 1-4) were modified from the September plan in order
to get through the Senate under reconciliation (50 votes)
instead of regular order (60 votes).

Interestingly, Trump signed the bill in 2017 instead of
waiting a couple of weeks until 2018, which had been
the plan of the Congressional leadership, in order to
avoid triggering PAYGO Medicare cuts until after the
2018 election.
Now there is going to be an interesting and quite likely
stalemated negotiation involving liberal Democrats in the
Senate and Freedom Caucus in the House.  If it goes badly,
Trump will blame the Congressional leadership.

The Trump Philosophy: SAYING: What does my shrinking
base want to hear?  DOING:  What's good for billionaires
like me?

At least he's consistent!


impact 349
impactrate 0
likeimpress 2
negative 0
posted 2017-12-28
ratio 10
react 7
reactrate 0
shares 1
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 4
title Evolution of Tax Reform into Billionaire Tax Relief
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 498
ID 556413984703125
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556413984703125
audclicks 4
audreach 3
engaged 4
impress 114
likeclickusers 2
likeimpress 2
likeuimpress 39
likeusers 2
likeuusers 18
matchedlinkclicks 1
matchedotherclicks 3
oimpress 114
oreach 76
posted "12/28/2017 02:59:21 PM"
postlinkclicks 1
postotherclicks 3
reach 76
sharesimpress 1
sharesusers 1
type Status


Need a Last Minute Charitable Deduction?

Most political contributions are not tax deductible.
But several organizations have tax-deductible educational
affiliates that you might consider supporting before the
end of 2017.

 http://www.fairvote.org/ FairVote retire winner-take-all
Congressional representation in favor of multi-district
preferential balloting

 http://www.democracy21.org/ Democracy 21 Education Fund
retire "one-dollar-one-vote" by legislation and
judicial action

 https://bipartisanpolicy.org/ Bipartisan Policy Center
actively seeking bipartisan solutions to problems

 https://www.concordcoalition.org/ Concord Coalition for
control of Federal deficit

 https://itep.org/ Institute on Taxation and Economic
ensure that policy makers, media, and advocates know
the impact that tax changes have on people of different
income levels

 http://www.equalrightsnow.org/ We the People Project
rights for residents of Federal territories


impact 33
impactrate 0
negative 0
posted 2017-12-28
ratio 7
react 4
reactrate 0
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 4
title Need a Last Minute Charitable Deduction?
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 83
ID 556367304707793
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556367304707793
audclicks 4
audreach 3
engaged 3
impress 53
likeclickusers 3
likeuimpress 52
likeuusers 28
matchedotherclicks 4
oimpress 53
oreach 29
posted "12/28/2017 12:18:19 PM"
postotherclicks 3
reach 29
type Status


Discretionary Income

What is discretionary income?    It's a concept of
economics - the amount of wealth that you have that you
can spend as you choose - thus excluding the cost of
staying alive and the cost of producing income (e.g. the
cost of driving to work).      It's the part of your
income that rewards you for your labor.  In principle,
a fair taxation system might take a fixed percentage
of all your discretionary income, regardless of source.
People who are barely getting by have no discretionary
income and shouldn't be taxed.     Since we have evolved
beyond letting the poor and sick and disabled die in the
streets, we accept that there are some people who will
be subsidized by others, and we have assigned the bulk of
this task to government, to be paid by taxes.

For businesses, it's easy to equate discretionary income
to gross receipts less the ordinary and necessary business
expenses required to produce the gross receipts.  The net
profit is the discretionary income to be taxed.

For individuals, it's not so easy, which is why
discretionary income is not mentioned in any tax return
instructions.     Instead there are adjustments and
deductions and exemptions and credits - different for
the Federal government and for each state - some of which
are intended to remove the non-discretionary income from
the amount you pay tax on.     But many of these are so
complicated and obscure that most ordinary W-2 wage earners
have no idea what they are about, and rightly conclude that
the system is rigged against them.     It's not enough for
a tax system to be fair if it's too complicated for the
majority of the taxpayers to see that it's fair.  Or, since
most people who don't want to study the matter will suppose
that it's unfair anyway, better for the tax system to make
its unfairness explicit instead of hidden in obscurity.

