The Rich Get Yet Another Break

redgolem, I'm not an estate attorney so I might not be the best person to answer your request on how to set up your estate to avoid taxes. Depending on the assets, there are various ways to minimize the estate but avoiding taxes completely is no easy task.

Originally posted by dawnstar
it's wrong for the government to be taken as much money from the people as they are, I don't care where it's coming from or how. but still, the root of the problem is their spending. and, well, look at it this way, they don't think that we gave them enough, they think they should have gotten more, a few trillion dollars more...and well, them not getting it didn't stop them from spending it, did it? nope. they spent it anyways, and some future generation will get to pay the piper.....
that's wrong also.

REPLY: As we've discussed before, most of the same people who complain about why they take so much, are the same ones who "want free stuff" they feel they are entitled to (but don't have to work for) simply because they exist.

Check below to see where most of your tax dollars go: NANNY-STATE GIVE-AWAYS

There are thousands of people who's ANNUAL income is more than 99% of us

REPLY: So do what most people do.... educate yourself and get a better job.... or is that difficult to do where you live?

The idea that rich being richer filters down to the poorer members of society via job creation etc etc is a phallacy.

REPLY: Maybe there, but it works EVERY TIME in America. You live in an extremely Socialist/Marxist country (it's happening here, too), which is why it doesn't work so well there.

the amount some folks have is obscene.

REPLY: And whose "job" is it to decide what is "obscene" and what isn't?

zappafan1

Meaning of Rich in America is just miss understood

Working class American that depend of an income are not rich even if they enjoy the luxuries that many other working class can not.

Instead of Rich I should have said wealthy elite.

Still the most attacked and drained group from taxes are indeed the hard working American that makes between 60 to 120.00 a year.

I don't work because with what my husband makes my entire income will go into taxes at a higher bracket. . .

For everybody that still believe that we have Privacy in this nation I got one coming for you.

for 9 Years my husband has been paying taxes after filling out his yearly tax We have been owning more.

Last year for the first time in nine years we came even and the IRS even own us about a littler over 100 dollars actually a littler victory for us.

Last week I we got 8 letters from the IRS claiming that we own penalties from 2004.

We find out that it was a red flag generated by computers to point out that some incomes has change.

Yes is true!!!!!!!

After a phone call from my husband the IRS told my husband that it was a balance of 150 dollars in penalties and that the letters were just a mistake . . .

OK my husband said that is fine with me . . . But the women dared to ask my husband and I will quote exactly what she said.

Mr. ______ It is something that you know that we should know about your income?

My husband was taken by the question due to the fact that he just move into another higher pay job 3 months ago.

My husband simple refuse to answer the question.

She then asked him if I was working to what my husband response was Negative she is not.

Now can somebody tell me if the government is not monitoring change on Income on certain group of People . . .

My husband works for the government and even have a security clearance.

Why did the IRS wants to know if my husband job change or not? did it have to do with his security clearance? or just that now the IRS is spying on certain cathegory of the population.

It is none of their business.!!!!!!!!!




[edit on 4-8-2006 by marg6043]

Marg6030: It is indeed a pain in the butt. The only way to get over the tax issue problems is to implement the Fair Tax.

Our tax code is over 9 MILLION WORDS, and is just unwieldy to the point in cannot be fixed (it's bad enough that they are acting illegaly). Ask ten people who work there about any given part of the code, and they each will have different answers.

zappafan1

Did you watched Lou in CNN about how the weathy gets away from paying taxes in American with accounts and companies addresses in the caiman Islands?

It was the most devastating thing to know when you are paying taxes on your income as a hard working American.

Why can they do that and we the regular Joe can not?

Is a shame.

Originally posted by marg6043
zappafan1

Did you watched Lou in CNN about how the weathy gets away from paying taxes in American with accounts and companies addresses in the caiman Islands?

It was the most devastating thing to know when you are paying taxes on your income as a hard working American. Why can they do that and we the regular Joe can not?

Is a shame.

Actually, there are those who are trying to pass a law making that illegal (maybe they have???). However, the average joe CAN do that. I don't agree with it because it is another over-arching governmental control of private business.

There's also a state in New England (I forget which) that allows companies from other states to incorporate in their state. It's quite legal, and benefits everyone who works for or invests in those companies/corporations.

anyone can go to the caymans and open a bank account. the only way you can shelter the money from taxes is if you are having money wired directly to the account from sources outside of the US. This way the IRS doesn't know you're being paid, there's no bank trail in the US and nobody knows about the account here. If you want to use the money you will have to declare it as income when you bring it in or go withdraw cash and bring it back with you (and stay under the limit for cash on hand when entering the country).

with regards to companies incorporating in other states, any company doing business in a state is supposed to register with the state and get approval to operate in that state.

As far as I'm concerned they should just get rid of the Estate tax period and while the're at it they can do away with corporate taxes to boot.

Originally posted by Astronomer70
As far as I'm concerned they should just get rid of the Estate tax period and while the're at it they can do away with corporate taxes to boot.

REPLY: EXACTAMUNDO!!!!!! Prices would come down for many goods and services. Companies/Corporations spend $4.6 BILLIUON per year just for complying with the tax code!

health and human services, defense, and treasury....the three largest spenders in gov't....

if the companies would pay a decent wage, there would be less need for human services. considering the threat WE ARE SUSPOSED to be under with terrorism and the possiblility of biological attack, well, we might find ourselves in need of the health dept....defense, well what can I say....even the auditors think they're a lost cause....a big black hole where money vanishes into oblivion.... and the treasury, and it's accompanying debt maintenance...of which, us continuing spending like we are while cutting taxes is just gonna be an added expense to their budget...

and as far as social security, ummm.....the way I look at it is that I gave so much money through my years, I expect at least a little of it back, probably won't get it, but well, I believe the government would be morally wrong not to do at least that much. and, I believe they were morally wrong to raid the account to begin with!

and quite frankly, it's not the poor screaming the loudest about their taxes being too high, why would they be screaming about the estate tax?? and in case you didn't notice, I have said much about the high taxes, I'm screaming at them to find a way to get the spending down!!!

another thing to think about...

if you give the poor a few extra bucks a week, they more than likely will use it to buy food (could be using food stamps at the present time to do it), or pay their rent...(could be depending on hud at the present..), or hey, maybe they'll even splurge and buy a new pair of pants, or go to mcdonalds or something.. they more than likely ain't gonna go out on a massive spending spree buying a bunch of luxury items (imported of course), to replace the year old luxury items that they've grown tired of!!! it is possible that we could see the trade deficit decrease a tad if we diverted some cash downward...instead of upward.

sorry, either me or the programming is acting a little screwy, don't need it posted twice....

[edit on 4-8-2006 by dawnstar]

health and human services, defense, and treasury....the three largest spenders in gov't....

if the companies would pay a decent wage, there would be less need for human services. considering the threat WE ARE SUSPOSED to be under with terrorism and the possiblility of biological attack, well, we might find ourselves in need of the health dept....defense, well what can I say....even the auditors think they're a lost cause....a big black hole where money vanishes into oblivion.... and the treasury, and it's accompanying debt maintenance...of which, us continuing spending like we are while cutting taxes is just gonna be an added expense to their budget...

and as far as social security, ummm.....the way I look at it is that I gave so much money through my years, I expect at least a little of it back, probably won't get it, but well, I believe the government would be morally wrong not to do at least that much. and, I believe they were morally wrong to raid the account to begin with!

and quite frankly, it's not the poor screaming the loudest about their taxes being too high, why would they be screaming about the estate tax?? and in case you didn't notice, I haven't said much about the high taxes, I'm screaming at them to find a way to get the spending down!!!

another thing to think about...

if you give the poor a few extra bucks a week, they more than likely will use it to buy food (could be using food stamps at the present time to do it), or pay their rent...(could be depending on hud at the present..), or hey, maybe they'll even splurge and buy a new pair of pants, or go to mcdonalds or something.. they more than likely ain't gonna go out on a massive spending spree buying a bunch of luxury items (imported of course), to replace the year old luxury items that they've grown tired of!!! it is possible that we could see the trade deficit decrease a tad if we diverted some cash downward...instead of upward.

Originally posted by zappafan1
There's also a state in New England (I forget which) that allows companies from other states to incorporate in their state. It's quite legal, and benefits everyone who works for or invests in those companies/corporations.

I do believe you are referring to Delaware. Many companies set up there for the benefits incorporating in that State offer.

The Estate tax as others have stated, effect only those who have not planned their Estates out properly. With proper planning, gifting and setting up of certain special Trusts and other strategies, one can minimize the effects of the Estate Tax to make it a non issue. The tax still gets paid but the planning put into action earlier minimizes the tax and the Trusts help with the Tax.

The really rich almost always do this sort of planning. The ones that really get bit by the Estate Tax are those people who don't think of themselves as rich and don't plan and lose hundreds of thousands of dollars that instead of going to their heirs, goes to the Federal and State governments because they didn't take the time to plan for the Estate Tax. Because someone was successful in their business dealings, their heirs get penalized for it? Some American Dream.

I have one client I am working with who, if they die tomorrow, will have an Estate of about 3M. He is well off but he doesn't think of himself as a Millionaire. The Estate Tax if he were to die tomorrow would be in the range of 30Ok.

With proper planning, his heir's will receive about 3.25M instead of the 2.7M without planning. His 8 Grandchildren will all have a good portion of their college pre-paid for and he is going to leave a nice sum to a favorite Charity. The Estate Tax still gets paid, but the planning reduced the total amount of the Estate and lowered the tax as well as increased the actual money to the heirs.

It may not mean much to you, but I assure you it means the world to the families involved. Who here wouldn't want an extra $500,000 just for taking the time to plan. You would be suprised by how many people refuse to plan for something that is bound to happen sooner or later. Weird, but true.

"...and as far as social security, ummm.....the way I look at it is that I gave so much money through my years, I expect at least a little of it back, probably won't get it, but well, I believe the government would be morally wrong not to do at least that much. and, I believe they were morally wrong to raid the account to begin with![/Quote]

REPLY: I agree with you completely, here. It won't happen, but I seem to recall that a law was passed by Congress that, in fact, they have the right to receive SS payments, and don't have to give it back. I DO know that it was before Reagan was President. I'll have to check on it. Yes.... Pres. Johnson is the dick who folded the SS fund into the General Fund.

I'm screaming at them to find a way to get the spending down!!

REPLY: Every time Reagan and Bush tried to cut some of the arbitrary spending, the special interests screamed like crazy. Then there's all the pork spending that Congress-people buy votes with and, of course, those who would rather get a "free" check than actually work for a living.

"....if you give the poor a few extra bucks a week, they more than likely will use it to buy food (could be using food stamps at the present time to do it), or pay their rent...(could be depending on hud at the present..)

REPLY: "Giving them" anything..... the money has to come from somewhere. Food stamps.... cash.... it's the same thing.

it is possible that we could see the trade deficit decrease a tad if we diverted some cash downward...instead of upward.

REPLY: Again, it's not governments job to divert money anywhere; state or federal.
More people started complaining about stuff like this in the 60's (no surprise there). Even poor people were more attuned to reality during the depression.

Pavil.... It indeed is Delaware. Thanks for the insight and info.

Originally posted by zappafan1


Our tax code is over 9 MILLION WORDS, and is just unwieldy to the point in cannot be fixed (it's bad enough that they are acting illegaly). Ask ten people who work there about any given part of the code, and they each will have different answers.

Zappafan,
I do think you have a good point hear. If the code were reduced and some of the breaks gotten rid of, things could be a lot better.
But those with the capital manage to pay enuff of the right people to get specil laws past so they dont half to pay so much, among other things.

The vote to pass the estate tax reduction failed.
But the strange thing is both sides are claiming a victory.

Both Democrats and Republicans insist they emerged as winners from last week's failed GOP effort to cut taxes on multimillion dollar estates and raise the minimum wage.

You can read the whole article hear.

www.forbes.com...

well, in today's world we can't have any losers, just winners.
you don't know this??

kind of glad it got defeated though. and well, if it didn't they would all still be winners!!
at least this way our grandkids won't be the losers as they have even more of our debt dumped on them!!

all this talk about tax cuts only diverts from the actual problem....WE NEED SPENDING CUTS!!! lots of them! it's like they take all they can from us, making sure we just stay afloat, and then well, they pick and chose just who they want to give a little back to, and for what purpose it should be used for...
this isn't the government's purpose! what gives them the right to chose what kind of business is to thrive, and endow them with little extra perks to ensure they do, at the expense of other businesses of course, who aren't seen as favorable in their eyes.....what gives them the right to chose between individuals. it's unconstitutional...it's not within their power to do this! the money that would be taken from the coffers from the reduction of estate taxes would just have to come from somewhere else, someone else would be getting screwed instead....we have the favored, and the unfavored.....in a country who's constitution clearly proclaims equality for all.

of course, there's one thing that the people could do that would take the fun out of alot of their games......and if they value this nation, you'd think that they would. start treating each other decently, pay a fair wage for a day's work, charge fair rates for your products and services, treat others as you would want to be treated, help those who need help, so the government won't have to. make it so the government doesn't need a half a dozen different agencies helping the poor, a gigantic court system that's now overburdoned beyond belief, and alot of other agencies and departments that are blackholes for money.
but that would require some moral integrity from the people of this nation, wouldn't it.....

Downster.
I certenaly cant call you wrong. Cutting spending would be a good idea, most would probably agree. Howerver in the reality of the situation it most likely wont happen. For every daller you try to cut there will be five lobbiest convinceing you not to. Not to menchen the mess we have gotten into in the middle east. That is something we will be paying for, for a long time.

If the code were reduced and some of the breaks gotten rid of, things could be a lot better. But, those with the capital manage to pay enuff of the right people to get specil laws past so they dont half to pay so much, among other things.

REPLY: The top 25% already pay 83% of the/our taxes.... what more do you want??? Basically, people who are successful are getting penalized for doing the right thing, realizing the American Dream because of their hard work and education.

".... a bill that also included ...... research and development credits for businesses, and deductions for college tuition and state sales taxes...."

REPLY: So, because the Left didn't get their way, those who do research and development, and those kids looking for help with college tuition deductions and state sales taxes, all get screwed.

".... what gives them the right to chose between individuals. it's unconstitutional...it's not within their power to do this!

REPLY: I agree with the spending issue. But as far as above, they do it all the time with their Social(ist) programs like Welfare, WIC, Medicaid, Medicare, etc. You'd have to include those, too, in your statement above.

"..... treat others as you would want to be treated, help those who need help, so the government won't have to. make it so the government doesn't need a half a dozen different agencies helping the poor, a gigantic court system that's now overburdoned beyond belief, and alot of other agencies and departments that are blackholes for money."

REPLY: I can't argue with that, but I'd say it happens more than you might think.

"... but that would require some moral integrity from the people of this nation, wouldn't it...?"

REPLY: No..... it would require more personal responsibility and common sense.

RedGolem: yes.... cut much spending, but people who receive those "free" dollars wouldn't elect those who would vote for those laws to cut spending. The Fair Tax would get rid of 90% of the IRS, and it would also get rid of the lobbyists for the special interests. I'm also for a Constitutional Amendment that would make it mandatory to get rid of three old laws before ythey could pass another one.

That, in addition to the obvious benefits, would take up so much of their time they would have to concentrate on the important issues.

Originally posted by RedGolem
Downster.
I certenaly cant call you wrong. Cutting spending would be a good idea, most would probably agree. Howerver in the reality of the situation it most likely wont happen. For every daller you try to cut there will be five lobbiest convinceing you not to. Not to menchen the mess we have gotten into in the middle east. That is something we will be paying for, for a long time.

well, cutting taxes isn't a good idea unless you also plan on cutting spending somehow. otherwise, those extra dollars you are borrowing is costing you a heck of alot more through interest...


I agree zappafan, those social programs WERE included in my statement, we're trillions of dollars in the red, too many people are screaming about being overtaxed as it is, and well, a fair way to handle the situation would be for the government to pull out of those areas that they really have no business being in in the first place. them taking so much out of us so that businesses and individuals can't keep their head above water, and then deciding who they should "save", is unconstitutional, and it would be a good place to start the cuts to reduce the budget...

but then expect the cost of living to be forced downward, and the wages to be forced upward if this ever happened, with alot of economic upheaval in the process. businesses are just as much addicted to these gov't handouts as the people are. where would the landlords be if the gov't ceased hud payments? the medical facilities without medicare and medicaid, theemployers be without all these programs for the poor, ect. where would our economy be without the government controlling where so much money was to go and how it was to be spent...

it would eventually straighten out I think, but in the meantime well.......maybe a controlled drop would be better.....it was their influence that got things so out of wack to begin with, they are gonna have to exert a little influence to get it stabalized now. and even if they do that, our particiaption in the process will be needed...

otherwise, I've got a feeling that sometime in the near future, it will be a very uncontrolled drop of the ball, and well, then we may see rioting in the streets, homeless people, and alot of nasty stuff coming at us.