Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Mes Ami - To The Barricades!
Old 03-20-2009, 07:17 AM   #21
Recycles dryer sheets
DougViages's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Belmont
Posts: 160
Mes Ami - To The Barricades!

A little revolution once in a while is good for a republic.
__________________

__________________
Work is the curse of the partying class!
DougViages 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 03-20-2009, 07:38 AM   #22
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 157
The house of reps has elections often enough that they must all grand stand. My Rep. Kucinich was hiding in all this mess as he knows it will not play well in his bid for the prez position in 2012. The Senate will never pass this.Who else got the impression that PREZ-O has let the house prove just how stupid they are with this measure. I think within a week he will comment how these AIG people worked hard since last April to keep AIG afloat and right the course of a troubled company. PREZ-O already said it really wasn't AIG only at fault. AIG packaged up bad mortgages and sold them to make money. They didn't create the bad mortgages. Fannie and Freddie did and MOODY's etc rated them as AAA securities. This story will lose it's legs on April 1 when the Defined Benefit Pension funding failures hit the news. Many more will be slapped in the face with the sting from a system in failure.
__________________

__________________
cashbalancetrouble is offline   Reply With Quote
Thumbs up t's certainly a bill full of unintended consequences.
Old 03-20-2009, 08:56 AM   #23
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 184
Thumbs up t's certainly a bill full of unintended consequences.

Very nice analysis.

It is the unintended consequences that get you every time.

I have another thread on that but I have to go to w**k right now.



Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go View Post
It's certainly a bill full of unintended consequences.

Not surprisingly the bill will encourage bankers at TARP firms to quit their jobs. What is surprising is that the legislation is so poorly written that it will actually encourage the banker's working spouses to quit too.

Consider the hypothetical banker who makes a $100K base, got a $400K bonus in January and has a working spouse making $150K in an unrelated industry. Now assume three different scenarios 1) they both work the full year 2009. 2) He quits at the end of March and doesn't work for the rest of the year. 3) They both quit in March and don't work. This is how much they'd earn in 2009 (after the new tax, but before normal taxes) under each of the three scenarios . . .

1) The both work . . . $290,000
2) He quits . . . $282,500
3) The both quit . . . $271,250

So the benefit for both of them working the next 9 months is $18,750 before ordinary taxes. In a way, the bill claws the spouses income back too.
__________________
Hal3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 10:35 AM   #24
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
FinanceDude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 12,484
Quote:
Originally Posted by dex View Post
Is it even legal?
Can there be a special tax on a person just because the company they work for took money from the government?
Also, the article questions the reto aspect of it.
I'm guessing it will be thrown out in court and we will not hear about it.
Well, the govt THINKS they can, and that's all that matters....... Bottom line, WE own 80% of AIG, so they are not really a private sector company anymore......
__________________
Consult with your own advisor or representative. My thoughts should not be construed as investment advice. Past performance is no guarantee of future results (love that one).......:)


This Thread is USELESS without pics.........:)
FinanceDude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 12:51 PM   #25
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
In reality, the government seems to keep changing the rules as it goes along, trying different things to see if something works, and to retroactively try to change deals.

It reminds me of a giant, high-stakes game of Calvinball:

Calvin and Hobbes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 01:27 PM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 7,526
I think we should tax future earnings of individuals receiving a mortgage bailout at 90% until they have repaid their debt in full plus taxes due on forgiveness of debt. I also think they should confiscate the salaries of all senators, representatives and presidents until this financial quagmire is resolved.
__________________
FUEGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 01:45 PM   #27
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Following the nice weather
Posts: 6,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by OAG View Post
With all of the exposure maybe the Senate will kill this thing!
I hope so too. That's the job of the Senate, to add rational processes to the grandstanding antics of the House. Their record isn't so good these days, though.
__________________
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Will Rogers, or maybe Sam Clemens
DW and I - FIREd at 50 (7/06), living off assets
harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 02:49 PM   #28
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,049
Quote:
Originally Posted by . . . Yrs to Go View Post
Consider the hypothetical banker who makes a $100K base, got a $400K bonus in January and has a working spouse making $150K in an unrelated industry. Now assume three different scenarios 1) they both work the full year 2009. 2) He quits at the end of March and doesn't work for the rest of the year. 3) They both quit in March and don't work. This is how much they'd earn in 2009 (after the new tax, but before normal taxes) under each of the three scenarios . . .

