Author Topic: Thousands of wealthy earners manage to zero out tax bills (Read 2745 times)

crustylicious · « **on:** May 30, 2012, 04:45:46 PM »

Thousands of wealthy earners manage to zero out tax billsBy Allison Linn
More than 35,000 people who had income of more than $200,000 in 2009 paid no federal income taxes that year, according to a new report from the Internal Revenue Service.
The non-taxpayers were among the top 3 percent of all earners with more than $200,000 in "expanded income," which includes adjusted gross income plus other less common sources of income such as tax-exempt interest or foreign income.
The number of wealthy people who paid no federal income taxes rose between 2007 and 2009, thanks in part to new tax credits, according to the report.
Programs such as a relatively new refundable alternative minimum tax credit and the first-time homebuyer credit helped a tiny portion of these wealthy earners to zero out their federal tax bill.
Some of those credits were introduced as a way to help spur spending and economic growth. Previously, the main tax credits available only applied to people with lower incomes.
For 2009, the report found that about nearly 4 million people, or about 2.8 percent of all taxpayers, had expanded income of $200,000 a year. About 0.8 percent of them, or 35,061 people, paid no federal income tax.
More than 4,000 of those people benefited from the new tax credits, according to the report.
The total number of wealthy people who did not pay any income taxes increased slightly from 2008 but saw a major jump from 2007, likely due to a combination of factors.
In general, the report noted, it takes a number of credits and deductions for a wealthy person can zero out a tax bill. These can include things like tax-exempt interest, medical deductions and charitable contributions.
Some wealthy taxpayers are also likely paid taxes to other countries even if they did not pay them in this country.
Nearly half of all American households don’t pay any federal income taxes, thanks to tax credits, deductions and other provisions in the tax code. However, many of those taxpayers are poor or elderly.
The issue of whether wealthy people pay their fair share of income taxes has been in the spotlight for nearly a year, since billionaire Warren Buffett implored lawmakers to tax the rich more. The so-called Buffett Rule, which would have required some millionaires to pay more in taxes, was rejected by the Senate in April.

http://lifeinc.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/30/11958591-thousands-of-wealthy-earners-manage-to-zero-out-tax-bills?lite

Could the OWS be on to something?

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #1 on:** May 30, 2012, 11:43:08 PM »

Quote

Could the OWS be on to something?

Nope! At .8% of the top 2.4% it's not even a drop in the proverbial bucket!

Folks haven't figure out yet that if we took everything the "rich" have and apply it to the national debt, it wouldn't even scratch the surface either.

ironglow · « **Reply #2 on:** May 30, 2012, 11:47:23 PM »

Crusty;
Driving the rich ouit of the country doesn't help either. So start pushing for a "flat tax' or Herman Cain's 9-9-9 plan.. They can't get away with it then.

lakota · « **Reply #3 on:** May 31, 2012, 04:08:57 AM »

yes. a flat tax that EVERYONE has to pay. That way there) s nothing to whine about.

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk

havent got a clue · « **Reply #4 on:** May 31, 2012, 04:40:17 AM »

the plain fact is everyone has the same "tax loop holes" it's just the more informed use them!

Ranch13 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 31, 2012, 05:07:23 AM »

Always makes me wonder if Warren Buffet is so danged concerned about who's paying what for taxes, then why doesn't he just call off his tax attorneys, stop the fight with the IRS and pay the millions of dollars the IRS says he owes?
I like the flat tax idea. 1% from everybody would likely cover all the governments bills, and then everybody has a dog in the fight, and this class warfare nonsense would likely get quieted down a good bit.

45-70.gov · « **Reply #6 on:** May 31, 2012, 05:39:10 AM »

a national sales tax sorta has a built in tarrif in imports

also if there were no income or corporate tax
we would be more competitive selling stuff over-seas

mcbammer · « **Reply #7 on:** May 31, 2012, 05:45:59 AM »

Its time for a flat tax accross the board . Its the fair way to go for everyone .