For a gold-plated example of the latter, just consider
the treatment of pass-through taxation in the new tax law:
Your eyes will glaze over, because it's irrelevant to
W-2 wage earners, but it's critical for retaining and
increasing the fortunes of certain kinds of business
owners... particularly real estate investors.  It's all
about making sure that such individuals get taxed at the
lower corporate rate rather than the higher individual
rate, while trying to make sure that most W-2 earners
can't get the same benefit.

So the one-flat-tax.net idea is a single flat tax on all
sources of discretionary income.  To keep it simple,
there might be one zero bracket amount (varying with
family size) for all taxpayers, reflecting the cost of
staying alive and in employable condition, and another
deduction for W-2 wage earners to reflect the cost of
earning income; these amounts would not be subject to tax.
The "flat" part intends to remove the incentive
for fancy tax-motivated transactions to move income from
high rates to low rates; the "one" part intends
to remove the regressive payroll, sales, and property
taxes as sources of general government funding.


impact 304
impactrate 0
likeimpress 1
negative 0
posted 2017-12-28
ratio 4
react 6
reactrate 0
shares 1
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 4
title Discretionary Income
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 507
ID 556365264707997
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/556365264707997
audclicks 4
audreach 4
engaged 6
impress 50
likeclickusers 6
likeimpress 1
likeuimpress 43
likeusers 1
likeuusers 22
matchedotherclicks 4
oimpress 50
oreach 27
posted "12/28/2017 12:09:00 PM"
postotherclicks 4
reach 27
sharesimpress 1
sharesusers 1
type Link


Getting to 60 on Tax Reform

It's hard to believe that the Republicans think voters
will thank them for their billionaire tax relief bill,
no matter how they slice and dice the House and Senate
versions to come up with a conference version.  If the
Republicans are right, then it's a reminder that people
get the government they deserve.    It brings to mind a
recent Simpsons episode set in feudal times where Homer
talks about how much he enjoys being a feudal serf for
his feudal lord.

But ordinary Republican W-2 earner voters don't seem to
be buying the Republican leadership lines; they accept
it's just another scheme to make the rich richer and the
poor poorer.  Lots of them still support Trump anyway,
presumably for other reasons.

Actually it's not clear that even the major Republican
donors that bought and paid for the Republican tax plan
will be happy; Trump in April and the congressional
leadership in September promised that the estate tax,
alternative minimum tax, and pass-through taxation would be
completely and immediately repealed - and instead there are
a bunch of complicated partial measures phasing in and out.
Tax simplification always seems to make the tax code longer
somehow, but this is worse than usual.

That's because the Republicans have been desperately trying
to get to 50 votes so they can get their bill through the
Senate under reconciliation with no Democratic support.

Instead of aiming for 50 votes for a bill that will
embarrass everybody that supported it for the rest of
their careers, why didn't they aim for 60 votes for
something they could be proud of?     It wouldn't be
that hard to find 30 Republican and 30 Democratic votes
for revenue-neutral tax relief for working and middle
class families.    That's what Republicans and Democrats
are SUPPOSED to be doing.  That's what Republicans and
Democrats SAY they are doing.   Government for the People,
you know?  But instead it got Trumped by Government for the
Billionaires.      Well why not - billionaires are people
too, just like you and me - except they have more money.
Lots more money.

Perhaps there needs to be another website in this
collection - get-to-sixty.net - just in case the Republican
tax bill conference effort runs off the tracks and produces
something that can't pass both houses.

