We Need to Get Rid of the Death Tax

[quote]ZEB wrote:

You don’t even have to start a charitable organization. Just incorporate yourself. Take depreciation on your car, home office, and anything else you can tie to your corporation. This only is worthwhile if you make enough money to do it.

Basically, you are running a business out of your home. And those deductions are legitimate business costs. And as you say it’s only worthwile if you are actually making money.

These are legitimate business deductions. I wouldn’t call it a loophole, would you?

[/quote]

Every single person I know that has a company car uses it for personal things such as grocery shopping, taking the kids to soccer practice etc.

They report most of these miles as business miles.

The IRS has no way of knowing.

This is a loophole Arnold could drive his Hummer through.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Regarding an American citizen hiding money overseas it is sone all the time. I know people that have worked overseas and have accounts that have not been touched by the taxman.[/quote]

I don’t dispute that Americans put money overseas for various purposes. My only point (which is my original point) is that they don’t do it to avoid paying the initial tax.

If someone puts 1 million bucks in an offshore account he might be be able to avoid the tax on his interest…then again I’m not entirely sure of that either. It might be he only avoids the tax as long as the interest stays in his offshore account. If he intends to draw it out and use it as an American citizen I think he owes tax on that interest.

Okay…I’m not sure about that one. But I do know that there is no way to avoid the initial tax when earned if you are an American citizen.

[quote]Regarding Don Imus, his advantage is he gets to live like a king on the charity. His money goes twice as far because he is not taxed.

The charity can pay to fly him back and forth to his mansion etc.

Does it help sick kids? Sure. Does it help Imus? Of course.[/quote]

So his benefit is that he has a nice ranch paid for by donations. And he stays at this ranch whenever he feels like it.

Okay, that’s a benefit!

[quote]For the average exec that works all the time and does not have time for these boondoggles he just saves money by having his compensation hidden.

Rather than being taxed on income and then buying a car his company buys or leases the car. It takes a depreciation on the car and gets a tax break on the deprecation. He drives it.[/quote]

That’s simply anther legitimate tax deduction. I wouldn’t call it a loophole.

It seems like it’s an advantage of his job, not his income. Does the company benefit? They still have to pay for the car.

He gets the use of it, but he might have a company car anyway. Many sales people in fairly low level positions (in comparision) have the use of a company vehicle.

Well, I think you may have come up with one. If you are a famous guy and you want to use that fame to start a legitimate charity via a ranch you now have the advantage of staying at that ranch.

But again, it is a legitimate charity…I think.

I wonder how that worked 20 years ago?

Well…when you find some of those loopholes please let me know, because I have still not seen anything that would help Mr. rich executive. (not that I am one don’t get me wrong…I’m just a guy with a small business who had one good year :slight_smile:

But since we all hear about all these loopholes they must be there…somewhere…right?

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
ZEB wrote:

You don’t even have to start a charitable organization. Just incorporate yourself. Take depreciation on your car, home office, and anything else you can tie to your corporation. This only is worthwhile if you make enough money to do it.

Basically, you are running a business out of your home. And those deductions are legitimate business costs. And as you say it’s only worthwile if you are actually making money.

These are legitimate business deductions. I wouldn’t call it a loophole, would you?

Every single person I know that has a company car uses it for personal things such as grocery shopping, taking the kids to soccer practice etc.

They report most of these miles as business miles.

The IRS has no way of knowing.

This is a loophole Arnold could drive his Hummer through.[/quote]

Yes, that does happen, as I just stated in my answer to your last post (which is not up yet).

However, the discussion began with many claims of “the rich having tax loopholes.”

We are now down to regular working folk who have a company car and drive their wife to the grocery store and then lie to the IRS and claim it as business mileage…

Yea I’m sure that goes on. But it’s hardly a loophole for the rich.

I wanted to know where all the loopholes for the rich are. In particular the ones that allow them to avoid paying taxes on earned income as was the original assertion.

Honestly, I’m not saying that there are none. All I am saying is that I am not aware of any…And out of curiosity I have really looked! And while we all hear about the rich and their tax loopholes none of us can really give any examples.

I think you came the closest with the Imus example. But then again he actually began a charity which does quite a lot of good from what I have read. Hardly a loophole.

