As someone who thinks he is an expert on taxes, I’m surprised that you have a problem with the elimination of tax shelters and a flat tax. You like to use the word “loopholes” and pervert it for your own ends but the fact is, you interchange the terms ‘loop holes” and “tax shelters” at will and do so dishonestly. Tax deductions, shelters and loopholes will be eliminated and you know that's what was being referd to don't you?
Hate to break it to you but not only are there people who pay zero federal income taxes, many of them get refunds from the federal government when they never paid a dime in income taxes.
Nice charts though. I bet you think they make you look smart.
Wow, someone sure got your panties in a bunch. I certainly do not recall being personally vicious. I was only attacking the notion of accepting that wiping out loopholes was going to solve anything given no one has been particularly specific about what loopholes are.
First, I do know a little bit about taxes as I was once a CPA and have been a CFO much of my career (feel free to visit my profile. I laid out my bio two years ago). I don't claim to be an expert, but I do have reason to believe that vis-a-vis this board, I have a better handle on taxes and tax theory than the vast majority of this group. Second, I never used the word 'tax shelter', so how did I use it interchangeably with 'loophole'? Third, I refuted your statement that people paid NO taxes (which was your statement) not that they paid no income taxes. I think you made an error in precision if you meant income tax, but that is not what you said. Nonetheless, the distinction isn't terribly relevant given that our government has seen fit to commingle income tax revenue with employment tax revenue such that the distinction is not much more than moot. It is not true that people pay no tax; it is true that many people do not pay income tax. The reason that many do not pay income tax gets to income tax theory. Income taxes are assessed on discretionary income, not on gross income. Given that half of the US population has no discretionary income, they pay no tax. Given that our decrease in the highest margin rate has acted to shift wealth and income in this country (which I discuss below) and that viturally all new income since 1980 has gone to the highest earners, the trend of more and more people without discretionary income will continue.
http://www.cbpp.org/files/6-25-10inc.pdf
Again, "loophole" is a vague populist term. It has as much precision and therefore is as meaningful as the term 'bad guy'. Everyone hates the bad guy. Until someone actually has the guts (Ryan either included or especially) to tell us what they mean by it, its just sweet nothings whispered to the the fools that think we should get rid of "bad guys". Virtually all "loopholes" have a very legitimate reason to be in the tax code and thus would be quite problematic to eliminate (like home mortgage interest deductions) or have far too much money behind them to ever be eliminated (like cap gain treatment of publicly traded stock or carried interest treatment of private equity holdings). Yes, there are some "loopholes" that could be closed, but they would collectively represent only a cosmetic change to our tax structure. Sorry, but you can not eliminate all deductions. Nothing would kill an economy faster than just taxing revenue (hopefully that is obvious, but if not, I am happy to explain it)
The idea that being educated in taxes means you would automatically be for a flat tax is a bit absurd. Do you think the people that architected the current system were not versed in its objectives or structure? They were not. I understand the argument for a flat tax as I understand some of the percepts of Buddhism; but that does not mean I buy it. I don't. I believe in the progressive tax system, and in fact, believe it is in everyone's interest to have it more progressive (with rates approaching 50% at the higher end of the income spectrum). Under the current tax structure, business owners (a club that I am now a member of) are incented to take cash out of a business rather than re-invest in the business. I am in favor of very low capital gains (from actually investing money in a business, not buy stocks in public market) and higher taxes on passive income and high wages (over $1M). Note that the effect of lowering the highest marginal rates as acted to promote the Mexification of the US by moving wealth from the 99% of people to the 1% of people.
I'm glad you like the pretty graphs. I don't care if they make me look smart, but they do add credibility to my positions. I try to support what I say wherever I can. If everyone backed up their statement, this discussion board would be even better. Hopefully the readers of this thread see reason to my points (even if they disagree). I don't care if you or anyone disagrees. It is, after all, DEBATE Politics. But, I do wish people would bring game. In your case, you offered not much more to this sidebar than insult and insolence. You could sharpen your game!