Start over, take your time, and get to sixty votes.
Maybe it will be good enough that the Democrats won't
immediately repeal it as soon as they get control of
Congress during the next bear market.


comments 1
hide 1
impact 253
impactrate 0
likeimpress 1
negative 1
posted 2017-12-04
ratio 1
react 6
reactrate 0
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 3
title Getting to 60 on Tax Reform
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 422
ID 545789985765525
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/545789985765525
audclicks 3
audreach 1
commentsimpress 1
commentsusers 1
engaged 3
hideclicks 1
hideclicksusers 1
impress 22
likeclickusers 2
likeimpress 1
likeuimpress 19
likeusers 1
likeuusers 8
matchedotherclicks 3
negclicks 1
negusers 1
oimpress 22
oreach 9
posted "12/04/2017 10:11:15 PM"
postotherclicks 1
reach 9
type Status


What happens next on the Republican tax bill?

It's past midnight in DC and there's no news that the
Republican tax bill has passed in the Senate, nor that the
Senate has adjourned.  Guessing that a vote will be taken
and the bill will pass 51-49 as expected sometime in the
wee hours, what next?

It might be a good idea for the House to swallow its
pride and just pass the Senate bill exactly as it passed
the Senate and send it on to the President to sign Monday
afternoon - assuming there is at least one legible copy
of the bill available for the House to pass and another
for Trump to sign.  The bill that passed the Senate was
marked up by hand at one point.  "Speed kills"
is not the way Republicans were thinking about it -
"delay kills" is more like it.

So if the House insists on a conference committee, it
risks trying to come up with a compromise between the
House and Senate versions, which might lose two votes in
the Senate and become impassable, or if they delay past
the Alabama election on Dec 12 there will be another lost
vote, or the anxiety from the Russian investigation might
distract Trump and lead him to say something unhelpful,
or the longer the bill sits unpassed, the more peculiar
provisions will come to light and to the attention of the
public and special interests, so that a senator or two
might become convinced that the future is brighter without
passing this particular bill.  Light is not good for this
bill; it was produced in the dark very quickly and has a
very short shelf life.  Like beer without preservatives,
"keep cold and dark and consume promptly."


impact 59
impactrate 0
negative 0
posted 2017-12-01
ratio 4
react 2
reactrate 0
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 2
title What happens next on the Republican tax bill?
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 293
ID 544393405905183
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/544393405905183
audclicks 2
audreach 2
engaged 2
impress 23
likeclickusers 2
likeuimpress 18
likeuusers 8
matchedotherclicks 2
oimpress 23
oreach 9
posted "12/01/2017 10:06:17 PM"
postotherclicks 2
reach 9
type Status


Taxation of Principal Residences

There's a lot of tax law provisions to encourage home
ownership in various ways.  The one-flat-tax scheme
eliminates two: the deduction for mortgage interest and
property taxes on real estate not used for business.
That's partly compensated since the zero bracket amount
is intended to cover basic housing costs, Keep America
Great Accounts provide ample low-cost funds for principal
residences, and property taxes to fund general government
are repealed and replaced by the Federal collection
allocated for state income tax.

That still leaves special-purpose property taxes and
capital gains on sale of principal residences as sources of
concern, particularly to senior citizens on fixed incomes
who fear being taxed out of their homes, on the one hand,
and having to pay capital gains on the sale if they want
to relocate to a smaller house or a lower-cost-of-living

So many states have mechanisms to defer property taxes
to some extent, and Federal and most state tax laws allow
deferral of capital gains on sale of a principal residence
to some extent.

Why not keep it simple: allow deferral of property taxes
and capital gains on principal residence until death.
The first is a matter of state law though the Federal
government could facilitate matters by paying deferred
property taxes for principal residences to the states
and collecting at death.     Under one-flat-tax, capital
gains is strictly a Federal matter, that could be deferred
until death.

The deferred property tax and capital gain are a debt
to the Federal government which becomes due at death
of the owner(s) or a year after sale if no replacement
principal residence is purchased - if a replacement
principal residence is purchased, the debt rolls over to
the replacement principal residence.