With regards to people living without a safety net:

Survey of Small Business Decision-Makers Reveals What It Takes to Attract and Retain Employees

COLUMBUS, Ga., May 18, 2006 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ – Seventy percent of small business decision-makers indicated they are concerned about their company’s ability to provide affordable health insurance coverage for employees. Two primary concerns included:

  • Attracting and retaining employees, with nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of respondents reporting that they are concerned about their company’s ability to provide a benefits package that will attract and retain employees; and
  • Nearly half (49 percent) agree that they cannot attract and retain top quality employees without offering competitive health benefits.

[…]

“Quality health insurance benefits are often key to recruiting and retaining good employees,” said Paul S. Amos, II, executive vice president and chief operating officer.

Further evidence in regards to the political leanings of the best and brightest:

Exactly How Liberal is Stanford University?

by Ryan Tracey
Stanford Review

A study completed by The Stanford Review found that liberal students overwhelmingly outnumber conservative students at Stanford University. Using political beliefs registered on Facebook, a popular social networking website, The Review found that 58% of Stanford undergraduates consider themselves liberal while only 10% of undergrads identify themselves as conservatives. The study collected data from over 3700 profiles, representing 56% of Stanford?s undergraduate population.

[…]

The results of the Facebook study are somewhat consistent with other analyses of Stanford?s political climate. An analysis of the College Republicans conducted several years back showed conservatives made-up approximately 20% of the undergraduate student population. A non-related study on Stanford?s faculty completed in February 2005 by the Palo Alto Weekly showed that democrats in the faculty outnumbered republicans 7.6 to 1, roughly comparable to the 5.8 to 1 ratio realized between liberals and conservatives observed on Facebook.

Compared to national studies, Stanford is substantially more liberal than the average university. A poll conducted by the Harvard Institute of Politics (IOP) of 1200 college students around the nation in March of this year found that nearly 31% of college students are conservative and 47% liberal, demonstrating a proportion of conservative students nearly three times that of Stanford. The study also showed an enhanced amount of partisanship in the average university?relative to Stanford. 18% identified themselves as moderates in the study, compared to 22% in the Stanford Facebook (where an additional 13% claimed to be “apathetic” or “other”).

Although specific data on the political leanings of undergraduates at other prominent universities is not readily available, school newspapers often conducted surveys prior to the last presidential election. The Daily Princetonian’s survey found that 62% of Princeton students, traditionally known to be more conservative, supported Kerry in the last Presidential election and 24% supported Bush. The Harvard Crimson’s numbers for Harvard students were more in favor of Kerry?73% to 19%. Both were more liberal than the average university.

It is very simple. The rich get their money through things other than a tradional paycheck.

They don’t pay as high a percentage tax on these various things as the average working man does.

When I take a trip I pay for it with my income that has already been taxed. When a wealthy guy does it he pays for it through his corporation that deducts it from their corporate income by declaring it a business expense.

They do it with everything they can do that is remotely legal.

There is an army of accountants that help their clients take advantage of the tax code.

The tricks are endless. Have your company lease your building from another company that you also own in your wife’s or son’s name or whatever.

The last company I worked for was owned by one of the richest privately held corporations in America.

When the owner died he willed it to his unborn grandkids (allegedly now illegal) in some sort of trust to avoid the death tax.

He had two sons. One runs the business and the other spends money.

They shuffle corporations around and lease things from each other in a tangled web to avoid paying taxes. One year company A takes a loss and the next year company B takes a loss.

They do this with a dozen or more corporations.

I honestly don’t know how it all works but they do it for good reason.

If you are having trouble finding ways to hide your money and deduct your expenses either you need a better accountant or you do not make enough money to make it all worthwhile.

While I don’t want socialized medicine I think it is time for employers to stop paying these costs. It is too big a burden on business and new job creation.

There has to be a way to revamp the system that allows us to use the money that is now making insurance companies rich on real health care instead.

[quote]hspder wrote:
Further evidence in regards to the political leanings of the best and brightest:

[/quote]

This is silly.

Stanford is a fine institution and it is very liberal. Big deal.

When these kids grow up and stop getting force fed liberalism many will likely shift their political beliefs.

