Taxmageddon

Since I've apparently run afoul of the mods, I'll post your doom in the appropriate place:

100 Days Until Taxmageddon

Sunday will mark the start of the 100-day countdown to “Taxmageddon” – the date the largest tax hikes in the history of America will take effect. They will hit families and small businesses in three great waves on January 1, 2013:

First Wave: Expiration of 2001 and 2003 Tax Relief
In 2001 and 2003, the GOP Congress enacted several tax cuts for small business owners, families, and investors (later re-upped by President Obama and Democrat Congress in 2010). The following tax hikes will occur on January 1, 2013:

Personal income tax rates will rise on January 1, 2013. The top income tax rate will rise from 35 to 39.6 percent (this is also the rate at which the majority of small business profits are taxed). The lowest rate will rise from 10 to 15 percent. All the rates in between will also rise. Itemized deductions and personal exemptions will again phase out, which has the same mathematical effect as higher marginal tax rates. The full list of marginal rate hikes is below:
-The 10% bracket rises to a new and expanded 15%
-The 25% bracket rises to 28%
-The 28% bracket rises to 31%
-The 33% bracket rises to 36%
-The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%

Higher taxes on marriage and family coming on January 1, 2013. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of taxable income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level.

Middle Class Death Tax returns on January 1, 2013. The death tax is currently 35% with an exemption of $5 million ($10 million for married couples). For those dying on or after January 1 2013, there is a 55 percent top death tax rate on estates over $1 million. A person leaving behind two homes and a retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved ones.

Higher tax rates on savers and investors on January 1, 2013. The capital gains tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 23.8 percent in 2013. The top dividends tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 43.4 percent in 2013. This is because of scheduled rate hikes plus Obamacare’s investment surtax.
Second Wave: Obamacare Tax Hikes

There are twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare. Some have already gone into effect (the tanning tax, the medicine cabinet tax, the HSA withdrawal tax, W-2 health insurance reporting, and the “economic substance doctrine”). Several more will go into effect on January 1, 2013. They include:
The Obamacare Medical Device Tax begins to be assessed on January 1, 2013. Medical device manufacturers employ 409,000 people in 12,000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax on gross sales – even if the company does not earn a profit in a given year. Exempts items retailing for

Third Wave: The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes
When Americans prepare to file their tax returns in January of 2013, they’ll be in for a nasty surprise—the AMT won’t be held harmless, and many tax relief provisions will have expired. These tax increases will be in force for BOTH 2012 and 2013. The major items include:

The AMT will ensnare over 31 million families, up from 4 million last year. According to the left-leaning Tax Policy Center, Congress’ failure to index the AMT will lead to an explosion of AMT taxpaying families—rising from 4 million last year to 31 million. These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at the higher level. The AMT was created in 1969 to ensnare a handful of taxpayers.

Full business expensing will disappear. In 2011, businesses can expense half of their purchases of equipment. Starting on 2013 tax returns, all of it will have to be “depreciated” (slowly deducted over many years).

Taxes will be raised on all types of businesses. There are literally scores of tax hikes on business that will take place. The biggest is the loss of the “research and experimentation tax credit,” but there are many, many others. Combining high marginal tax rates with the loss of this tax relief will cost jobs.

Tax Benefits for Education and Teaching Reduced. The deduction for tuition and fees will not be available. Tax credits for education will be limited. Teachers will no longer be able to deduct classroom expenses. Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut. Employer-provided educational assistance is curtailed. The student loan interest deduction will be disallowed for hundreds of thousands of families.

Charitable Contributions from IRAs no longer allowed. Under current law, a retired person with an IRA can contribute up to $100,000 per year directly to a charity from their IRA. This contribution also counts toward an annual “required minimum distribution.” This ability will no longer be there.

You voted for him.... the solace I take is knowing you're going to get pounded just like the rest of us.

You think the economy is bad now?

If this is allowed to happen, you will see a continuation of the current depression for decades.

reply to post by tangonine


Dear tangonine,

Why don't you tell us how revenue this means in taxes by bracket. The people that pay 10% make nothing, the people that make 35% (like I used to) make $100,000 and above. The people that make the most, do not get a graduated tax, if you make a million or 35 million, you don't pay a higher percentage. There is a cap in the United States. By the way, I have never complained about paying 35%, I am much more annoyed by alimony in a community property state.