Principal residences only, excluding any part of the
property used for commercial purposes, and only one
principal residence at a time.  Divorce settlements would
have to specify how the debt is divided.

At death, after the deferred property tax and capital
gain tax are paid, the basis of the property steps up to
its current market value and the principal residence is
excluded from estate tax.

Altogether that seems to be an adequate incentive for
home ownership.  Dollar limits could be placed on any of
these benefits, but simpler is usually better.


negative 0
posted 2017-12-01
rate 0
title Taxation of Principal Residences
topic tax
words 382
ID 544385532572637
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/544385532572637
impress 12
likeuimpress 12
likeuusers 4
oimpress 12
oreach 4
posted "12/01/2017 09:37:27 PM"
reach 4
type Status


If the Republican tax bill gets signed into law, express
your thanks!    Even in advance!

It is looking more likely that the Republicans will find
the price of 50 votes to pass a tax reform bill in the
Senate, and then it is highly likely that some compromise
will pass both houses and be signed by Trump.


If your Representative or Senators vote for it, you
should take the opportunity to congratulate them; if
they've already promised to vote for whatever comes out
of conference, you can even congratulate them in advance:

Well done, good and faithful servants, enter into the joy
of your donors!

W-2 workers, retirees, students, unemployed, disabled
join together today in praise of the Republican tax bill.
We're proud to be able to stand up on our own two feet
so that hard-working billionaire donors can relax.
When billionaire donors can relax, then Senators and
Representatives can relax about the 2018 primaries!

And since runaway deficit financing might undermine the
billionaires' hard-won gains, we also endorse your next big
step, as soon as you're past the 2018 election - welfare
reform - reducing Federal expenditures like medicaid,
medicare, social security, ... that keep expanding the
deficit and don't do a thing to help our hard-pressed


impact 105
impactrate 0
likeimpress 2
negative 0
posted 2017-11-29
ratio 2
react 5
reactrate 0
shares 1
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 2
title If the Republican tax bill gets signed into law, express
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 210
ID 543350196009504
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/543350196009504
audclicks 2
audreach 1
engaged 2
impress 28
likeclickusers 1
likeimpress 2
likeuimpress 21
likeusers 1
likeuusers 8
matchedotherclicks 2
oimpress 28
oreach 12
posted "11/29/2017 11:08:36 AM"
postotherclicks 1
reach 12
sharesimpress 1
sharesusers 1
type Link


Craft Beer and Taxes - an object lesson

I like craft beer pretty well - there's an entry in the
political-scrapbook website.    So as far as I could tell,
the idea of Sen Portman, R-OH,
to give craft brewers a break, seemed reasonable enough.
He added it to the Republican Senate tax reform bill.

But what about the next break for somebody else?  And the
ten more after that, and then another hundred, and then
a thousand?     Pretty soon you've got a whole internal
revenue code full of special breaks for special people,
groups, businesses, or industries, and if you are not one
of them, you might justifiably conclude that the whole
deck is stacked against you.

It isn't enough to be fair - laws should be perceivably
fair.  And so I conclude that if a tax break isn't
important enough to pass Congress on its own, then it
shouldn't pass Congress as a barnacle on something bigger.


comments 1
hideall 1
impact 63
impactrate 0
likeimpress 1
negative 1
posted 2017-11-27
ratio 5
react 4
reactrate 0
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 1
title Craft Beer and Taxes - an object lesson
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 158
ID 542572066087317
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/542572066087317
audclicks 1
audreach 1
commentsimpress 1
commentsusers 1
engaged 2
hideallclicks 1
hideallclicksusers 1
impress 55
likeclickusers 2
likeimpress 1
likeuimpress 11
likeusers 1
likeuusers 5
matchedotherclicks 1
negclicks 1
negusers 1
oimpress 55
oreach 23
posted "11/27/2017 03:02:07 PM"
postotherclicks 1
reach 23
type Status


