Arianna Huffington paid no Federal tax

[taoist]

taoist....have you read it yet?


Answers to FAQ.

...yes, but I remain strong in my belief that a so-called "flat tax" is 1.) not even really a "flat tax" because the minute you exempt poverty level people, it is no longer an across the board flat tax.

and 2.) It would increase, not decrease the tax burden on the middle class.

I say go ahead and pass the damn thing because within a couple of years, everyone will realize that it was a huge mistake and it will be repealed.


For anyone interested on my opinion of taxes, see this thread.... Tax Thread

 

[marine]

If you implement a flat tax, that means that your donations to non profit groups that you can normally deduct on your taxes are not going to be deducted. Which means, who is really going to donate if there is no tax benefit to it? Which means, where is the money to support these groups going to come from?

 

[taoist]

...not only that marine, but what about the largest tax deduction that would no longer exist???? ...the MORTGAGE DEDUCTION!!!

 

[Turfgrass]

turfgrass--after reading that, I have a couple of questions. Once again, I am no tax expert. I only entered this thread because it seems everytime a money issue comes up, here comes StevieD (the mighty mouse of the middle class) to save the day and point a finger at the successful in this country.

My questions:
1. Why would consumers not begin making more purchases from outsie the US to avoid those taxes? With the birth of the internet, this has become a very easy practice.
2. Couldn't US companies place "stores" across the borders in Canada and Mexico to offer cheaper products to consumers?
3. What taxes would be paid on exported goods? Woud consumers outside the US be subjected to the same tax percentage? If so, wouldn't this lower our exportation of goods, thus hurting our economy?

These are just questions in which I am sure there are answers. Is anyone here familiar enough with this approach to shed light?

Thanks,

The retail industry will significantly save money from reduced compliance costs under the FairTax. Retail businesses, along with other businesses, are tax collectors today. They withhold income and payroll taxes from their employees. Moreover, the vast majority of retail businesses currently operating in states with a sales tax (45 states currently use a sales tax) are already sales tax collectors. Under the FairTax, retailers would have the responsibility to collect and submit the tax. Those five states who do not have a sales tax will find the FairTax easier and much less expensive than the current confusing and cumbersome tax code. In addition, retailers would be paid a fee equal to one-quarter of one percent of the federal sales taxes they collect and remit. Retailers would no longer need to bear the cost of complying with the income tax, including the uniform capitalization requirements, the various depreciation schemes and employee benefit and pension rules. The beneficial effects of dramatically lower income tax compliance costs, no income taxes, and a reasonable fee for collecting the FairTax, will ensure that retailers will do quite well.

 

[Turfgrass]

If you implement a flat tax, that means that your donations to non profit groups that you can normally deduct on your taxes are not going to be deducted. Which means, who is really going to donate if there is no tax benefit to it? Which means, where is the money to support these groups going to come from?

The FairTax will allow people to make charitable contributions out of pre-tax dollars. With more money to spend, more people will give. Most taxpayers today cannot deduct their contributions, and only the relatively few who itemize may deduct their contributions with after-tax payroll dollars. For those generally less affluent taxpayers who do not itemize, the cost of charitable giving will actually go down under the FairTax, because they will be able to make contributions from pre-tax dollars.

 

[Turfgrass]

...not only that marine, but what about the largest tax deduction that would no longer exist???? ...the MORTGAGE DEDUCTION!!!

How will the FairTax affect my investments?

The stock market, mutual funds, and retirement funds will prosper under the FairTax for both small and large investors, because corporations will face lower operating costs and individuals will have more money to save and invest. The FairTax will significantly enhance the retirement savings of all Americans. Tax-free bonds will still be tax-free. And in addition, all stocks, bonds, and other investments will be tax-free as well!

The FairTax will greatly benefit real estate in a number of ways, starting with the non-taxability of mortgage interest, which doubles the value of the mortgage interest deduction over today's allowable deductions.

Taxpayers will for the first time be able to pay interest with pre-payroll and income tax dollars. Today, at best, taxpayers must pay mortgage interest with after-payroll tax dollars. Under the FairTax, mortgage interest rates will fall by 25 to 30%. For example, on a $150,000, thirty-year home mortgage at an interest rate of 8 percent, the monthly mortgage payment would be $1,112.64. On that same mortgage at a 6 percent interest rate, the monthly payment would be $907.64. The two-point decrease in interest rates in this instance would result in a $73,800 cost savings!

Under the American?s for Fair Taxation plan, home ownership will be a possibility for many who don?t have that option under the current income tax system. Lower interest rates, the repeal of the income tax, the repeal of all payroll taxes, and the FairTax rebate will mean that people will have more money to spend, as well as the opportunity to become home owners.

Currently, interest rates will drop quickly by approximately 25% after passage of the FairTax Bill. Interest rates include compensation to the lender for the tax that they must pay on interest. That is why taxable bonds bear a higher interest rate than tax-exempt bonds. When the tax on interest is removed, interest rates will drop toward today's tax-exempt rate.

Under the current system, savings and investments are taxed. Under the FairTax, savings and investments will not be taxed at all. As Americans save more money, and businesses invest more in the world's only "zero tax" advantaged country, the pool of funds in lending institutions will grow, thereby causing the cost of borrowing funds to drop.

 

[taoist]

Under the FairTax, mortgage interest rates will fall by 25 to 30%.

...really? I say bullshit!!! How can mortgage interest rates drop by 25-30%? They are already at 40 year lows!!! Okay, I'm going to get out my boots, because it's getting deep in here....