1) The both work . . . $290,000
2) He quits . . . $282,500
3) The both quit . . . $271,250

So the benefit for both of them working the next 9 months is $18,750 before ordinary taxes. In a way, the bill claws the spouses income back too.

Explain this to me.

1) is obvious
2) He has $25k from salary and $400k from the bonus. After the 90% special tax, he has $65k. She makes 150k. Total is $215k.
3) He makes $65k and she makes $37.5k. Total is $102.5K.

Or is that assuming the income limit of $250,000 is before the bonus? Or that only >$250k is taxed at 90%?
__________________
eridanus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 04:34 PM   #29
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by socca View Post
we've placed too much power in the hands of the clueless.
Nicely put.
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 05:55 PM   #30
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7,408
Hmmm - not to be a smart ass(well yes I couldn't resist) but it's all our fault - as shareholders we are supposed to guide management.

And as voters - well you know.



As Dr Phil would say - how's that working out.

heh heh heh - 'May you live in interesting times' is getting curiouser and curiouser - er something.

I predict at 5-10 years into this current unpleasantness - people may start to get grumpy - I'd better have my Curmudgeon Certificate insured.
__________________
unclemick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 06:13 PM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by dex View Post
Is it even legal?
Can there be a special tax on a person just because the company they work for took money from the government?
Also, the article questions the reto aspect of it.
From what I've read most folks seem to think this would be legal. There is some question over whether this particular tax would be a "bill of attainder". I don't know.

In terms of it being retroactive, it really isn't. The bonus payments were made in 2009 and the changes are to the 2009 tax code. For tax purposes it doesn't matter that the bonus was "earned" in the 2008 calendar year if it was paid in 2009.
__________________
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 06:31 PM   #32
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by eridanus View Post
Explain this to me.

1) is obvious
2) He has $25k from salary and $400k from the bonus. After the 90% special tax, he has $65k. She makes 150k. Total is $215k.
3) He makes $65k and she makes $37.5k. Total is $102.5K.

Or is that assuming the income limit of $250,000 is before the bonus? Or that only >$250k is taxed at 90%?
The reason this works the way I suggested is that they exempt $250K of income. But the way they do it is by exempting $250K of "Adjusted Gross Income" (a.k.a. income from all sources, not just bonus income). So in case number 2, he earns $25K salary, $400K bonus, and she earns $150K salary for a total of $575K. The first $250K is shielded, leaving $325K of "bonus income" subject to the 90% tax. $250K + $325K * 10% = $282.5K. In the case where they both quit, total income is $462.5K, $250K of which is shielded, so the take-home amount is equal to $250K + ($462.5K - $250K) * 10% = $271.25K

The practical effect of this scheme is that many people will find that they've already received all of the money they can possibly earn this year. So why bother showing up for the rest of the year?

Another "interesting" factoid of this asinine formula is that a back office worker making $60K who got paid a $20K bonus will still see his bonus taxed at 90% if his spouse makes enough to put the couples AGI above $250K.
__________________
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2009, 11:21 PM   #33
Full time employment: Posting here.
Darryl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 577
Sorry, I have't seen much news as I've been busy at work.

Did I just see the some politicians on TV who have spent trillions of dollars with hundreds of millions, possibly in the billions of dollars in earmarks, pork, waste etc. all outraged that 165 million will be paid to people who did a poor job? Did that same handful of people vote to take property away from other americans? Sure hope they don't get upset with me or my company or my industry at anytime during the next 50 years.
__________________

__________________
I highjacked a rainbow and crashed into a pot of gold - Bon Jovi
Darryl 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
How Happy are You? LKH Other topics 88 03-22-2011 10:28 AM
New and Happy I Think. Yankees Rule Hi, I am... 5 10-17-2008 10:22 AM
Have a Happy- - - JPatrick Other topics 3 11-24-2006 02:36 PM
Just to make you FIREd people happy... Cool Dood Other topics 16 03-20-2006 09:04 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:17 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.