Reasons to dislike the one-flat-tax framework

Compared to the current Federal tax system, or compared
to what the Republicans are proposing in Congress, what
billionaires might find most objectionable about the
one-flat-tax framework is that there is no legal escape
from the flat tax rate:

no escape by income shifting to lower tax years no escape
by income shifting to long term capital gains no escape
by investing in municipal bonds no escape by establishing
residence in a low-income-tax state no escape by taxing
the future

There's also: no escape from the estate tax

Most ordinary voter/W-2 taxpayers don't know about any
of these escapes because they aren't available to them or
wouldn't help.

An essential part of the framework is to balance the
budget within a few years and pay off the national debt
in a generation or two.  There's no built-in bias for a
large or a small government - just a bias that whatever
is voted for gets paid for, and the only way to reduce
the tax rate is to reduce expenditure.

Surveys in California at least indicate most voters favor
specific government benefits - social security, medicare,
medicaid, veterans - and many favor a strong defense
as well.

If, however, the same inquiry is posed as a question about
which taxes to raise in order to pay for those things -
the answer is usually "somebody else's."  This
intellectual disconnect is honed by politicians who know
better but don't act better.   That needs to change.

The experience of other western democracies is that
government tends to have a larger role over time,
and voters gripe about paying for it but are loathe to
give up any benefits.    So the ultimate objection from
billionaires would probably be

no escape from a slowly increasing flat tax rate - until
it becomes painful to the average voter/taxpayer


negative 0
posted 2017-11-27
rate 0
title Reasons to dislike the one-flat-tax framework
topic tax
words 309
ID 542525962758594
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/542525962758594
impress 10
likeuimpress 10
likeuusers 5
oimpress 10
oreach 5
posted "11/27/2017 11:49:29 AM"
reach 5
type Status


Bypassing progressive income tax by unrecaptured section
1250 gain

That's a catchy title!    But what it means is, that if
you can afford to invest in commercial real estate, you
can keep your maximum tax rate at 25% instead of 39.6%.

If you buy a car or a computer for your business, you
are not usually allowed to deduct it all in one year.
Instead you deduct a part of the cost over several years,
thereby reducing your income taxable at the usual rates up
to 39.6%.  This makes sense; your car or computer started
losing value the day you took it home.

If you at some point sell the car or computer for more
than its depreciated value, the excess depreciation is
recaptured and taxed at ordinary income rates.     You've
managed to defer some of your taxes for several years,
but you eventually pay at the same rate.

Real estate is different.     That's why it's such a
popular investment, if you can afford it.   You are allowed
to depreciate real estate buildings (but not land), even
though real estate doesn't depreciate in urban California
and many other parts of the country - it continues to
go up in value even if you let it go to wrack and ruin.
After all, some social media gazillionaire might want to
buy your real estate (and some of your neighbors) just
for the lots, so the lots can be combined to make room to
build a palace.

Better yet, when you do sell, the imaginary depreciation
that you deducted against ordinary income at rates up to
39.6% - is recaptured at capital gains rates of up to 25%.
So you not only get to defer taxes, you get taxed at a
lower rate.

(Prior to 1986, this worked even for passive investors
in limited partnerships.    Now it's mostly available to
active real estate investors.  It also used to be possible
to take accelerated depreciation on real estate, though
perhaps subject to AMT.)

If all income were taxed at the same rate - as
one-flat-tax.net proposes - then commercial real
estate might not be quite as attractive an investment.
You'd still get to defer taxation - but when you sold, it
would be at the flat tax rate in effect then, which might
be higher or lower than that on the income you deferred,
but most likely will not be much different.  Commercial
real estate might decline a little in value without that
tax break.  That sounds like a bad thing for investors.

