Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Presidential candidates taxation policies
Old 01-06-2008, 03:02 PM   #1
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 886
Presidential candidates taxation policies

I ran across this guys blog when I was Googling for some estate planning information. He takes a look at some of the major players taxation policies. Might be of some interest to people.

Kevin A. Pollock BLAWG
__________________

__________________

Trek is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 01-06-2008, 03:09 PM   #2
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trek View Post
I ran across this guys blog when I was Googling for some estate planning information. He takes a look at some of the major players taxation policies. Might be of some interest to people.

Kevin A. Pollock BLAWG
Good read it at least it gives us an ideal on where they stand on taxation.

GOD BLESS
__________________

__________________
War is a poor chisel to carve out tomorrow. - Martin Luther King Jr.
Seek peace, and pursue it. - Psalms 34:14
Be kind to unkind people - they need it the most - by Ashleigh Brilliant.
Wags is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2008, 03:49 PM   #3
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
TromboneAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,198
I used to like the simplicity of a national sales tax, but got a quick education from this forum, and I realize that it would never work, and isn't desirable.

My guess is that Huckabee would be wasting his time on this if he got elected and tried to get it through.
__________________
Al
TromboneAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2008, 06:48 PM   #4
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,972
Quote:
Originally Posted by TromboneAl View Post
I used to like the simplicity of a national sales tax, but got a quick education from this forum, and I realize that it would never work, and isn't desirable.

My guess is that Huckabee would be wasting his time on this if he got elected and tried to get it through.
Do you have a link to a previous discussion on the topic?
__________________
aaronc879 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 03:34 PM   #5
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by TromboneAl View Post
I used to like the simplicity of a national sales tax, but got a quick education from this forum, and I realize that it would never work, and isn't desirable.

My guess is that Huckabee would be wasting his time on this if he got elected and tried to get it through.
I think it would be hard to get any serious tax reform through. Too many influential people make a fat living off our ridiculously complicated system.

Plus, I think the IRS (assuming it oversaw some kind of simplified tax system) would see an increase in compliance and quite possibly higher annual tax revenue.

"The tax code now exceeds a staggering 60,000 pages, prompting Americans to waste 6.2 billion hours just completing their returns every year. Deciphering it costs the country $203.4 billion a year, according to the Tax Foundation. Its complexities generate additional job-killing distortions throughout our economy."

"The answer, quite simply, is the flat tax. It has a single, low rate that treats all Americans fairly and has no deductions or special-interest loopholes. The flat tax is clear, honest and easily understood, and passing a flat tax would liberate taxpayers and jump-start the economy."

USATODAY.com - Scrap the tax code

60,000 pages?? It's beyond insane. The tax code shouldn't be more than 6 paragraphs!
__________________

Trek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 05:29 PM   #6
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,820
I'll agree that the current code is ridiculously complex. We should eliminate all "intentional" special deals, including all individual deductible expenses.

However, there is no reason to go to a single tax rate. If there are 60,000 pages of tax code, then 59,999 pages are used to determine your taxable income, and 1 page has the table of graduated rates that we apply to that income. I would keep the 1 page and get rid of as many of the 59,999 as possible.
__________________
Independent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 05:41 PM   #7
Recycles dryer sheets
Arc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 370
Nice list of all the things they would like to do. I'm scared of what will happen if they don't do anything and just let Bush's tax cuts expire.
__________________
Arc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 06:42 PM   #8
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 97
Just looking at it on the surface, I think Paul's ideas are the soundest.
__________________
starter82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 07:14 PM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by starter82 View Post
Just looking at it on the surface, I think Paul's ideas are the soundest.
Although there could be some benefit to more closely linking use of government services to funding said services, "fee" is just another word for "tax"...

President Paul: That'll be $12,000 please.

HFWR: Grumble, grumble...

President Paul: But it's a fee, not a tax.

HFWR: Oh, in that case...
__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 07:16 PM   #10
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,764
I love the idea of a consumption tax.
__________________
Notmuchlonger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 07:51 PM   #11
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
TromboneAl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,198
Quote:
Do you have a link to a previous discussion on the topic?
http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f28/new-national-sales-tax-15380.html

http://www.early-retirement.org/foru...eam-17556.html
__________________
Al
TromboneAl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 07:52 PM   #12
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by HFWR View Post
Although there could be some benefit to more closely linking use of government services to funding said services, "fee" is just another word for "tax"...

President Paul: That'll be $12,000 please.

HFWR: Grumble, grumble...

President Paul: But it's a fee, not a tax.

HFWR: Oh, in that case...
I get that I'd still pay a lot, potentially more. I think the benefit just what you said, that what we pay would be more closely linked to what we use. Right now, people with children pay less. Why? They use more services. Mortgage interest deduction? Anyone wanna buy a bigger house, let the government help you pay for it!


I think we should more greatly bear responsibility for decisions we make.
__________________
starter82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 08:39 PM   #13
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by TromboneAl View Post
I used to like the simplicity of a national sales tax, but got a quick education from this forum, and I realize that it would never work, and isn't desirable.

My guess is that Huckabee would be wasting his time on this if he got elected and tried to get it through.
I mostly agree, but at least Huckabee is talking up simplicity. Maybe he would really push for some compromises that would lead to some real simplification.

