Trump: Low Taxes are "Ridiculous"

[Derideo_Te]

Bullshit.

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

Then the income tax for businesses would not be an income tax. Income has to be calculated as the yearly revenue less that yearly expenses, otherwise it's not income. To exclude depreciation is to exclude a real expense. Capital expenditures have to be spread over the useful life the asset. You certainly should not be allowed to expense the cost a new factory that will last decades all in one year. This would make no sense at all.

It makes no sense if the profits derived from the new asset, like a factory, cannot be realized in the first year either. Depreciating it against future profits makes sense for large capital expenditures.

Smaller expenses don't have to be depreciated.

The tax code needs to be adjusted because of changes to the business environment. When the code was first drafted there weren't any expensive office machines such as mainframe computers. Since there were so expensive and lasted several years they were depreciated as such. Then along came desktop computers and the IRS treated them like mainframes even though they only a fraction of the cost. Now the IRS allows them to be written down in the first year or depreciated if they are purchased in bulk for a large corporation.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Ironic!

 

[Misty]

Using that logic, why should the rich pay more for their income than the poor? It's all income right?

And why is the estate tax 40%. It's just income right.

That's why a flat tax on all income is the fair thing to do. The right thing to do.

Which part of the term "occupation" do you need an adult to explain to you?

Occupation means the same thing if you are taking about jobs that make more money than other jobs therefore putting a person in a higher or lower tax bracket.

Thank you for disqualifying yourself from any further meaningful participation on this OP topic.

Have a nice day.

Lol you can't refute my point so you run away.

Get back to us when you can make a coherent point, m'kay?

Your condescension is noted and ignored.

I live and work in the real world. I don't pick words off the internet and rewrite them without understanding what I'm writing like you do.

 

[Flopper]

That's stupid. There would be little incentive to upgrade aging equipment. Manufacturing would then take a huge hit, meaning lay-offs.

Bullshit.

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

Then the income tax for businesses would not be an income tax. Income has to be calculated as the yearly revenue less that yearly expenses, otherwise it's not income. To exclude depreciation is to exclude a real expense. Capital expenditures have to be spread over the useful life the asset. You certainly should not be allowed to expense the cost a new factory that will last decades all in one year. This would make no sense at all.

Business should not be taxed at all. They don't pay it anyway, they pass it on to their customers.

That's a popular assumption but incorrect. A well-run business is already charging what they should charge for their product or service. If they had room to raise prices they would have already have done so. But of course doing so will cause them to lose sales to competitors.

Competitors today are not effected equally by increased taxes. For example, one competitor may be hit by a reduction in allowable equipment deprecation while another would not be effect at all because the goods being sold are manufactured abroad. A change in tax rules related to inventories, capital expenditures, foreign tax credits, loss carry forwards and many other expenses can have widely differing impacts on competitors.

The public seems to make the assumption that faced with increased expenses, a business's first reaction is to raise prices. In reality, it's usually the last thing a business wants to do.

 

[The Rabbi]

Bullshit.

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

Then the income tax for businesses would not be an income tax. Income has to be calculated as the yearly revenue less that yearly expenses, otherwise it's not income. To exclude depreciation is to exclude a real expense. Capital expenditures have to be spread over the useful life the asset. You certainly should not be allowed to expense the cost a new factory that will last decades all in one year. This would make no sense at all.

Business should not be taxed at all. They don't pay it anyway, they pass it on to their customers.

That's a popular assumption but incorrect. A well-run business is already charging what they should charge for their product or service. If they had room to raise prices they would have already have done so. But of course doing so will cause them to lose sales to competitors.

Competitors today are not effected equally by increased taxes. For example, one competitor may be hit by a reduction in allowable equipment deprecation while another would not be effect at all because the goods being sold are manufactured abroad. A change in tax rules related to inventories, capital expenditures, foreign tax credits, loss carry forwards and many other expenses can have widely differing impacts on competitors.

The public seems to make the assumption that faced with increased expenses, a business's first reaction is to raise prices. In reality, it's usually the last thing a business wants to do.

If you eliminate taxes for corporations you do so for all corporations. Ergo lower cost for all of them, ergo lower prices.