But what if you are a would-be owner-occupied homeowner
tired of competing with investors outbidding you for
single-family residential property that they want for
rentals?  If some of those investors get discouraged and
single-family residential property becomes less expensive,
that sounds like a good thing for prospective homeowners.
But there will still be plenty of other would-be homeowners
competing, so don't expect too much of a drop in real
estate prices.

How does depreciation work in a one-flat-tax scheme?
It could work somewhat at present, with depreciation taken
over the life of the asset and recaptured at about the
same rate on disposal of the asset.    But does it make
sense to grant even the tax deferral benefit when there
is no actual cash expense?

Perhaps it's better, and certainly simpler, for all assets,
to allow deductions of the actual amount spent in the
years spent, and tax the actual amount gained, if any,
in the year of disposal.    You get a tax deferral benefit
according to the actual cash spent, but no conversion from
ordinary income rates to capital gain rates, because they
are the same.


impact 121
impactrate 0
negative 0
posted 2017-11-27
ratio 4
react 2
reactrate 0
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 2
title Bypassing progressive income tax by unrecaptured section
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 607
ID 542499116094612
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/542499116094612
audclicks 2
audreach 1
engaged 1
impress 16
likeclickusers 1
likeuimpress 14
likeuusers 8
matchedotherclicks 2
oimpress 16
oreach 8
posted "11/27/2017 10:10:25 AM"
postotherclicks 1
reach 8
type Status


Double Taxation of Dividends

Comment: "Let's say I have a couple million
dollars. With dividends being tax free I can buy dividend
paying stocks and live on 75 to 80 thousand a year
tax-free! Cool. All the people earning wages of 75 to
80 thousand will owe income tax, but not me! People with
money really make out with this tax bill. People that live
on wages, not so much."

Federal tax law has generally had some provision to avoid
double taxation of dividends.     To see why, suppose that
you were the owner of all the stock of the corporation
and you decided that all net profits would be returned
as dividends to the shareholders, namely yourself.  Those
dividends might be taxed at the corporate level and be tax
free to the recipient, or tax-free at the corporate level
and taxed to the recipient.  If the corporate and personal
tax rate were the same, there would be no difference.
You end up paying the same tax at one level or the other.

If instead you are only a small shareholder in a large
corporation, you don't get to decide how much of earnings
is returned to shareholders.  But none the less the value
of your shares is reduced by the amount paid as tax at
the corporate level.

Taxing at the corporate level rather than the recipient
level has the property that all corporate dividends are
taxed.    But if dividends are taxable to the recipient,
then non-taxable entities will pay no tax.  Some people
might view this as a feature, others as a bug.


comments 1
impact 53
impactrate 0
negative 0
posted 2017-11-20
ratio 3
react 2
reactrate 0
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 1
title Double Taxation of Dividends
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 264
ID 539647763046414
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/539647763046414
audclicks 1
audreach 1
commentsimpress 1
commentsusers 1
engaged 2
impress 17
likeclickusers 1
likeuimpress 15
likeuusers 7
matchedotherclicks 1
oimpress 17
oreach 7
posted "11/20/2017 04:25:35 PM"
postotherclicks 1
reach 7
type Status


How do you tax Discretionary Income?

Discretionary income is the income that you have some
choice about how you spend.    For an individual, it
means what's left over after you provide the necessities
of life and the costs of generating income - for most
people, the costs of qualifying for a job and getting
to a job and performing a job.    For a business, it's
what's left of your sales receipts after you have paid
for the all the costs of producing or providing what you
sold: "ordinary and necessary expenses" of the
particular business you're in.

So is a lawyer or a dentist, a business or a job?  What
about an venture capital company with one owner?  Those are
questions at the heart of the arguments about pass-through
income treatment in the Republican tax proposals.

From the point of view of taxation, to avoid non-economic
shifting of income between business and personal income,
one would like to have the same tax rate on discretionary
income, whether generated as a business or a job.  A flat
tax rate accomplishes that.     But what about the ordinary
and necessary expenses of a business vs the ordinary and
necessary expenses of having a job?

