It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

the real IRS scandle

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 



someone some where will have to pay, or your roads will be in ruins.
who ever ends up paying has lost something, if you cant use your roads you have also lost something.

EVERYONE else pays…including ALL for-profit businesses. It’s very difficult to become 501c and there aren’t as many as you might think in comparison to other businesses. It’s much more difficult and time consuming to run also (your minutes had better be spot on and every penny accounted for…or else).

And AGAIN, we made it just fine before the non-profit was formed!!



yes your correct that it gets spent,
but instead of being spent helping the community (tax exempt is for the public benefit) it is spent in the private interest of a political objective for the personal benefit of a candidate.
they are not the same.

All businesses and people who get the money are IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR!

Do you think there is some big non-profit pool that the rich throw money into and divvy up amongst themselves when we’re not looking?





even if i use the money i saved in taxes to post,
"tea parties are for little girls" posters everywhere? lol

Good luck getting that business plan approved!





dont you see it becomes the person with the most money will win,
not the guy or gal with the best vision for the future.

The little bit in tax savings isn’t making the difference in the money game. Most nonprofits don’t even show enough profit to be effected by federal taxes anyway…they spend the money and show little to no profit.




posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


thank you I starred you for that.
second



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   

OK, fair enough... but what in the blue hell does that have to do with your initial ascertation that the TEA Party provides no benefit to the avergae tax payer and fails to meet the criteria you're pushing as being needed to qualify as a tax exempt group?


simple it should benefit "the community" as stated in the statute,
not an individual political ideology, individual person (candidate) or political party (tea party)


Listen man (and don't take this as a hit because it is just an observation) there are some clear cut indication of personal bias and the agenda you're working in your posts in this thread.


sounds funny saying it but i was trying to bring ballence to the IRS debate


1. Rail against the TEA Party, but swift to defend Occupy Wall Street.

ask beezer he knows why



2. Attempt to divert the conversation away from the legitimacy of personal tax burdens and refocus on larger, more populist targets like (deep, menacing voice) CORPORATE AMERICA and CONSERVATIVE PACS. (Kinda surprised you haven't hammered home a cursory Koch Bros. indictment yet)

was trying to point out where you tax money is going, ie subsidising apple in their cayman islands head office

and that if you were really pissed at paying high taxes you could at least be mad at the correct groups,
your miss directed anger would be more helpful if directed at the real problem,
23 trillion in tax havens, and VERY FEW ARE SMALL BUSINESS, no deflection just redirection



3. You are completely ambivalent to any rip against a non-Conservative tax free entity... quickly redirecting the conversation with an empathetic "I feel for you, but..." followed by clear indications that you're providing lip service but certainly want the focused outrage to remain solely on the Conservative groups.


im sorry if you cant fathom why i care about others, weather r or d or neither,
trust me its not lip service



I'd argue that your OP is biased.

as stated earlyer i am trying to ballence the debate with another view point.

its not all
"we are the victims of the IRS"
occupy was also investigated,
and so too should anyone claiming public benifit from tax exempt status.

you should not take my answers to heart, i am not your enemy

xploder



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 07:04 PM
link   

EVERYONE else pays…including ALL for-profit businesses. It’s very difficult to become 501c and there aren’t as many as you might think in comparison to other businesses. It’s much more difficult and time consuming to run also (your minutes had better be spot on and every penny accounted for…or else).

And AGAIN, we made it just fine before the non-profit was formed!!


i have no issue with helping the community, its the "illegitimate" use of this very specific loophole to fund political contributions (tax free for the donator) and hidden donations.
very bad idea.



All businesses and people who get the money are IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR!

Do you think there is some big non-profit pool that the rich throw money into and divvy up amongst themselves when we’re not looking?


there are questions being asked about expenditure,


Good luck getting that business plan approved!

that was intended to illustrate how bad it will get if nothing is done.
it was not a serious plan lol



The little bit in tax savings isn’t making the difference in the money game. Most nonprofits don’t even show enough profit to be effected by federal taxes anyway…they spend the money and show little to no profit.


2 billion spent on adds ect,
how many extra adds does that work out too?

the tax free portion would be many many more political adds.
how does this help the community?
outside of add agencies ect, who are private not public entities.

xploder



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER
was trying to point out where you tax money is going, ie subsidising apple in their cayman islands head office

and that if you were really pissed at paying high taxes you could at least be mad at the correct groups,
your miss directed anger would be more helpful if directed at the real problem,
23 trillion in tax havens, and VERY FEW ARE SMALL BUSINESS, no deflection just redirection


I'm not the first in this thread to say this, but that is a very liberal progressive view on taxation... that if there's a corporate group which isn't paying their (always moving goalpost, ever changing definition) "fair share" they are somehow more responsible for "screwing" those of us who pay a net total in taxes than are those who are a net drain on the accounts tax dollars are placed in.