 

[Misty]

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

Then the income tax for businesses would not be an income tax. Income has to be calculated as the yearly revenue less that yearly expenses, otherwise it's not income. To exclude depreciation is to exclude a real expense. Capital expenditures have to be spread over the useful life the asset. You certainly should not be allowed to expense the cost a new factory that will last decades all in one year. This would make no sense at all.

It makes no sense if the profits derived from the new asset, like a factory, cannot be realized in the first year either. Depreciating it against future profits makes sense for large capital expenditures.

Smaller expenses don't have to be depreciated.

The tax code needs to be adjusted because of changes to the business environment. When the code was first drafted there weren't any expensive office machines such as mainframe computers. Since there were so expensive and lasted several years they were depreciated as such. Then along came desktop computers and the IRS treated them like mainframes even though they only a fraction of the cost. Now the IRS allows them to be written down in the first year or depreciated if they are purchased in bulk for a large corporation.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Ironic!

You know what's ironic? Hillary's son in law runs a hedge fund.

 

[auditor0007]

Low taxes on hedge fund managers, that is.

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump blasted hedge fund managers on Sunday as mere "paper pushers" who he said were "getting away with murder" by not paying their fair share of taxes.

In a telephone interview on CBS's "Face the Nation," Trump vowed to reform the tax laws if elected and said the current system was harming middle class Americans who currently faced higher tax rates than traders on Wall Street.

"The hedge fund guys didn't build this country. These are guys that shift paper around and they get lucky," Trump said.

"They are energetic. They are very smart. But a lot of them - they are paper-pushers. They make a fortune. They pay no tax. It's ridiculous, ok?"

Trump's comments were referring to the so-called "carried interest loophole" - a provision in the tax code which allows private equity and hedge fund managers pay taxes at the capital gains rate instead of the ordinary income rate.

Many fund managers are in the top income bracket, but the capital gains tax bracket is only 20 percent.

While these individuals are also required to pay an additional 3.8 percent surtax on their net investment income, this total rate is still far lower than the 39.6 percent rate that top wage earners must pay on their ordinary income.​

Trump says tax code is letting hedge funds 'get away with murder'

I happen to agree with Trump on this. As does Hillary Clinton. And Bernie Sanders.

But when I've discussed this with conservatives here on the board in the past, they've disagreed with me, saying hedge fund managers shouldn't pay higher taxes.

I've agreed with this all along. Only truly long term capital gains should be given reduced taxes, as far as I'm concerned, on any investment.

 

[auditor0007]

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

Then the income tax for businesses would not be an income tax. Income has to be calculated as the yearly revenue less that yearly expenses, otherwise it's not income. To exclude depreciation is to exclude a real expense. Capital expenditures have to be spread over the useful life the asset. You certainly should not be allowed to expense the cost a new factory that will last decades all in one year. This would make no sense at all.

It makes no sense if the profits derived from the new asset, like a factory, cannot be realized in the first year either. Depreciating it against future profits makes sense for large capital expenditures.

Smaller expenses don't have to be depreciated.

The tax code needs to be adjusted because of changes to the business environment. When the code was first drafted there weren't any expensive office machines such as mainframe computers. Since there were so expensive and lasted several years they were depreciated as such. Then along came desktop computers and the IRS treated them like mainframes even though they only a fraction of the cost. Now the IRS allows them to be written down in the first year or depreciated if they are purchased in bulk for a large corporation.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Ironic!

You know what's ironic? Hillary's son in law runs a hedge fund.

And?

 

[Zander]

Bullshit.

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

Then the income tax for businesses would not be an income tax. Income has to be calculated as the yearly revenue less that yearly expenses, otherwise it's not income. To exclude depreciation is to exclude a real expense. Capital expenditures have to be spread over the useful life the asset. You certainly should not be allowed to expense the cost a new factory that will last decades all in one year. This would make no sense at all.

Business should not be taxed at all. They don't pay it anyway, they pass it on to their customers.

That's a popular assumption but incorrect. A well-run business is already charging what they should charge for their product or service. If they had room to raise prices they would have already have done so. But of course doing so will cause them to lose sales to competitors.

Competitors today are not effected equally by increased taxes. For example, one competitor may be hit by a reduction in allowable equipment deprecation while another would not be effect at all because the goods being sold are manufactured abroad. A change in tax rules related to inventories, capital expenditures, foreign tax credits, loss carry forwards and many other expenses can have widely differing impacts on competitors.