You could post a study from an elite pre-school that claims the best and brightest lean towards The Wiggles or Mac and Cheese.

That still does not mean The Wiggles and Mac and Cheese are worthwhile for grown ups.

When I see a study such as this I am not sure if it is intentionally deceptive or merely poorly designed.

Either way it makes me uneasy that the best and brightest would put together such a load of crap.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Every single person I know that has a company car uses it for personal things such as grocery shopping, taking the kids to soccer practice etc.

They report most of these miles as business miles.

The IRS has no way of knowing.

This is a loophole Arnold could drive his Hummer through.[/quote]

Actually this is not a loophole, this is tax fraud, and it is criminal. Very difficult to detect though. Pizza delivery guys do the same thing.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
When these kids grow up and stop getting force fed liberalism many will likely shift their political beliefs.[/quote]

Would you care to provide any evidence of that?

I provided a study with some real numbers. Please return in kind.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

I would be a complete libertarian if I didn’t think that anyone except the owners and bosses would benefit from it, and the rest of us would get the shaft.

GASP! Heaven forbid that the owner of a small business get a tax break from big government.

Especially when all he does is abuse those poor workers…

Who for some reason continue to work for the guy when they could just go out and get anothe job.

Irish…you really have to rethink some things.
[/quote]

No, I don’t. I know the things I’ve seen, and I know the course of history. You cannot leave businesses alone without setting standards and laws for them to abide by. When you don’t, you have fifteen hour workdays, no minimum wage, and all the other shit that has already happened in this country and forced the government to step in.

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Rather than being taxed on income and then buying a car his company buys or leases the car. It takes a depreciation on the car and gets a tax break on the deprecation. He drives it.

That’s simply anther legitimate tax deduction. I wouldn’t call it a loophole.

It seems like it’s an advantage of his job, not his income. Does the company benefit? They still have to pay for the car.

He gets the use of it, but he might have a company car anyway. Many sales people in fairly low level positions (in comparision) have the use of a company vehicle.

I am not an accountant so I do not know all the tax dodges.

Well, I think you may have come up with one. If you are a famous guy and you want to use that fame to start a legitimate charity via a ranch you now have the advantage of staying at that ranch.
[/quote]

The car is taxable income, the exec must report it as such, and pay FICA as well as income taxes. The company cannot take depreciation on the car if its not used in the business, it would record the expenses as salary. The employer also has to pay FICA taxes on the vehicle.

Staying at the ranch would be a ‘no additional cost’ benefit and is not taxable. Just like airline employees don’t have to claim their free travel as income (they do pay the sales tax)as long as the benefit is available to all employees and that there are no addional costs incurred by the company by providing the service.

[quote]hspder wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
When these kids grow up and stop getting force fed liberalism many will likely shift their political beliefs.

Would you care to provide any evidence of that?

I provided a study with some real numbers. Please return in kind.
[/quote]

LOL…You supplied a study that showed that in three major universities more students considered themselves liberal than conservative!

GOOD JOB!

… and for those who are completely missing my point:

I am not advocating that we go out and shoot all business owners. I am not a Bolshevik. I understand they have their role in a capitalist system, and that capitalism is the least bad system we have.

What pisses me off to no end is this retarded philosophy that they are MORE important than workers and they actually are worth the orders of magnitude more that they earn in comparison to the people that work for them.

I read conservatives complaining about all the lazy people who live on Social Security, and can only but laugh at the hypocrisy.

About 90% of my net income comes from capital gains and dividends. What did I do to make so much money? I take calculated risks. I was fortunate enough to be able to go to college, get educated, and learn how the market works. I was also fortunate enough to find and marry a beautiful, intelligent lady who also went to college and helps me with statistical models and allows us to have hugely favorable risk-reward ratios.

That 90% of my income uses up about 1 hour of my day. I pay 15% tax on the gross.

I could just sit back, work 5 hours a week, and retain 90% of my net income – again, paying only 15% of tax.

It is my LIBERAL conscience that prevents me from doing so. It is my liberal conscience that makes me want to help others and takes me out of bed each morning, and work 10 to 12 hours a day on creating classes, delivering them, doing research and writing papers.

