Tax question for you guys

[coloradoatheist]

Since it is approaching tax season, I am curious if anyone on here calculates their tax bill to maximize the amount of taxes you have to pay? For example, do you calculate the difference between itemizing and standard deductions and then pay Uncle Sam the highest of the two?

 

[Sarpedon]

Generally, I procrastinate until I have to file them, then do it in the most straightforward, rushed manner possible.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Our finances are complicated enough that we have to itemize, but we do not go out of my way to take all the deductions we possibly could.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

Well, I don't go out of my way to set up a corporation in Bermuda to run my all of my income through, but generally I take the deductions to which I'm entitled.

When you buy a flat screen TV or iphone X do you throw in an extra $100 or do you pay what's on the price tag? (the question has the same relevance).

aa

 

[coloradoatheist]

Well, I don't go out of my way to set up a corporation in Bermuda to run my all of my income through, but generally I take the deductions to which I'm entitled.

When you buy a flat screen TV or iphone X do you throw in an extra $100 or do you pay what's on the price tag? (the question has the same relevance).

aa

Yes and no, because this a pro government spending board. How do you solve most problems? More government spending. And the complaint is also about how rich don't pay their share either. So if you feel that the government is the answer and like bigger government programs, do you share and maximize how much you give the government. Go ahead and do that and pay extra on the line for support of the government.

When Buffet says he pays more in taxes than his secretary, does he try and maximize his tax payment or minimize it?

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

Well, I don't go out of my way to set up a corporation in Bermuda to run my all of my income through, but generally I take the deductions to which I'm entitled.

When you buy a flat screen TV or iphone X do you throw in an extra $100 or do you pay what's on the price tag? (the question has the same relevance).

aa

Yes and no, because this a pro government spending board. How do you solve most problems? More government spending. And the complaint is also about how rich don't pay their share either. So if you feel that the government is the answer and like bigger government programs, do you share and maximize how much you give the government. Go ahead and do that and pay extra on the line for support of the government.

I like iphones and flat screen TVs. I still pay what they charge me.

The actual argument is that the charges levied against the wealthy are out of balance with respect to the benefits they receive when compared to the less well off when we discuss the expenses of a functional society.

When Buffet says he pays more in taxes than his secretary, does he try and maximize his tax payment or minimize it?

Nope. He says he pays less in taxes than his secretary. I don't know why he would 'maximize' his payment. No one thinks twice about the ridiculousness of saying 'I like the iphone so much I'll pay you $3000 for it'. Yet this is supposed to be some kind of profound argument when it comes to paying taxes? No, it's still just as stupid.

aa

 

[funinspace]

Well, I don't go out of my way to set up a corporation in Bermuda to run my all of my income through, but generally I take the deductions to which I'm entitled.

When you buy a flat screen TV or iphone X do you throw in an extra $100 or do you pay what's on the price tag? (the question has the same relevance).

aa

Yes and no, because this a pro government spending board. How do you solve most problems? More government spending. And the complaint is also about how rich don't pay their share either. So if you feel that the government is the answer and like bigger government programs, do you share and maximize how much you give the government. Go ahead and do that and pay extra on the line for support of the government.

While I might not be exactly a big spending promoter, as I argue quite strongly against our massive military-complex spending, I favor some of the savings going towards better purposes. Either way, I regularly argue against XYZ tax cuts that would save me money or tax policy changes that would add taxes to myself (along with lots of others where it would actually make a difference). I do take the deductions I am allowed, and I do pay quite a bit in taxes. As I am largely a W-2 wage earner along with investment income, it is 'relatively' straight forward as I don't have any LLCs to have monkey business with. As I might buy a vacation rental in the next year or two, I certainly won't BS the deductions to get more than allowed.

Many years ago, when I did one of my occasional outsourcing by having a professional do my taxes, the guy wanted me to claim $500 in non-documented donation deductions. He said was allowed w/o paperwork, so why not just claim it even if you didn't have any donations that weren't recorded. I said no.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I like iphones and flat screen TVs. I still pay what they charge me.

The actual argument is that the charges levied against the wealthy are out of balance with respect to the benefits they receive when compared to the less well off when we discuss the expenses of a functional society.

When Buffet says he pays more in taxes than his secretary, does he try and maximize his tax payment or minimize it?