You're not trying to point out where anyone's tax money is "going", you're trying to point out more sources of additional tax dollars. There's a massive difference between the two. My tax money is going for horsecrap like millitary aid to Syrian rebels, neverending unemployemnt checks, subsidized living expenses for nearly half the damn nation, endless wars in the desert, legal battles against our Constitutional rights, security for lavish parties and tax payer funded vacations for the Obamas, border wars we aren't even trying to win, and a whole slew of other pointless and insulting expenses I and other workers are expected to foot the bill for while half the nation yells at me to search deeper in my pockets for just a little more pain to help fund the machine.

It is a crock of crap. But yeah, let's feign anger at the ones who pay the most but "aren't paying enough" while ignoring the leeches. That'll certainly make things better!



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   
ok.....


I'm not the first in this thread to say this, but that is a very liberal progressive view on taxation... that if there's a corporate group which isn't paying their (always moving goalpost, ever changing definition) "fair share" they are somehow more responsible for "screwing" those of us who pay a net total in taxes than are those who are a net drain on the accounts tax dollars are placed in.


do you agree that if the biggest earners offshore profits so they cant be taxed YOUR taxes will be higher?


You're not trying to point out where anyone's tax money is "going", you're trying to point out more sources of additional tax dollars.


no not "additional taxes" but actual taxes NOT payed,
what would happen if everybody "avoided taxes"
what would your country look like if "everyone" offshored profits not just the big corps?
i would love for you to answer please


There's a massive difference between the two. My tax money is going for horsecrap like millitary aid to Syrian rebels, neverending unemployemnt checks, subsidized living expenses for nearly half the damn nation, endless wars in the desert, legal battles against our Constitutional rights, security for lavish parties and tax payer funded vacations for the Obamas, border wars we aren't even trying to win, and a whole slew of other pointless and insulting expenses I and other workers are expected to foot the bill for while half the nation yells at me to search deeper in my pockets for just a little more pain to help fund the machine.


so big corps dont benifit from the security your military provides?
or use the roads and infrastructure to earn their profits?


It is a crock of crap. But yeah, let's feign anger at the ones who pay the most but "aren't paying enough" while ignoring the leeches. That'll certainly make things better!


i can now say that it is you who are biased,
the leeches are the big guys offshoring profits while still using the infrastructure YOU are paying for.
23 trillion in off shore tax havens,

let that sink in for a minute,
now what crumbling infrastructure could that repair or build?
and now YOU have to pay because the big corps can rout the system.

back on topic,
the tea party should not get tax free status for private political spending,
neither should OWS

you shouldnt have to pay taxes if the largest corps dont,

its that simple

xploder



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


The answer to all of your questions is held in a 2 step process.

Step 1: Reinstate tariffs. It should cost more to import goods manufactured outside the US than it costs to manufacture locally and tariffs are the way to make that a reality.

Step 2: The federal government MUST learn how to prioritize and budget. They need a balanced budget amendment desperately. That law should apply to every cent expended by the feds and, to ensure that all is fair, there should be absolutely no untouchable sector of the budget.

I'm not opposed to discussing corporate tax reform and closing loopholes, but right now we are pouring water into a bucket full of holes. Everyone out there taking more from the system than they put into it represent a hole. Until the holes are completely plugged, it is insanity to pour more water into the bucket.

As it stands right now, the USA has more than enough income to fix the infrstructure woes and manage defense and essential services... what the USA lacks is any degree of testicles in its leadership to make hard choices and actually define "essential" in a manner which makes sense rather than the current laize faire definition which has created so many handouts and free rides.



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Would you feel the same way about OWS? They were granted tax-exempt status as well, yet they were not investigated by the IRS.


here ya go,

Reuters has obtained part of a yet to be released report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) that confirms that the IRS was targeting groups on the left and right who focused their activities on advocating for expanding or limiting of the size of the government. The report also states that the screening process was not influenced by the Obama administration, and that none of the groups screened were denied tax exempt status.


www.politicususa.com...

par for the cause.

xploder



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   

THE REAL I.R.S. SCANDAL


www.newyorker.com...


So the scandal—the real scandal—is that 501(c)(4) groups have been engaged in political activity in such a sustained and open way. As Fred Wertheimer, the President of Democracy 21, a government-ethics watchdog group, put it, “it is clear that a number of groups have improperly claimed tax-exempt status as section 501(c)(4) ‘social welfare’ organizations in order to hide the donors who financed their campaign activities in the 2010 and 2012 federal elections.”