… and pay twice as much tax on that work.

Anyone else see a problem with that?

Do you really think that the time I spend playing in the stock, options and futures market is worth 100x more (per hour) than my work as a professor, and that in fact should be taxed less?

The conservative rationale is that reducing taxes gives people an incentive to invest more.

That is a profoundly retarded rationale.

The only thing that reducing taxes does long term is to drive up inflation Nothing more, nothing less. My capital gains income almost doubled after Bush reduced taxes the first time. Did I increase my investments because of that? No. I just sat back and got a “bonus” anyway, without changing anything. I didn?t have to.

If I had made the mistake of increasing my investments, that would help drive up inflation further – if you don’t understand why, try using your brain and think what happens a while after a bunch of money suddenly shows up in the economy without an increase in (worker) productivity. That’s right: inflation.

Clearly, Bush slept through Econ-101, but apparently so did everybody that voted for him.

The only safe way to grow an economy, without fear of inflation, is to increase productivity. Productivity depends, mostly, on worker output. And how do you increase worker output in a developed country? You keep the best and brightest around. You treat them well. You keep them happy. You give them benefits, flexible work hours, and all kinds of lifestyle improvements – they will respond back with commitment and a sense of duty to the company, which translates into increased productivity.

Because if you don’t, they will move elsewhere – and moving to other companies costs everybody a boatload of money. On high-expertise jobs (the ones that allow us to compete with the likes of China), having a worker change companies costs a lot of wasted time (ramping up a replacement in the old company, and ramping up the new hire in the new company), and, hence, productivity. So employee retention is critical for the health of our economy.

This is not China, where you can keep people working 14 hours a week under the promise of a new TV for the family.

We need to treat our working force with ALL the respect they deserve.

That’s my point.

[quote]hspder wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
When these kids grow up and stop getting force fed liberalism many will likely shift their political beliefs.

Would you care to provide any evidence of that?

I provided a study with some real numbers. Please return in kind.
[/quote]

Do you actually believe that the students are fed balanced arguments by their liberal professors?

You just admitted it is a liberal institution and now you want to pretend that the liberalism does not penetrate the classroom?

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
It is very simple. The rich get their money through things other than a tradional paycheck.

They don’t pay as high a percentage tax on these various things as the average working man does.

When I take a trip I pay for it with my income that has already been taxed. When a wealthy guy does it he pays for it through his corporation that deducts it from their corporate income by declaring it a business expense.[/quote]

We are back to a legitimate business expense. This doesn’t lower their tax bite one iota. That is really not “hiding their money” as you suggested.

Yes, I’m sure they do. But what specific advantages do they get relative to their income? How does Mr. Rich executive pay less in taxes? What are the loopholes?

Look…I’m not disagreeing with you. I simply want to know what those tricks are. And honestly no one can tell me!

Okay, I purchase a bldg. and lease it to my business. The business pays me $1,000. per mo rent.

I then declare the rent on my taxes. How does that help me avoid paying more taxes?

This is not only not a loophole, I’m not even sure it saves a dang thing.

[quote]The last company I worked for was owned by one of the richest privately held corporations in America.

When the owner died he willed it to his unborn grandkids (allegedly now illegal) in some sort of trust to avoid the death tax.

He had two sons. One runs the business and the other spends money.

They shuffle corporations around and lease things from each other in a tangled web to avoid paying taxes. One year company A takes a loss and the next year company B takes a loss.[/quote]

I’m not trying to be argumentative, especially with you. We agree on just about everything (see I know you’re a smart guy :). But, that really makes no sense. You have explained nothing with this example.

You can lease things back and forth all you want. The bottom line is, unless you are outright cheating on your taxes, the lease money you receive is still taxable income.

Keep one thing in mind: they might do it for reasons other than to beat the tax man.

For example, if you and I and 4 of our brothers decide to get into business we might want to draw some lines relative to income.

For example:

If we each own one bldg. the lease money paid to the brother who owns the one buiding is very clearly his to keep.

There might be other reasons for it too, even tax reasons. But for the life of me, I can’t think of even one! And a team of my accountants could not think of one either!

