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 : Income Taxes and Record Keeping ( tax ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Douglas Webb who wrote (1052)	4/17/1998 6:09:00 PM
From: Colin Cody	Respond to of 5810

Doug, You make all kinds of rationalizations about my simple landscaper example. None are appropriate. Everyone who qualifies may take the credit, right on line 59 of form 1040. Do I take it? NO. It is not worth my effort for the 5 gallons of gasoline I use each year. But the FACT is that there is a ROAD TAX assessed SPECIFICALLY for the use of the ROADS. Whether the Gov't ABUSES this tax is NOT THE ISSUE. The Gov't could have us all pay the road tax annually with a tax form. BUT rather than that they force the gasoline stations to collect the tax from us. WHETHER WE USE THE GASOLINE ON THE ROADS OR NOT. It is NOT FAIR to assess a ROAD TAX against us as we buy gasoline for our lawnmowers. EVERYONE KNOWS THIS, but to make it EASIER and to HIDE IT FROM THE PUBLIC, they force it as a hidden tax, and they REFUND IT as a credit to those that paid it but SHOULD NOT HAVE. It is ONLY FAIR to return the tax STOLEN at the pumps. The point is, this Flat Tax IN NOT FAIR. ------------------------------------------------------------ Regarding: But their TAXES ON CAPITAL GAINS on STOCKS will be SEIZED IMMEDIATELY UPON SALE. I misread this part Corporations would pay tax on capital income--dividends and interest--eliminating the need for individuals to keep track of these payments." Your point is understood, Sorry, I see you are correct. ------------------------------------------------------------ You claim that That leaves most people paying less in federal income taxes than they do today. I don't care about "most people" per se. Let's talk about those OTHER PEOPLE who will pay MORE to make up for the savings that "most people" will be seeing. I KNOW that the wealthy like FORBES will see a 99% DECREASE in taxes under this Flat Tax scheme. I KNOW my clients will save a bundle too. What I want to know, WITH SPECIFICITY, is who is making up the difference!!! The SAME $$$ of REVENUE will be collected. WHO is making up the difference is what I'd like explained. I am TIRED of Armey, Forbes et al tell us how much THEY will save in taxes. Tell me who's taxes are going UP, and how HIGH? And remember - 17% isn't enough. But even if it is. ADD that 17% to the other taxes I showed you earlier and we could be paying 50% of our GROSS -- as taxes, right off the top. WHAT'S THE POINT of this NEW Tax Collection Scheme? ------------------------------------------------------------ You said: This is tied into about $40 billion in spending cuts, which is reasonable even if that's per year and not a three-year total. $40B? That's a drop in the bucket. It works out to be 2.22% of the 2001 budget. And 2001 is $51B OVER the prior year!! 1) Maximum spending amount . - The term 'maximum spending amount' means - '(A) with respect to fiscal year 1998, $1,653,000,000,000 in outlays; '(B) with respect to fiscal year 1999, $1,687,000,000,000 in outlays; '(C) with respect to fiscal year 2000, $1,748,000,000,000 in outlays; '(D) with respect to fiscal year 2001, $1,799,000,000,000 in outlays; and '(E) with respect to fiscal year 2002, $1,851,000,000,000 in outlays.'. So since the REVUENES must be substantially THE SAME - if Forbes and Armey are paying MILLIONS of $$ less between themselves, who do you suppose will be making up the difference? Everyone can not "save taxes" THAT'S THE BIG LIE. Colin