Nope. He says he pays less in taxes than his secretary. I don't know why he would 'maximize' his payment. No one thinks twice about the ridiculousness of saying 'I like the iphone so much I'll pay you $3000 for it'. Yet this is supposed to be some kind of profound argument when it comes to paying taxes? No, it's still just as stupid.

aa

But buffet is the one saying he doesn't pay enough in taxes. If he wasn't hypocritical then he has means to do something about it. He can maximize his taxes, he can write them a check for as much as he wants, he can say that his entire estate is going to the government instead of the Gates Foundation. It's hypocritical to talk about not paying enough taxes and not doing something when you can. People on here support bigger government problems, complain about how the teachers don't have enough money, etc. Then do you your part too, pay more in taxes.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, I don't go out of my way to set up a corporation in Bermuda to run my all of my income through, but generally I take the deductions to which I'm entitled.

When you buy a flat screen TV or iphone X do you throw in an extra $100 or do you pay what's on the price tag? (the question has the same relevance).

aa

Yes and no, because this a pro government spending board. How do you solve most problems? More government spending. And the complaint is also about how rich don't pay their share either. So if you feel that the government is the answer and like bigger government programs, do you share and maximize how much you give the government. Go ahead and do that and pay extra on the line for support of the government.

While I might not be exactly a big spending promoter, as I argue quite strongly against our massive military-complex spending, I favor some of the savings going towards better purposes. Either way, I regularly argue against XYZ tax cuts that would save me money or tax policy changes that would add taxes to myself (along with lots of others where it would actually make a difference). I do take the deductions I am allowed, and I do pay quite a bit in taxes. As I am largely a W-2 wage earner along with investment income, it is 'relatively' straight forward as I don't have any LLCs to have monkey business with. As I might buy a vacation rental in the next year or two, I certainly won't BS the deductions to get more than allowed.

Many years ago, when I did one of my occasional outsourcing by having a professional do my taxes, the guy wanted me to claim $500 in non-documented donation deductions. He said was allowed w/o paperwork, so why not just claim it even if you didn't have any donations that weren't recorded. I said no.

There is a difference between being unethical for it as I get from your story and paying more in taxes. You can always not itemize and pay more in taxes and give to the government.

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

I like iphones and flat screen TVs. I still pay what they charge me.

The actual argument is that the charges levied against the wealthy are out of balance with respect to the benefits they receive when compared to the less well off when we discuss the expenses of a functional society.

When Buffet says he pays more in taxes than his secretary, does he try and maximize his tax payment or minimize it?

Nope. He says he pays less in taxes than his secretary. I don't know why he would 'maximize' his payment. No one thinks twice about the ridiculousness of saying 'I like the iphone so much I'll pay you $3000 for it'. Yet this is supposed to be some kind of profound argument when it comes to paying taxes? No, it's still just as stupid.

aa

But buffet is the one saying he doesn't pay enough in taxes. If he wasn't hypocritical then he has means to do something about it. He can maximize his taxes, he can write them a check for as much as he wants, he can say that his entire estate is going to the government instead of the Gates Foundation. It's hypocritical to talk about not paying enough taxes and not doing something when you can. People on here support bigger government problems, complain about how the teachers don't have enough money, etc. Then do you your part too, pay more in taxes.

I'm not paying enough for my iphone technology (said no one ever). I guess I'm a hypocrite for not donating more of my money to apple.

Anything that you think is a bargain, you likely buy. It doesn't preclude you from having an opinion on it's price. And if your opinion is that it is underpriced - doesn't imply you are a hypocrite for not paying more for it.

I would think this very simple economic concept would not only be easy for any conservative republican to understand - it would be appreciated for it's reliance on free market principles.

aa

 

[funinspace]

But buffet is the one saying he doesn't pay enough in taxes. If he wasn't hypocritical then he has means to do something about it. He can maximize his taxes, he can write them a check for as much as he wants, he can say that his entire estate is going to the government instead of the Gates Foundation. It's hypocritical to talk about not paying enough taxes and not doing something when you can. People on here support bigger government problems, complain about how the teachers don't have enough money, etc. Then do you your part too, pay more in taxes.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, I don't go out of my way to set up a corporation in Bermuda to run my all of my income through, but generally I take the deductions to which I'm entitled.

When you buy a flat screen TV or iphone X do you throw in an extra $100 or do you pay what's on the price tag? (the question has the same relevance).

aa

Yes and no, because this a pro government spending board. How do you solve most problems? More government spending. And the complaint is also about how rich don't pay their share either. So if you feel that the government is the answer and like bigger government programs, do you share and maximize how much you give the government. Go ahead and do that and pay extra on the line for support of the government.