Here's one crazy, stepping-stone idea I thought of recently:

OK, I've mentioned eliminating corporate taxation before, because the consumer just pays it anyhow in the price of the goods sold, plus they pay the cost of compliance and avoidance. That would simplify the tax code tremendously. But, we would need to replace that tax revenue. So, how about a tax on corporate sales? Shouldn't be too hard to figure what the rate would need to be to capture as much revenue as the current corporate income tax does. Let's say it's 5% of sales (note1). A company has $1M in sales, they owe $50,000 in tax. Period. No deductions, no calculation of profits/loss, etc.

That would 'test the waters', and maybe warm people to the idea of point-of-sale type sales tax to replace income tax.

(note1) - Ballpark number, if you guesstimate that corporations on average were making 15% profits on sales, a 5% sales tax would be the equivalent of 33% income tax. Could phase it in over 5 years to give companies time to adjust pricing if needed.

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 09:12 PM   #14
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
FIRE'd@51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
So, how about a tax on corporate sales? Shouldn't be too hard to figure what the rate would need to be to capture as much revenue as the current corporate income tax does. Let's say it's 5% of sales (note1). A company has $1M in sales, they owe $50,000 in tax. Period. No deductions, no calculation of profits/loss, etc.
The problem with this approach is that profit margins are vastly different in different industries.
__________________
FIRE'd@51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 09:26 PM   #15
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIRE'd@51 View Post
The problem with this approach is that profit margins are vastly different in different industries.
True, but would it really be a big deal? Maybe, I don't know.

Let's see - high tech companies might be riding at 30% profit margin or so for a while. So 5% of sales would be lower than their corporate income taxes most likely (depending on what kind of clever accountants and write offs they have).

What's at the other end of the spectrum? I've always heard that grocery stores have low profit %, but they turn over so much inventory that it adds up. So, a 5% increase in food prices might be bad.

But, it is essentially the same deal with the NST, just at the point-of-sale versus the corporation. I suppose it could be dealt with the same way - raise the standard deduction to offset 5% on essentials?

I guess that's why I think this might be a good idea - it's a way to provide a test bed w/o converting whole hog?

-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 10:00 PM   #16
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
What's at the other end of the spectrum? I've always heard that grocery stores have low profit %, but they turn over so much inventory that it adds up. So, a 5% increase in food prices might be bad.
I often wonder how much food is marked up. One store has a certain product for $4 something. I think it's $4.4X, but I'm not sure. Another store sells the same thing for, no joke, $8. These are everyday prices. The second store will occasionally put the item on sale for $7 (6.99). How much profit is in food?

I'd support higher food prices if the clerks, etc. get paid more. I don't support greater profits.
__________________
starter82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 10:08 PM   #17
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by starter82 View Post
I often wonder how much food is marked up.
If you are talking about the retailers, not very much.

Nov 30, 2007, Supermarket News

"Food retailers overcame sharp increases in energy, health care and other costs to post a median after-tax net profit of 1.91% in fiscal year 2006-2007, up from 1.46% the previous year, according to Food Marketing Institute’s Annual Financial Review 2006-2007, released yesterday."
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 10:11 PM   #18
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by REWahoo View Post
If you are talking about the retailers, not very much.

Nov 30, 2007, Supermarket News

"Food retailers overcame sharp increases in energy, health care and other costs to post a median after-tax net profit of 1.91% in fiscal year 2006-2007, up from 1.46% the previous year, according to Food Marketing Institute’s Annual Financial Review 2006-2007, released yesterday."
Then why the price difference that I mentioned? I doubt they're spending the money on their storefront labor. Actually, I know they aren't, at least not by wage, perhaps by number of employees.
__________________
starter82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-2008, 10:19 PM   #19
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
REWahoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 42,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by starter82 View Post
Then why the price difference that I mentioned?
Loss leader, better (lower cost) sourcing, mis-pricing, who knows? You can't judge the overall pricing/profit strategy of a retailer or industry by looking at one product out of thousands.
__________________
Numbers is hard

When I hit 70, it hit back

Retired in 2005 at age 58, no pension
REWahoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-2008, 01:11 AM   #20
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by Independent View Post
However, there is no reason to go to a single tax rate. If there are 60,000 pages of tax code, then 59,999 pages are used to determine your taxable income, and 1 page has the table of graduated rates that we apply to that income. I would keep the 1 page and get rid of as many of the 59,999 as possible.
I can get behind this solution as well. My main issue with the tax code is it's vast unnecessary complication.

Personal Income Tax form - USA EAZY

Name here
SSN here

Line 1: Total income
Line 2: Your tax rate % (see table below)
Line 3: Amount owed

Signature here
__________________

__________________

Trek is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Presidential Candidate Limericking maddythebeagle Other topics 0 12-26-2007 08:35 PM
Series EE Savings Bonds--Taxation RetireeRobert FIRE and Money 6 12-12-2007 01:35 PM
Potential Presidential candidate? FinallyRetired Other topics 3 07-21-2007 10:07 PM
Trust Taxation - Canada My Dream FIRE and Money 32 11-08-2006 05:30 PM
State Taxation on Pensions and S.S. maddythebeagle FIRE and Money 5 07-25-2005 04:41 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:32 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.