The public seems to make the assumption that faced with increased expenses, a business's first reaction is to raise prices. In reality, it's usually the last thing a business wants to do.

I run a business. When my costs go up, I pass it along to my customers. When my costs go down, I pass that along as well.

 

[Misty]

Trump is incorrect. Hedge fund managers pay higher taxes and tax rates than Trump is hinting at here.

Then the income tax for businesses would not be an income tax. Income has to be calculated as the yearly revenue less that yearly expenses, otherwise it's not income. To exclude depreciation is to exclude a real expense. Capital expenditures have to be spread over the useful life the asset. You certainly should not be allowed to expense the cost a new factory that will last decades all in one year. This would make no sense at all.

It makes no sense if the profits derived from the new asset, like a factory, cannot be realized in the first year either. Depreciating it against future profits makes sense for large capital expenditures.

Smaller expenses don't have to be depreciated.

The tax code needs to be adjusted because of changes to the business environment. When the code was first drafted there weren't any expensive office machines such as mainframe computers. Since there were so expensive and lasted several years they were depreciated as such. Then along came desktop computers and the IRS treated them like mainframes even though they only a fraction of the cost. Now the IRS allows them to be written down in the first year or depreciated if they are purchased in bulk for a large corporation.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Ironic!

You know what's ironic? Hillary's son in law runs a hedge fund.

And?

that's why Trump said what he said. It was a personal dig at Hillary.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Trump is incorrect. Hedge fund managers pay higher taxes and tax rates than Trump is hinting at here.

Read and learn for a change!

The Hedge Fund Managers Tax Break: Because Wall Streeters Want Your Money

The hedge fund managers' tax break applies to the portion of their earnings that are contingent on the performance of their fund. It's standard for hedge fund managers to be paid a flat fee of 1-2 percent of the money they manage. In addition, they will typically get performance pay that is equal to 10-20 percent of what the fund earns above some threshold. Managers of private equity funds and real estate investment trusts have similar arrangements with the same tax break.

The portion of their pay that depends on the fund's performance is the "carried interest." It often runs into the tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars. While this money is clearly and explicitly pay for the work of managing the fund, under the current tax law managers get to have this income taxed at the capital gains rate.

This translates into a huge savings for the fund managers. If their earnings were taxed as normal income they would pay a 39.6 percent tax rate, compared to just a 20 percent capital gains tax rate. For a successful manager earning $10 million, the savings come to $1,960,000. If they earned $100 million, the savings would be equal to $19,600,000.

The fund managers' tax break first became a major political issue seven years ago. It seemed so obviously corrupt that it couldn't stand up in the light of day. When I first heard about it from a friend I assumed that he had misunderstood its nature since no tax break could be such a blatant give away to the rich. I then looked it up and realized that he was right.

I then asked a prominent conservative economist how he would justify this tax break. He told me that the fund managers are rich and powerful people. I assured him I knew this, but I wanted to know what sort of economic rationale there could be for this sort of tax break. He said there isn't one.

So there you have it. The richest people in the country don't pay their taxes because they don't feel like it. Happy Tax Day.

 

[auditor0007]

Trump is incorrect. Hedge fund managers pay higher taxes and tax rates than Trump is hinting at here.

It makes no sense if the profits derived from the new asset, like a factory, cannot be realized in the first year either. Depreciating it against future profits makes sense for large capital expenditures.

Smaller expenses don't have to be depreciated.

The tax code needs to be adjusted because of changes to the business environment. When the code was first drafted there weren't any expensive office machines such as mainframe computers. Since there were so expensive and lasted several years they were depreciated as such. Then along came desktop computers and the IRS treated them like mainframes even though they only a fraction of the cost. Now the IRS allows them to be written down in the first year or depreciated if they are purchased in bulk for a large corporation.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Ironic!

You know what's ironic? Hillary's son in law runs a hedge fund.

And?

that's why Trump said what he said. It was a personal dig at Hillary.

How is it a dig at Hillary? Being a hedge fund manager isn't a bad thing. It is the tax rules that are bad. Any hedge fund manager is just using tax law as it is written. Just ask Mitt Romney.

 

[Synthaholic]

If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit.

What about small business owners who aren't incorporated? I'm a sole proprietor.

 

[Synthaholic]

This is exactly why a flat tax is needed.
No more loop holes no more deductions,everyone pays.

