Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GraceZ who wrote (3328)	10/31/2001 2:44:20 PM
From: Mark Adams	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

You do pay attention <g> If you remember Mark's biggest concern in getting rid of corporate income tax was that wealthy individuals would abuse the corporate shell to avoid paying any income taxes. He's worried about wealthy individuals not paying any income taxes, yet I haven't heard his concern about the lower end not paying any. My concern over eliminating corporate income taxes did include a potential for shifting the tax burden. But not so much wealthy individuals not paying taxes, or not paying their share. I take it for granted that the rules are unfair. Even so, any changes in the rules have long term implications likely unforseen (remember the RTC?) and what I really object to is politicians selling a tax cut that favors one group over another to the masses with biased or incomplete info. That's why I spoke out that corporate shells are used to reduce tax liability, and that decreasing the corporate tax rates would favor certain sophisticated investors who shelter retained earnings inside corporate shells at the expense of others. Since I don't make the rules but do try to follow them, if such changes are/were enacted, I'd try to avail myself of the opportunities created by joining the more sophisticated investors. This requires understanding the techniques, pitfalls and implications of tax law changes.