While I might not be exactly a big spending promoter, as I argue quite strongly against our massive military-complex spending, I favor some of the savings going towards better purposes. Either way, I regularly argue against XYZ tax cuts that would save me money or tax policy changes that would add taxes to myself (along with lots of others where it would actually make a difference). I do take the deductions I am allowed, and I do pay quite a bit in taxes. As I am largely a W-2 wage earner along with investment income, it is 'relatively' straight forward as I don't have any LLCs to have monkey business with. As I might buy a vacation rental in the next year or two, I certainly won't BS the deductions to get more than allowed.

Many years ago, when I did one of my occasional outsourcing by having a professional do my taxes, the guy wanted me to claim $500 in non-documented donation deductions. He said was allowed w/o paperwork, so why not just claim it even if you didn't have any donations that weren't recorded. I said no.

There is a difference between being unethical for it as I get from your story and paying more in taxes. You can always not itemize and pay more in taxes and give to the government.

I could hand over my entire net worth, and probably not even cut out one minutes worth of our current deficit. A few people not taking a few deductions is even sillier. If we dumped the Repug tax cut of last year, it would reduce this years deficit by roughly $150,000,000,000. The ship is sinking due to a glacier ripping a huge gap thru the side of the ship, and you are fussing over the idea of putting a toothpick in a pin sized hole...

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

Many years ago, when I did one of my occasional outsourcing by having a professional do my taxes, the guy wanted me to claim $500 in non-documented donation deductions. He said was allowed w/o paperwork, so why not just claim it even if you didn't have any donations that weren't recorded. I said no.

Of course. Because that would be lying. I suppose there are some who believe that taxes are "theft at gunpoint" who might argue that lying cheating and stealing from society is some sort of patriotic duty. But I'm glad you aren't one of those people

aa

 

[coloradoatheist]

But buffet is the one saying he doesn't pay enough in taxes. If he wasn't hypocritical then he has means to do something about it. He can maximize his taxes, he can write them a check for as much as he wants, he can say that his entire estate is going to the government instead of the Gates Foundation. It's hypocritical to talk about not paying enough taxes and not doing something when you can. People on here support bigger government problems, complain about how the teachers don't have enough money, etc. Then do you your part too, pay more in taxes.

I'm not paying enough for my iphone technology (said no one ever). I guess I'm a hypocrite for not donating more of my money to apple.

Anything that you think is a bargain, you likely buy. It doesn't preclude you from having an opinion on it's price. And if your opinion is that it is underpriced - doesn't imply you are a hypocrite for not paying more for it.

I would think this very simple economic concept would not only be easy for any conservative republican to understand - it would be appreciated for it's reliance on free market principles.

aa

But in this case, it's people asking for other people to pay for it. So you are okay with a lay saying that other people must buy Apple products?

 

[laughing dog]

But buffet is the one saying he doesn't pay enough in taxes. If he wasn't hypocritical then he has means to do something about it. He can maximize his taxes, he can write them a check for as much as he wants, he can say that his entire estate is going to the government instead of the Gates Foundation. It's hypocritical to talk about not paying enough taxes and not doing something when you can. People on here support bigger government problems, complain about how the teachers don't have enough money, etc. Then do you your part too, pay more in taxes.

Your analogy breaks down pretty quickly. Buffet's point is that the taxes on people like him in comparison to his secretary are too low. There is no reason to pay more in taxes if no one else in your situation is going to pay more, since any particular individual's contribution is not really going to address the total problem.

There is nothing hypocritical in advocating for more government spending (in total) without addressing the funding mechanism. There is nothing necessarily hypocritical in advocating for more gov't spending and a specific funding mechanism that does not affect you.

For example, I don't mind paying more in taxes to support education. I do mind paying more in taxes to support education if I am the only one doing so, or if there are others who I think also ought to paying more.

Another example is the progressive income tax. There is nothing necessarily hypocritical in advocating for a more progressive income tax system to fund some project when advocate is unaffected if the rationale is that a more progressive income tax is a good thing for society.

 

[PyramidHead]

Individual excess contributions don't make a difference unless a lot of people do it. Most people will not voluntarily pay more taxes than they owe. The way to get a lot of people to do it is to raise the tax rate on those people. Next thread please.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Since it is approaching tax season, I am curious if anyone on here calculates their tax bill to maximize the amount of taxes you have to pay? For example, do you calculate the difference between itemizing and standard deductions and then pay Uncle Sam the highest of the two?