 

[taoist]

I'm going to post my little rant about the so-called "flat tax" from the other thread and then I am finished with this subject.... We will just have to agree to disagree....



...the first issue [when we're looking at a "flat tax"] is do you tax EVERYONE (a true flat tax) or do you exempt people on the low end? The answer is yes, obviously you have to exempt people below the poverty line.... You can?t tax somebody who is supporting a family of four on minimum wage at the same rate you tax Steve Forbes and say that that is equitable or fair because they?re both paying the same rate. So you?re going to exempt people at the low end of the scale and as soon as you do that, it isn?t really a flat tax because you can?t start here and say if you make $12,000 you pay zero tax, if you make $13,000, then you have to pay 10% on everything. Because what happens the guy who makes $12,000 pays none and the guy who makes $13,000 pays $1300. And the guy who pays $1300 ends up worse off than the guy who only makes $12,000. So, if you exempt the first whatever of income, you?ve already got a graduated tax structure and not a "flat tax."

So you can?t have a true flat rate!!! So you say we?ll exempt everybody below $30,000 ? everybody gets a standard deduction at $30,000 and then we charge a flat rate above that.... Yeah, that?ll work.... The problem is remember how much the people who report an income over $100,000 paid in taxes? Remember that 7.5% of the population (only folks declaring over $100,000) pays 62% of the tax.... If you have a flat rate you will not get 62% of the revenue from those people.... It simply can?t happen!!! So what happens with the flat rate is, if you?re going to keep the revenue the same, somebody has to pay a lot more than they are currently paying and it?s not going to be the people down here at the bottom because we?ve exempted them...and it?s not going to be the people up here who are paying at a current marginal effective rate of somewhere between 30-40%, right? Why? Because our flat rate is going to be lower than the highest marginal rate and higher than the lowest marginal rate...a "flat tax" squeezes the middle class of wage earners. If the tax rate is say...17-25%, then the folks in the middle class are going to pay a hell of a lot more tax than they do now!!! THAT I will guarantee you...but it?s a flat tax!!! I'm sure that you could get a lot of people to vote for it.... I suspect it would sort of be like 1981-82 where we voted for it and then we said "Holy Shit!!! This isn?t exactly the way we planned for it to come out...." (Not to mention all of the current credits and deductions that they would lose in the process....) Like I said earlier...a flat tax will never work unless you're willing to let the middle class in this country carry an even heavier burden than they currently do.

The simply solution is to cut spending, but once again, that's not the point.... That argument doesn't hold water if you're arguing for a flat tax because all of us can agree that we need to reduce the size of the whole pie.... (i.e. we need to reduce spending)So let's say that we've got a smaller pie, the question now becomes how do we divide it up? Who's going to pay what? Hey, I got an idea...let's make the middle class carry most of the tax burden in this country!!! Yeah, that sounds like a great idea!!! A flat tax simply doesn't work guys, but hey, what do I know? :shrug:

 

[Turfgrass]

Americans for Fair Taxation began primarily as a research effort committed to seeking possible remedies to the current convoluted and unfair tax system. Concerned citizens banded together and commissioned various studies looking at a replacement or a restructuring of the current code. A diversity of Americans was then cross-sampled through extensive focus group studies to find out what Americans wanted from their tax system. It was determined through these exhaustive studies that the only fair way to tax Americans was via a consumption tax. The FairTax plan evolved as a way of meeting all Americans needs in the most reasonable and fair way possible.

A sampling of the founding research participants can be found below.

http://www.harvard.edu/

http://www.heritage.org/

http://www.mit.edu/

http://www.nber.org/

http://www.io.com/~depr/

http://www.stanford.edu/group/decisions/

http://www.bu.edu/

http://www.cato.org/

Policy paper link:
http://cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-272.html



So I guess people from Harvard, MIT, and Stanford, (Just to name a few) are just trying to bulls**t you.

Look I'm just tring to share an idea that I think would work. If you don't that's fine. We will agree to disagree. I just thought you guys would like to know about it.

 

[djv]

Im not sure Doc if I agree being rich in the old days meant working hard. There were just as many born with gold rings in there mouths as today. Remember some got rich by haveing slaves. The money they got for working was little or nothing. Room and board is very little. By the way not all slaves were Black Men. Not at all many got rich over the dead bodies of black and white both.
Sales tax looks good. Or as said before. Let everyone go tax free the first $15000 they make each year. And instead of 4 tax brackets just have 2. 10% and 20%. Rich should not get pissed at 20%. They claim there paying 27% to 30% now.
But none of this wil happen because the crooks in Wash DC dont want it. That would be both parties.

 

[ferdville]

Huffington is one of the biggest phonies around - even for california. She claims one of her campaign plans is to end loopholes that the "fat cats" use to save taxes. Then we find out she pays nearly nothing in taxes.

She rants and raves about SUV's, but flits from place to place in limos and airplanes. When asked how she could justify the use of jet fuel, etc - her answer was "Well, they were going there anyway."

Today we find out something new. Another of her platforms was to get rid of all the "special interest' people that pollute the political scene. Her campaign manager, however, is a lobbyist for the tobacco industry, gambling industry, and others. She responds that she would be concerned if he did his work in California, but since he doesn't, it is o.k.

This lady certainly has an excuse for everything. And won't take responsiblity for anything. Actually that makes her sound like every other politician, Repub or Dem.