Exactly............Scrap the current code. Simplify...........and make the system fair for everyone..............

They want the loop holes gone and so do I, but they for some strand reason want the same fucked up system we have now. Which is stupid.

They want the "rich" to pay more but don't want to pay their own fair share

Why are you tonguing the balls of the rich?

Why are thinking about them tonguing the balls of the rich?

That's what SassyIrishBitch does every chance she gets.

 

[Synthaholic]

Bullshit.

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

OK. so what about a building? The building doesnt get consumed when you buy it. It has value after that and is likely to get sold at a higher price later.

You only pay a (low) tax when you realize a profit. If you own a building and sell it - you pay a tax on your actual profit. Since (under this system) you've already deducted all maintenance in the year it was done, your basis is what you paid for it. Simple and effective.

OK. Works for me.
Frankly any change is going to be for the better since the system we have now just sucks.

Any change to make taxes simpler is going to run into a buzzsaw of lobbying by the huge accounting firms, and hundreds of thousands of CPAs.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

OK. so what about a building? The building doesnt get consumed when you buy it. It has value after that and is likely to get sold at a higher price later.

You only pay a (low) tax when you realize a profit. If you own a building and sell it - you pay a tax on your actual profit. Since (under this system) you've already deducted all maintenance in the year it was done, your basis is what you paid for it. Simple and effective.

OK. Works for me.
Frankly any change is going to be for the better since the system we have now just sucks.

Any change to make taxes simpler is going to run into a buzzsaw of lobbying by the huge accounting firms, and hundreds of thousands of CPAs.

Guess they'll have to get into another line of work.

 

[The Rabbi]

OK, so what do you mean by "no deductions"? Do you mean individuals cant deduct, e.g. mortgage interest, or do you mean companies cant, e.g. depreciate machinery and equipment?

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

OK. so what about a building? The building doesnt get consumed when you buy it. It has value after that and is likely to get sold at a higher price later.

You only pay a (low) tax when you realize a profit. If you own a building and sell it - you pay a tax on your actual profit. Since (under this system) you've already deducted all maintenance in the year it was done, your basis is what you paid for it. Simple and effective.

OK. Works for me.
Frankly any change is going to be for the better since the system we have now just sucks.

Any change to make taxes simpler is going to run into a buzzsaw of lobbying by the huge accounting firms, and hundreds of thousands of CPAs.

With any luck there wont be many Democrats for them to lobby.

 

[Synthaholic]

Lol you can't refute my point so you run away.

Get back to us when you can make a coherent point, m'kay?

Oh shit - we'll never see her again!

 

[Synthaholic]

Trump is incorrect. Hedge fund managers pay higher taxes and tax rates than Trump is hinting at here.

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Ironic!

You know what's ironic? Hillary's son in law runs a hedge fund.

And?

that's why Trump said what he said. It was a personal dig at Hillary.

How is it a dig at Hillary? Being a hedge fund manager isn't a bad thing. It is the tax rules that are bad. Any hedge fund manager is just using tax law as it is written. Just ask Mitt Romney.

She's just talking out of her ample ass.

 

[Synthaholic]

I want a simple tax code for businesses and individuals.

For businesses - No depreciation. No more capital expenditures versus expenses. If you need a new piece of equipment you buy it. It is deducted from the corporate profit. It would encourage investment, not discourage it.

Individual would take income from all sources and pay a low flat tax. No deduction. No exemptions.

A child could figure it out.

OK. so what about a building? The building doesnt get consumed when you buy it. It has value after that and is likely to get sold at a higher price later.

You only pay a (low) tax when you realize a profit. If you own a building and sell it - you pay a tax on your actual profit. Since (under this system) you've already deducted all maintenance in the year it was done, your basis is what you paid for it. Simple and effective.

OK. Works for me.
Frankly any change is going to be for the better since the system we have now just sucks.

Any change to make taxes simpler is going to run into a buzzsaw of lobbying by the huge accounting firms, and hundreds of thousands of CPAs.

With any luck there wont be many Democrats for them to lobby.

Right, because no one lobbies Republicans.

You're a stupid motherfucker.

 

[JoeB131]

They drone do nothing? Fly off and mate?
Oft he workers?
Have you considered AA?

Have you considered "Hooked on Phonics"?