What a stupid fucking question.

Person A: I think we shouldn't cut SNAP spending.
Person B: Oh, so you must give extra in taxes each year then. *smug*
Person A: *sigh*

 

[Horatio Parker]

What Taxes Are Really For
Federal taxes can be made to serve four principal purposes of a social and economic character. These purposes are:

1. As an instrument of fiscal policy to help stabilize the purchasing power of the dollar;

2. To express public policy in the distribution of wealth and of income, as in the case of the progressive income and estate taxes;

3. To express public policy in subsidizing or in penalizing various industries and economic groups;

4. To isolate and assess directly the costs of certain national benefits, such as highways and social security.

From "Taxes For Revenue Are Obsolete", Beardsley Ruml, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 1946.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/warren-mosler/taxes-for-revenue-are-obs_b_542134.html

So deduct away and advocate for more govt spending free from guilt.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Individual excess contributions don't make a difference unless a lot of people do it. Most people will not voluntarily pay more taxes than they owe. The way to get a lot of people to do it is to raise the tax rate on those people. Next thread please.

But that is it, tragedy of the commons right? I don't want to do what I can, but I want to make other people do something I don't want to do.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Go ahead and do that and pay extra on the line for support of the government.

I don't know anyone that's just in favor of more government spending.
I do know people who are in favor of more spending by the government for specific programs.
Which means that throwing more money at the government would be wasted UNLESS there was some sort of guarantee that the extra money would go towards the programs I support.

Just giving them money while questioning the way they currently plan to spend it would not be the logical thing to do.

 

[coloradoatheist]

But buffet is the one saying he doesn't pay enough in taxes. If he wasn't hypocritical then he has means to do something about it. He can maximize his taxes, he can write them a check for as much as he wants, he can say that his entire estate is going to the government instead of the Gates Foundation. It's hypocritical to talk about not paying enough taxes and not doing something when you can. People on here support bigger government problems, complain about how the teachers don't have enough money, etc. Then do you your part too, pay more in taxes.

Your analogy breaks down pretty quickly. Buffet's point is that the taxes on people like him in comparison to his secretary are too low. There is no reason to pay more in taxes if no one else in your situation is going to pay more, since any particular individual's contribution is not really going to address the total problem.

There is nothing hypocritical in advocating for more government spending (in total) without addressing the funding mechanism. There is nothing necessarily hypocritical in advocating for more gov't spending and a specific funding mechanism that does not affect you.

For example, I don't mind paying more in taxes to support education. I do mind paying more in taxes to support education if I am the only one doing so, or if there are others who I think also ought to paying more.

Another example is the progressive income tax. There is nothing necessarily hypocritical in advocating for a more progressive income tax system to fund some project when advocate is unaffected if the rationale is that a more progressive income tax is a good thing for society.

For Buffet it certainly was. Hey taxes are great but guess what, I'm going to avoid those taxes by giving it away to charity when I die. I want other people to pay those taxes instead of me. That's very hypocritical. If taxes are great like he says then put your money there too. Say I'm proud my estate taxes are going to government and I'm not going to avoid any estate taxes.

- - - Updated - - -

Go ahead and do that and pay extra on the line for support of the government.

I don't know anyone that's just in favor of more government spending.
I do know people who are in favor of more spending by the government for specific programs.
Which means that throwing more money at the government would be wasted UNLESS there was some sort of guarantee that the extra money would go towards the programs I support.

Just giving them money while questioning the way they currently plan to spend it would not be the logical thing to do.

Outside of defense, what programs are the left against that the government spends money on? Have they asked for cuts in the other big programs. Have they asked for the education budget to be cut? Less government spending in helathcare?

 

[PyramidHead]

Individual excess contributions don't make a difference unless a lot of people do it. Most people will not voluntarily pay more taxes than they owe. The way to get a lot of people to do it is to raise the tax rate on those people. Next thread please.

But that is it, tragedy of the commons right? I don't want to do what I can, but I want to make other people do something I don't want to do.

No. It's game theory. If I do what I can but few others do the same, which is likely, then my individual contribution is almost worthless. If a large group of people do what they can, which is unlikely unless they are required by law, then the accumulation of many individual contributions becomes valuable.