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #8 on:** May 31, 2012, 06:56:14 AM »

no one even touched on what a tax payer has to do to not pay. In most cases they either have to do something that stimulates the economy or give to charity . EX a first time home buyer , that stimulates the economy for the house to the furnitue to curtians etc. Was it a good investment by the govt ? they forego a small amount of income but stimulate the economy thus bring in more tax dollars from all the assoicated business from the sale of the house.
Has America been dunbed down to the point people don't have a clue anymore ?

45-70.gov · « **Reply #9 on:** May 31, 2012, 07:03:05 AM »

flat tax

as in every one pays the SAME.....say $10,000
or show up at a work camp and be paid according to there ability

lakota · « **Reply #10 on:** May 31, 2012, 07:23:51 AM »

The only problem I can see with a flat tax is that it would likely render an enitre army of government employees obsolete and they would never allow that to happen

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #11 on:** May 31, 2012, 07:46:59 AM »

The IRS employees could be retrained as border guards to keep illegals out. The sales tax or VAT tax could be 1% of income for all people and business. You could have 2% on imports. From what I heard from a Libertarian, a 1% sales tax on everything would eliminate all income tax. If need be to help the poor etc, you could take off tax on food purchased to be consumed at home but not restaurants. You could also tax the tax off medical expenses. Of course the government wouldn't stop there, they would raise the tax on luxury items, and probably take the tax paid by charities. However, this system would not need the IRS to hassle individuals, only businesses who collect the taxes for them. Good record keeping of sales would solve that though. Also, people who work "under the table" or who get paid in cash that they don't report, would have to pay when they bought something.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #12 on:** May 31, 2012, 07:48:02 AM »

Flat tax could have a min income before you have to pay .

Ranch13 · « **Reply #13 on:** May 31, 2012, 08:13:45 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on May 31, 2012, 07:48:02 AM

Flat tax could have a min income before you have to pay .

1$ US sounds like a good minimum to me.

Swampman · « **Reply #14 on:** May 31, 2012, 08:22:46 AM »

"Thousands of wealthy earners manage to zero out tax bills"

Excellent, and a goal we should all strive for. There is no such thing as a good tax.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #15 on:** May 31, 2012, 08:31:17 AM »

Quote from: Ranch13 on May 31, 2012, 08:13:45 AM

Quote from: SHOOTALL on May 31, 2012, 07:48:02 AM
Flat tax could have a min income before you have to pay .
1$ US sounds like a good minimum to me.

I would rather not force those who can't make but a subsistance wage give up and go on the govt dole. I'm of the opinion that instead of not letting people on wealfare get a job , let them encourage them and supliment them until they make more working than on wealfare . Of course some would find a way to abuse that.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #16 on:** May 31, 2012, 08:32:36 AM »

Flat tax would also be more fair across the board. Rich or poor no deductions. However in a nutshell, no amount of taxing, tax increases, or even if the rich paid everything the earned, it still would not balance the federal budget. Only drastic cuts will balance the budget or drastically grow the economy. Growth is not going to happen in the current administration.

Ranch13 · « **Reply #17 on:** May 31, 2012, 08:36:57 AM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on May 31, 2012, 08:31:17 AM

Quote from: Ranch13 on May 31, 2012, 08:13:45 AM
Quote from: SHOOTALL on May 31, 2012, 07:48:02 AM
Flat tax could have a min income before you have to pay .
1$ US sounds like a good minimum to me.
I would rather not force those who can't make but a subsistance wage give up and go on the govt dole. I'm of the opinion that instead of not letting people on wealfare get a job , let them encourage them and supliment them until they make more working than on wealfare . Of course some would find a way to abuse that.

Shootall I would even have those that are on the govt dole pay their flat tax, there's no reason for some to recieve for free, what other's put alot of blood sweat and tears into.