We seem to be much more irritated by having to pay so that people can get $650 a month to barely live on then by having me or others paying tens of thousands of dollars a month to someone who cheated on us. Anything to let someone scrape buy so long as the government doesn't tax on it. If so, then don't let the government enforce alimony. Think about it. Perhaps you believe my ex should starve to death rather than living off me for the rest of her life, which is what the court ordered. I don't complain about taxes and asked to have my wages garnished, it was not a requirement, I wanted to simplify things for her and me. Should the government have the right to force me to pay her so that the government does not have to take care of her or should she just die of starvation?

reply to post by tangonine


We just had a new state tax, 150$ each household in certain areas for fire prevention. we are in a non fire green can clear area but we had to pay. there are more state and local taxes to come.

I like how the media has remained completely silent about this issue. To call it an issue is an understatement. I wouldn't bet on congress to take care of it either.

People should already have their preparations and plans in place. If you don't, it's never too late.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by tangonine

 

Dear tangonine,

Why don't you tell us how revenue this means in taxes by bracket. The people that pay 10% make nothing, the people that make 35% (like I used to) make $100,000 and above. The people that make the most, do not get a graduated tax, if you make a million or 35 million, you don't pay a higher percentage. There is a cap in the United States. By the way, I have never complained about paying 35%, I am much more annoyed by alimony in a community property state.

We seem to be much more irritated by having to pay so that people can get $650 a month to barely live on then by having me or others paying tens of thousands of dollars a month to someone who cheated on us. Anything to let someone scrape buy so long as the government doesn't tax on it. If so, then don't let the government enforce alimony. Think about it. Perhaps you believe my ex should starve to death rather than living off me for the rest of her life, which is what the court ordered. I don't complain about taxes and asked to have my wages garnished, it was not a requirement, I wanted to simplify things for her and me. Should the government have the right to force me to pay her so that the government does not have to take care of her or should she just die of starvation?

I tried to reply to your questions, but most of them are unintelligible. Not a slam, but you aren't making any sense.

reply to post by tangonine


tangonine,

It is not that complicated. If we eliminate your deductions your taxes go up even if you reduce the percentage cap. Have you ever paid income tax?

reply to post by tangonine


Dear tangonine,

This may also help. Tax Deductions - Who gets them and what is it worth.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by tangonine

 

tangonine,

It is not that complicated. If we eliminate your deductions your taxes go up even if you reduce the percentage cap. Have you ever paid income tax?

I served in the USAF for 14 years, got out, became a defense contractor for 7 years making ~$100k/yr so yes I'm somewhat familiar with income tax. Is there a point to your question? Or are you making assumptions?

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by tangonine

 

Dear tangonine,

Why don't you tell us how revenue this means in taxes by bracket. The people that pay 10% make nothing, the people that make 35% (like I used to) make $100,000 and above. The people that make the most, do not get a graduated tax, if you make a million or 35 million, you don't pay a higher percentage. There is a cap in the United States. By the way, I have never complained about paying 35%, I am much more annoyed by alimony in a community property state.

We seem to be much more irritated by having to pay so that people can get $650 a month to barely live on then by having me or others paying tens of thousands of dollars a month to someone who cheated on us. Anything to let someone scrape buy so long as the government doesn't tax on it. If so, then don't let the government enforce alimony. Think about it. Perhaps you believe my ex should starve to death rather than living off me for the rest of her life, which is what the court ordered. I don't complain about taxes and asked to have my wages garnished, it was not a requirement, I wanted to simplify things for her and me. Should the government have the right to force me to pay her so that the government does not have to take care of her or should she just die of starvation?

I'm missing the part where you can provide justification for taking money from people that earned it.

reply to post by tangonine


Dear tanonine,

I'm missing the part where you can provide justification for taking money from people that earned it.

You are missing it because that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is that the tax is only meaningful if it is applied and the deductions change the rate that people pay. If we all pay the same rate; but, you get all the deductions then we are not actually paying the same rate. If you are going to tax income then there should be no deductions for some and not others.