You can't have a job without eating enough to stay alive,
a place to stay when you're not working, transportation
to the job, suitable clothing and equipment for the job.

Of course, basic food/clothing/shelter are things you need
anyway whether you have a job or not.  They are ordinary
and necessary expenses of staying alive.     So if we want
taxation to be fair between business owners and employees,
how do we figure what's discretionary?

The way Federal income tax works now, there are some
adjustments, deductions, and credits for various expenses
associated with producing personal income.     There is a
zero bracket - an amount of income which is not taxed,
built into the standard deduction and the personal
exemptions.     Perhaps this is intended to cover the cost
of staying alive.

So businesses should get no zero bracket, but deduct all
ordinary and necessary business expenses.    Individuals
get a zero bracket, but can't deduct ordinary and
necessary staying-alive expenses.     Which is fairer?
One could have a complicated system in which individuals
deducted ordinary and necessary staying-alive expenses.
But in a three-bedroom house for two people, which part
of the rent or mortgage is going toward staying alive and
which is a choice about spending discretionary income?
If both work and need reliable transportation, is three
unreliable cars to have backup a necessity, but three new
reliable cars at least 1/3 discretionary  income?

In politics, fairness has to be perceived.  A system that
is so complicated that most voters can't understand it will
be perceived to be unfair - and often that perception will
be correct.  So perhaps it would be perceptibly fairer for
personal income tax to have a much larger zero bracket than
now for basic living expenses to cover staying alive, and
perhaps an additional zero bracket for persons with earned
income to cover going go work, but no explicit adjustments,
deductions, or credits.  Of course, larger zero brackets
mean the flat tax rate would be higher.

Fixed zero brackets without deductions is less fair than
the current system in that there is less consideration of
individual circumstances, but more fair in that everybody
can understand how it works and can have confidence that
there aren't any intentionally obscure exceptions.


negative 0
posted 2017-11-20
rate 0
title How do you tax Discretionary Income?
topic tax
words 572
ID 539591233052067
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/539591233052067
impress 13
likeuimpress 13
likeuusers 6
oimpress 13
oreach 6
posted "11/20/2017 12:19:44 PM"
reach 6
type Status


Which California Representatives voted against the
Billionaire Tax Relief and Democratic State Punishment Act
on November 16? All the Democrats and (surprise!) three

   California 4: Tom McClintock (R) (since 2009) California
   48: Dana Rohrabacher (R) (since 1989) California 49:
   Darrell Issa (R) (since 2001)


The rest of the California Republicans should be recalled,
but since we can't, we can only censure and vote better in
2018. The first five are part of the California 7 Project:

   California 10: Jeff Denham (R) (since 2011) California
   21: David Valadao (R) (since 2013) California 25:
   Steve Knight (R) (since 2015) California 39: Ed Royce
   (R) (since 1993) California 45: Mimi Walters (R)
   (since 2015)

   California 1: Doug LaMalfa (R) (since 2013) California
   8: Paul Cook (R) (since 2013) California 22: Devin
   Nunes (R) (since 2003) California 23: Kevin McCarthy (R)
   (since 2007) California 42: Ken Calvert (R) (since 1993)
   California 50: Duncan D. Hunter (R) (since 2009)



impact 16
impactrate 0
negative 0
posted 2017-11-17
ratio 6
react 1
reactrate 0
sharesrate 0
sumclicks 1
title Which California Representatives voted against the
topic tax
wordrate 0
words 155
ID 538203993190791
URL https://www.facebook.com/politicalscrapbooknet/posts/538203993190791
audclicks 1
audreach 1
engaged 1
impress 14
likeclickusers 1
likeuimpress 12
likeuusers 5
matchedotherclicks 1
oimpress 14
oreach 6
posted "11/17/2017 07:29:11 AM"
postotherclicks 1
reach 6
type Link