Swampman · « **Reply #18 on:** May 31, 2012, 08:39:19 AM »

There should not be any government dole...period.

lakota · « **Reply #19 on:** May 31, 2012, 08:43:53 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on May 31, 2012, 08:22:46 AM

"Thousands of wealthy earners manage to zero out tax bills"

Excellent, and a goal we should all strive for. There is no such thing as a good tax.

You will not get an arguement from me on that.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #20 on:** May 31, 2012, 11:20:51 AM »

Welfare benefits, food stamps, and government housing, should be less than what one would make working minimum wage with taxes. That way only the truely needy get benefits, others would opt to work. Someone took a street survey of those collecting benefits outside a welfare office. They found that most had cell phones, averaged two TV's, washers, driers, and had cable TV.

That is why we either need to give them housing, food stamps, and minimum utilities. NO MONEY or VERY LIMITED MONEY. That way they would be encouraged to work and not be so wastefull. The poor CAN'T HANDLE MONEY, or otherwise, they would pull out of poverty.

When I run into someone near a grocery store panhandling for money for food. I will take them in the store and ask them what they need within say $20. I would buy it. Most of the time, they won't do it, they want money for something else, like alcohol or drugs.

A study was done several years ago that said if all money was evenly distributed world wide with no government interference or taxes, within 6 months, all the money would be back in the same hands. The first person in New York who won the lottery in the 70's was on welfare. He won $1 million. Within 5 years he was back on welfare. He blew it all on alcohol, drugs, prostitutes, etc.

DDZ · « **Reply #21 on:** May 31, 2012, 12:05:41 PM »

The top 3% of taxpayers earn 30% of all income, but pay 52% of all income taxes. So how much do we think they should pay? Maybe the op can give us some ideas. The top wage earners pay most of the taxes, but are always criticized for not paying enough. While the bottom half pay nothing, and many of them get a tax return, but there is never much fuss over that.
If the rich paid all or most of their income in taxes it would not make one bit of difference, because government would just spend it and spend more on top of that. Its just so easy to rail against the rich isn't it? We want more job loss in this country, lets go right ahead and make the rich pay more taxes. More job loss is exactly what would happen.
What is it with people that think the rich don't pay enough, when they pay most all income tax. Is it envy? Or is it greed, and the idea that they should have some of it? The majority of rich people took large risks, and have busted their butts to get what they have. Maybe those of us that are not making over 200K a year should just quit our jobs and go on the government dole. I see fat lazy people living pretty well off of tax payers backs. It appears easy enough to do anymore. Then we can all piss and moan about rich people not giving us enough of their money.

jimster · « **Reply #22 on:** May 31, 2012, 01:05:51 PM »

Since the poor pay nothing in taxes, and the people who make very little pay nothing, and the people that complain about the wealthy don't pay, and actually receive money instead of pay taxes (earned income credit/vote for me cash)...just who in the world does crusty think IS paying taxes? Lets see...the government takes in 2.6 trillion in taxes each year and the people that complain about the wealthy pay nothing and actually receive money they never paid in...gee, wonder where the 2.6 trillion comes from. Not the complainers...that's for sure. It comes from the wealthy, and someone on here already said it...you could take everything they own, all of it, and would not put a dent the debt these socialist spent themselves into.
Best leave the wealthy alone...they are the only ones holding up your government crusty. If you believe we do need a government like you say, you best leave their income alone...they got nothing else but the wealthy. The people who the Dem's represent ain't payin nothin...I'd say leave well enough alone.

Quote

Flat tax would also be more fair across the board.

Yes it would Dixie Dude....and can you imagine millions of screaming liberals/socialists the first time they have to pay anything? LOL!! They would burn their cities to the ground first time they did not receive a welfare check from the IRS...let alone actually pay anything. That's the kind of people they are.