[quote]If you are having trouble finding ways to hide your money and deduct your expenses either you need a better accountant or you do not make enough money to make it all worthwhile.
[/quote]

Well, it was a lot of money to me. And enough to hire one of the best accounting firms in the nation. And I told them I didn’t care what I paid to them as long as they could find a way to have me pay less taxes legally!

These guys took a few weeks and got back to me…ZIP!

I said there must be a way to legally pay less in taxes…what about this? What about that?

Each of my ideas (specific suggestions at the time) were shot down methodically and with great care.

The things I thought people did…Well they just can’t do!

Granted I’m no where near the folks that you might be thinking of in income. It’s just ONE good year. But I brought some specific names into the equation and really studied ALL of the possibilities…Still nothing!

Nope no one including you is able to give even one loophole!

We all “think” they are there but not one of us can come up with even one legal loophole to hide money!

[quote]Kayrob wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Every single person I know that has a company car uses it for personal things such as grocery shopping, taking the kids to soccer practice etc.

They report most of these miles as business miles.

The IRS has no way of knowing.

This is a loophole Arnold could drive his Hummer through.

Actually this is not a loophole, this is tax fraud, and it is criminal. Very difficult to detect though. Pizza delivery guys do the same thing.
[/quote]

Semantics. It happens every day.

I delivered pizza in college.

I was paid gas money and I did not make nearly enough money to deduct anything other than the standard deduction.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

I would be a complete libertarian if I didn’t think that anyone except the owners and bosses would benefit from it, and the rest of us would get the shaft.

GASP! Heaven forbid that the owner of a small business get a tax break from big government.

Especially when all he does is abuse those poor workers…

Who for some reason continue to work for the guy when they could just go out and get anothe job.

Irish…you really have to rethink some things.

No, I don’t. I know the things I’ve seen, and I know the course of history. You cannot leave businesses alone without setting standards and laws for them to abide by. When you don’t, you have fifteen hour workdays, no minimum wage, and all the other shit that has already happened in this country and forced the government to step in.[/quote]

I’m not for throwing out laws that curtail abuse of employees.

Where did I say that?

[quote]ZEB wrote:
You supplied a study that showed that in three major universities more students considered themselves liberal than conservative![/quote]

Not just “three major universities”. We’re talking about the best universities on the PLANET. And it’s not just “more” students. It’s overwhelmingly more, hands-down.

What’s the problem, reality hurts you somehow? Are you complaining that reality has a liberal bias?

My challenge still stands: show me a study that shows that Stanford, Harvard and Princeton alumni change their political inclination from liberal to conservative over the course of their lives. I’m sure that if that’s true, some “conservative think-tank” has performed and publicized such study.

I can’t find it myself, but surely it’s because I’m just a dumb biased liberal.

[quote]Kayrob wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Rather than being taxed on income and then buying a car his company buys or leases the car. It takes a depreciation on the car and gets a tax break on the deprecation. He drives it.

That’s simply anther legitimate tax deduction. I wouldn’t call it a loophole.

It seems like it’s an advantage of his job, not his income. Does the company benefit? They still have to pay for the car.

He gets the use of it, but he might have a company car anyway. Many sales people in fairly low level positions (in comparision) have the use of a company vehicle.

I am not an accountant so I do not know all the tax dodges.

Well, I think you may have come up with one. If you are a famous guy and you want to use that fame to start a legitimate charity via a ranch you now have the advantage of staying at that ranch.

The car is taxable income, the exec must report it as such, and pay FICA as well as income taxes. The company cannot take depreciation on the car if its not used in the business, it would record the expenses as salary. The employer also has to pay FICA taxes on the vehicle.

Staying at the ranch would be a ‘no additional cost’ benefit and is not taxable. Just like airline employees don’t have to claim their free travel as income (they do pay the sales tax)as long as the benefit is available to all employees and that there are no addional costs incurred by the company by providing the service.[/quote]

Okay, I’m thinking you are an accountant!

(If you’re not pretend you are)

And that is what we need at this point in this thread.

Please tell me how a rich executive making…over 1 million dollars per year (not me and not anyone on this thread probably) can escape paying taxes, or dramtically lower his tax bite with a loophole.

Thank you for your time and you can bill Zap.

:slight_smile: