100% tax rate in the polls as we speak (France).

reply to post by JBA2848

There is also a general income tax on corporations. Check out the instructions for form 1120, page 4:

The corporation must make installment payments of estimated tax if it expects its total tax for the year (less applicable credits) to be $500 or more.

That corporate income tax rate is around 35%. Then we get into all the other taxes like excise (which is state only), FICA, unemployment insurance, withholding, workers comp, etc., etc., etc. All those are in addition to the corporate income tax, which is what we are discussing here.

The shareholders report their share of the income as dividend income on their 1040 and pay income taxes again on the profits. If you are planning on running a business any time soon, please get yourself a good tax accountant; trust me, you do not want to miss a quarterly payment.

TheRedneck

reply to post by Americanist

So have you ever run a corporation? You'll find sales tax, payroll tax, SS, franchise... I've actually paid these in the past.

I owned and ran a design service (full C-corp, privately traded) for ten years. I have used the loopholes. I am well aware of the requirements, cost, and hassle of operating a corporation.

With the advent of 3D printing and full-automation you won't see the same manufacturing lines. Jobs vanish as a result.

Yes, manufacturing will change... but you place far too much faith in your technology. All machines break and need repair; all machines require an operator; all machines must be created in the first place. The jobs do not disappear; they change.

Also, not all businesses are able to use the latest (mostly still experimental) technology... 3D printers are still somewhat limited in size and can only use plastic... there was a recent thread about a 3D printer which used lasers to create high-impact plastic items from a bed of plastic powder, but this is a prototype. There is one in the world. Most 3D printers use plastic filament which is fairly expensive compared to extrusions and injection molding.

Still not sure how all this applies to charging 100% tax rates, but you brought it up...

Lowest bidders are the guys spraying chemicals on our food crops that rarely live to see their own grand kids being born. I'd rather end this monstrosity for them. No offense to Walmart and Monsanto.

There is no love lost between me and either of those two examples. WalMart simply makes for a good example at times, being so well known.

Monsanto is not a low bidder like WalMart. Monsanto has created its niche through contract negotiations with farmers and abuse of patent laws. Both need to be broken up. What does that have to do with 100% tax rates?

You are very good at spinning a conversation; I'll grant you that.

TheRedneck

reply to post by MaryStillToe

Now let me make another point:

Let's say a cell phone manufacturer is making cell phones. They are doing good and making the maximum income every year with 50 employees making 3 different models of cell phones. Now, without the cap, there is a good chance they are running an R&D department trying to develop new versions of cell phones. If they were to make a new type of phone that everyone in the country wanted, they would have to hire more people or buy more machinery to make the new phones. There would be new jobs and new phones. But instead, since they are already making as much as they can, why would they even bother dealing with an R&D department? They wouldn't... they would still stay in business of course, but they would not be expanding, growing... they would be stagnating. That means no new jobs, no new products.

New ideas come from individuals... Alex Bell, Eli Whitney, Henry Ford to name a few. But development of those new ideas come from industry. Development requires massive amounts of money and huge risk, and only industry can provide those. The first transistors were developed by large electronics corporations (Bell Labs, Westinghouse, Texas Instruments) and more large corporations refined the concept to produce the semiconductor chips we use today to post these messages. The people involved with this development made a lot of money for their efforts, and I happen to believe this is a fair and good thing. I do not despise them for their profits; I applaud them for their efforts.

Without profit motive, people will not take on new risks. Why take a chance of losing millions of dollars in a failed attempt when success will make no difference? To do so would be ludicrous. And yet, people are busily telling me in this thread that no one needs incentive to take these risks.

What that tells me is if I had the ability to cure the world's ills right now in a single swoop, I would not be excited about doing so. Success, not failure, is now becoming a thing to be punished for, and I have endured enough punishment for failure in the past to not want to dance that dance again.

TheRedneck

reply to post by estebadia

I'm truly sorry. It appears we didn't learn well enough from history, and it also appears France is set to take the brunt of the repeat lesson.

We will watch and see what happens. We will learn and all swear to never let this happen again. We will go on with our lives and forget so when we find ourselves in a similar situation in the future, all will again be repeated.

An endless cycle, a merry-go-round of tragedy and insanity.

Can I renounce my species?

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck

Yes, manufacturing will change... but you place far too much faith in your technology. All machines break and need repair; all machines require an operator; all machines must be created in the first place. The jobs do not disappear; they change. Also, not all businesses are able to use the latest (mostly still experimental) technology... 3D printers are still somewhat limited in size and can only use plastic... there was a recent thread about a 3D printer which used lasers to create high-impact plastic items from a bed of plastic powder, but this is a prototype. There is one in the world. Most 3D printers use plastic filament which is fairly expensive compared to extrusions and injection molding. Still not sure how all this applies to charging 100% tax rates, but you brought it up...

On the topic of jobs... I expound on jobs. Jobs will alter to mirror machines with an efficiency and touch ratio measured against milliseconds as we've seen inside larger hubs. Say I drink green tea and urinate more frequently. How about I save myself a firing, and start with a... Hell no.

Here's a heads up:

Monsanto is not a low bidder like WalMart. Monsanto has created its niche through contract negotiations with farmers and abuse of patent laws. Both need to be broken up. What does that have to do with 100% tax rates?

Connect the dots. You remove all corporate tax, and big business is gifted means to skirt regulation by blasting out legal maneuvers. At present, we're witness to the exploitation of workers, the environment, and governing bodies including the presidential race. And the system gradually improves, via your proposition? Highly unlikely, but to each his or her own... So goes choices of debtor nations.

Save the spinning for a dance floor, if entertainment is something you can afford.

Originally posted by Protostellar
So all that money will go to the governement. What a surprise.

With the right government the money will flow on to the people.

reply to post by TheRedneck


The pitfall of society is profit margin. Success should be viewed as invention, implementation, and integration each geared towards health benefits and higher learning. This watered down version is rather selfish and boring.

Originally posted by flice

Originally posted by Protostellar
So all that money will go to the governement. What a surprise.

With the right government the money will flow on to the people.

A government of the people - by the people will ensure this happens. Not cronies of Goldman Sachs and the likes.

People need to step out of the current system and equalize, and constantly fire everyone.

I don't believe in money.

Do I think someone over 320 000 US should have the profits shared?

Yeah, but not in the hands of the corrupt leaders!

But then I don't believe money or the scarsity system.

Whatever is going down is a plan.

And I take it Elenin 9/11 and the Apollyon stuff is coming up. Their code for their iron fist rule.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
It appears we didn't learn well enough from history, and it also appears France is set to take the brunt of the repeat lesson.

Uh... I've realized (after posting, unfortunately) that this thread is NOT about France, or anything having to do with the french situation. This is about American politics and economics, is it not?

In every election there is some obscure candidates making some pretty radical commentary..... but from there to talking about it as if it is going to happen, that is a far stretch! It isn't attracting attention here, and there isn't hardly any chance this guy could make it to the second tour! The french aren't considering this!

But also, I don't understand how one can analyze the proposition in terms of another countries system. What woudl work one way in a specific system and culture would work differently in another. What is good for one is not necessarily good for another.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by JBA2848

There is also a general income tax on corporations. Check out the instructions for form 1120, page 4:

The corporation must make installment payments of estimated tax if it expects its total tax for the year (less applicable credits) to be $500 or more.

That corporate income tax rate is around 35%. Then we get into all the other taxes like excise (which is state only), FICA, unemployment insurance, withholding, workers comp, etc., etc., etc. All those are in addition to the corporate income tax, which is what we are discussing here.

The shareholders report their share of the income as dividend income on their 1040 and pay income taxes again on the profits. If you are planning on running a business any time soon, please get yourself a good tax accountant; trust me, you do not want to miss a quarterly payment.

TheRedneck

Do you know what the estimated tax payments are for?· Use Form 1120-W, Estimated Tax for Tax Return; The corporation must pay any tax due in Corporations, as a worksheet to compute

www.irs.gov...

For corporations with assets of $1 billion or more, the amount of estimated tax. of any required installment of estimated tax due in July, August, or September of 2012 must be increased, and the next required installment must be decreased in an amount to reflect the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS). However, if
increase in the previous installment. See the instructions for line 25.

This tax payment is for assets not income.The money used to buy buildings and so on are taxed. Its not forgotten money because you bought a building just so you can name it Trump Towers. and they even have loopholes for this crap. Just take Warren Buffet buying Wells Fargo. He owed a lot of money in taxes for it. They gave him a payment plan for like ten years which he will make in his estimated taxes payments. But then he wrote them all off due to his loses in Wachovia. But both of thoses companies taxes were not there own. There taxes belonged to the share holder Berkshire Hathaway or Warren Buffet. On paper Wells Fargo paid there taxes. On paper Wachovia lost alot of money and owed a negative amount so techinically would have got money back that they never paid in. Normal person tuff luck you lose. But those companies are owned by Berkshire Hathaway who can trade the loss from one company Wachovia for the large amount owed by another company Wells Fargo. Then the taxes get washed again because now Warren Buffet owes the taxes for Berkshire Hathaway because he is the share holder. So he gets to take even more discounts and tax write offs. The spider web of tax debt and tax gains being traded by the umbrella companies is a scam. Just like our banking system. They push paper around and never pay anything. In the end of it all they will pay as a shareholder ussually around 17.5 % taxes. No workmans comp. and very little Social Security.

reply to post by TheRedneck


I am going to have to disagree. Since R&D is an expense, it falls under the invest it or lose it slogan.

If the cell phone company made $60M and the income cap was $50M, they would have to find a way to spend $10M or lose it to the government. This would give companies greater incentive to invest in new products and give more money to their R&D departments. An income cap on individuls and companies would keep more money flowing through the economy and increase competition. Under those circumstances, the company would have to invest in R&D to achieve long-term success.

reply to post by Americanist

A large part of the problems we face with unreasonable (IMO anyway) demands on workers has to do with the shrinking market. Business is trying to survive as well, and just like a person down on their luck will start eating mac-n-cheese instead of more expensive meals, so too do businesses try to squeeze every dollar from every employee.

If working correctly, this tendency is countered by the fact that good workers are valuable assets and are treated as such, lest they switch to a different company. But when the option of switching jobs becomes questionable at best, people will accept what they once would not, and many business managers, trying desperately to maintain profits to keep the business afloat, will take advantage of that. Fix the economy and things will go back to normal; keep vying for this socialized government-nanny approach and things will get worse.

And again, paying zero is paying more than paying a negative number. My college teaches that in introductory remedial math.

TheRedneck

reply to post by Americanist

Success should be viewed as invention, implementation, and integration each geared towards health benefits and higher learning.

I agree.

Now as soon as you figure out how to do that, how to erase greed from the human experience, how to make people care less about themselves than they do others, please let me know.

TheRedneck

reply to post by Bluesma

Actually, it is about France, but also about the attitude that allows such a proposition to be accepted. We have tended to focus on American politics, I'm afraid, but I am very interested in how this will affect France.

TheRedneck

reply to post by JBA2848

I'm sorry; I think you are confused.

In the US, a corporation pays income tax on all profit realized during that year. This has nothing to do with property taxes, workers comp, excise tax, or anything else. The shareholders then individually pay income tax again on the dividends from that profit in their personal return.

Warren Buffet cannot assume the tax liability for any corporation he is a shareholder of without piercing the corporate veil and making the corporation null and void. That is the law, and has been for a very very long time.

Shareholders do not receive benefits. They are not employees. They are investors. They thus receive no workers comp, no withholding, no insurance, no FICA... those are for employees.

TheRedneck

reply to post by MaryStillToe

It appears to me we have one major difference in our stances: you assume there will be common-sense measures put in place to allow corporations to escape this penalty, while I do not. As far as I know (and someone from France feel free to correct me on this), there are no such provisions in the proposal... if you make more than $370,000 you pay it all to the government. Period.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck


I never said he had health insurance and so on for his self. But he does pay social security every body does and theres no way to hide from it.

www.forbes.com...

The new figures don’t suggest anything untoward on Buffett’s part and, if anything, strengthen his case. Previously, he had said he paid 17.4% of his taxable income to Uncle Sam, including payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security. It’s not surprising that Buffett’s rate, as a percentage of AGI, is significantly lower than as a percentage of taxable income. Taxable income is the smaller number you get after claiming deductions for charitable contributions, state and local taxes and the like. Moreover, since Buffett pays himself a salary of just $100,000 a year, most of his income comes from investments—long term capital gains and dividends–taxed at a special top rate of 15%. By contrast, some of the highest income taxpayers operate their businesses as privately held S corporations, which means that the businesses themselves pay no taxes, but pass through all their profits to their owners’ 1040s, where it is taxed at the ordinary top rate of 35%. (For example, that explains why, according to the government, billionaire Andrew Beal tried to stockpile more than $4 billion in artificial tax losses from the now disallowed DAD tax shelter to offset his future personal income—all the profits from Beal Financial Corp. were landing on his tax return. Beal insists the losses were proper.)

He pays himself 100,000 dollars and pays social security and he probly gets health care. That 100,000 takes care of the mandatory parts. The rest is shareholder which is over 62 million dollars.

Originally posted by PrinceDreamer
The trouble with tax is that we are all over taxed, if I remember rightly someone once worked out that out of every £ you earned here in the UK 90%+ ends back in the government coffers, what with income tax, national insurance, council rates, super high taxes on Petrol, cigs, alcohol and value added tax and all the other stealth taxes, it really is an outrage,

I don't really think the rich should be taxed extra, even though I am fairly poor. I just think they need to pay the same percentage as everyone else and deal with tax avoidance. You can't nail someone to the floor just for being successful, they would only get around it anyway, pay themselves the $370, 000 or what ever it is and then filter the money through shares in the company, paying dividends which the French cant tax.,

The only thing that will change the system is killing off the central banks and the stock exchange. That is where the damage is really done. The solution is not in the pockets of a few rich people, it with the people that control the money

Get real? The government is bought and paid for by the tax breaks which upset the economic balance between main street and wall street.... today wall street controls government for big business at the expense of main street and the people!

Yes kill off the central banks and stop the giant ponzi but also put big business where they belong....

behind the taxpayer!

the US founding fathers were correct in limiting corporations to only for the public good!

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by Germanicus

May I ask: who exactly are the "job creators"? I have never worked for a poor man (except myself).

TheRedneck

Exactly, but they plan to just work for government run agencies, I guess? Otherwise are we going to do the community farming thing?