Hooker · « **Reply #23 on:** May 31, 2012, 01:53:36 PM »

Taxes are theft to those who can get around them I give a big thumbs up

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #24 on:** June 01, 2012, 12:57:57 AM »

Quote from: Ranch13 on May 31, 2012, 08:36:57 AM

Quote from: SHOOTALL on May 31, 2012, 08:31:17 AM
Quote from: Ranch13 on May 31, 2012, 08:13:45 AM
Quote from: SHOOTALL on May 31, 2012, 07:48:02 AM
Flat tax could have a min income before you have to pay .
1$ US sounds like a good minimum to me.
I would rather not force those who can't make but a subsistance wage give up and go on the govt dole. I'm of the opinion that instead of not letting people on wealfare get a job , let them encourage them and supliment them until they make more working than on wealfare . Of course some would find a way to abuse that.
Shootall I would even have those that are on the govt dole pay their flat tax, there's no reason for some to recieve for free, what other's put alot of blood sweat and tears into.

So we can assume you would be willing to raise taxes on everyone so those on wealfare could get enough to live and pay taxes ? No thanks , there are people who are on wealfare who need to be there for real reasons . Clean up wealfare !

Ranch13 · « **Reply #25 on:** June 01, 2012, 01:56:36 AM »

Shootall your assumption is wrong flat wrong.
Just because someone is recieiving welfare, should not exclude them from paying taxes on the money they recieve. What gives them the "right" to not have to pay taxes on what they recieve?
If there's going to be an income tax, then anybody and everybody that has "income" no matter where it came from needs to be paying , and they all need to pay the same percentage.No loopholes no deductions, if you make 10$ then you need to pay your 1%, if you take in 10 million dollars then you need to pay 1%. That way everybody has skin in the game, and this bullspit about the rich not paying their fair share gets put away. Of course there will always be the simpletons that can't figure out pecentages, but then maybe somewhere along the line the education systems can be brought back under control...

mcbammer · « **Reply #26 on:** June 01, 2012, 01:58:26 AM »

National sales tax + state, city, county , sales tax , sounds like double taxation . not good.

fatercat · « **Reply #27 on:** June 01, 2012, 02:07:20 AM »

very simple, the govt. can not spend more than it takes in. we all pay some kind of tax. the goverment spending is the problem. 1st is forien aid. 2nd is the pay and retirement plan of govt. emps. how much tax is the govt. making on the high price of gas tax? less spending and no more taxes.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #28 on:** June 01, 2012, 02:21:42 AM »

That cracks me up !
First its called INCOME tax for a reason its income not charity . Second under your thouht process then moneys won in a law suit (sueing) would be taxed , again money not earned income.
I don't want to pay more tax so the govt can give it to people on wealfare then get part of it back from them. FIRST I would be paying MORE to start . SECOND how long do you think it would take for some enterprising rep in the house to say well if we need more tax rev we can just raise benifits to those on wealfare the take back more ................

People in this country need to learn that its more important to control what is taken from you than what is given to someone else. If those who make high incomes don't pay high taxes but invest in business and you have a good paying job what have you lost ? but if a flat rate is used don't you see that 25% taken from a guy making $40000.00 a year will suffer more than the guy making a million ?

Ranch13 · « **Reply #29 on:** June 01, 2012, 02:41:10 AM »

Shootall right now if I sell cows that I have raised, I get hit at 35% capital gains tax. I leased the mineral rights on a piece of property and guess what? The government was there wanting 55% of that "lease" income.
Do you wanna take a shot at what the tax bill is going to be when my bachelor uncle passes away and the three of us who are his only heirs get our inheritance?
Got any idea how much they hit the wife for when she takes a chunk from her 401K?
Don't be handing me any crap about who pays what for taxes, I pay something close to 15 % by the time it's all said and done, yet there are people that are living from the cash they recieve from the government that don't pay any taxes, and they have more "luxuries" than I can afford. Not to mention folks that show a bottom line at about the same level as ours, that not only don't have to pay taxes, but because they're still young enough to have kids in the house they get an additional 4800$ back.
So yeah if there's going to be an income tax then it needs to hit everybody, for the same percentage, doesn't matter how you got that money.