Some people in the I.R.S. field office in Cincinnati took the names of certain groups—names that included the terms “Tea Party” and “patriot,” among others, which tend to signal conservatism—as signals that they might not be engaged in “social welfare” operations. Rather, the I.R.S. employees thought that these groups might be doing explicit politics—which would disqualify them for 501(c)(4) status, and set them aside for closer examination. This appears to have been a pretty reasonable assumption on the part of the I.R.S. employees: having “Tea Party” in your name is at least a slight clue about partisanship. When the inspector-general report becomes public, we’ll surely learn the identity of these organizations. How many will look like “social welfare” organizations—and how many will look like political activists looking for anonymity and tax breaks? My guess is a lot more of the latter than the former.


so at this point i think we should see who is hiding their political efforts behind charity

it will be interesting to see the IRS report

xploder



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Some where I read Nancy Pelosi claim that the IRS Scandal was an opportunity to scrutinize 501(c)(4)s and overturn some thing called Citizens United, I think.
Let m see if I can find it, because it looks like your pushing her agenda or at lest you agree with her.
If so,,, that's Scary! I mean we're talking Pelosi,,,


The fact is that the law says that as long as the funds, the 501(c)(4)s do not use as the primary purpose politics but instead promoting social well being, welfare. Well, that's what primary purpose means, could be the secondary purpose. And here's what I'm calling for: As we look at this and we should, and I think it's very wrong that they would have targeted them, we should be saying what are these groups? Let's have transparency, disclosure. Who are these contributors, a.? B., Let's have accountability for what it is. This is a very vague law, let's bring a clear definition of what a 501(c)(4) -- is that somebody could give them money and they don't have to pay taxes on it.

www.realclearpolitics.com...
edit on 14-5-2013 by guohua because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-5-2013 by guohua because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2013 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by guohua
 


citizens united is simply unlimited campaign contributions,
the idea is that corporations are people and money is free speech,

if you are trying to say that by association i must be like polosi,
thats a big fail on your part.

you cant say i agree with HER because i agree with 1 thing she said.

you are out of touch if you think trolling me in this manner will be effective,
im not a democrat

xploder



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Ugh, I really don't know why people think the income tax makes any difference in tax revenue. ALL income tax funds go to paying off the interest on the national debt. Remember how the income tax was created just after the creation of the federal reserve? A debt based monetary system has to be held in check somehow and this is how it is currently done. If we didn't have the income tax to hold back the debt from the current monetary system things would be a whole lot worse right now.

Just remember that not one penny goes to the government in terms of revenue from the income tax. Anyone avoiding paying this particular tax is simply trying to avoid paying into a system that was corrupt from it's very creation. The income tax would be completely unnecessary if we didn't have a debt based monetary system.



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 09:45 AM
link   
So specifically targeting conservative groups is excusable under this guise your trying to spread? How can you not see that this was a total abuse of power? This thread is just a lousy attemp to save the credibility of the IRS and the democrats behind the scandal.

Pladuim



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pladuim
So specifically targeting conservative groups is excusable under this guise your trying to spread? How can you not see that this was a total abuse of power? This thread is just a lousy attemp to save the credibility of the IRS and the democrats behind the scandal.

Pladuim


I think you’re absolutely right. At the VERY BEGINNING the OP said:


alot of people think the IRS scandle is about "unfair" investigations into Tea Party Groups, its not, the real scandle is that groups that want to engage in political enterprises are attempting to EXPLOIT a tax loop hole


So targeting groups who don’t support this administration isn’t a scandal but trying to form a 501c is?? Abuse of power isn’t a scandal but being tax exempt is??



posted on May, 15 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Yes in very Plain English, if you have any dealing with a Right Wing Group of any sort, you're going to be harassed.
You're going to wait months if not years for your exemption status.
But if you're part of Obamas little group or family,,, it would appear you're moved to the head of the line and even though it appears to be illegal,,,, Not to worry, Obama and his cronies will over look that little detail.

Lois Lerner, the senior IRS official at the center of the decision to target tea party groups for burdensome tax scrutiny, signed paperwork granting tax-exempt status to the Barack H. Obama Foundation, a shady charity headed by the president’s half-brother that operated illegally for years. Read more: dailycaller.com...


According to the organization’s filings, Lerner approved the foundation’s tax status within a month of filing, an unprecedented timeline that stands in stark contrast to conservative organizations that have been waiting for more than three years, in some cases, for approval. Lerner also appears to have broken with the norms of tax-exemption approval by granting retroactive tax-exempt status to Malik Obama’s organization. Read more: dailycaller.com...

Other source: www.barackhobamafoundation.org...

A charity organization founded by President Barack Obama's half brother is raising eyebrows, prompting one watchdog group to file a request for an official investigation

www.huffingtonpost.com...
Now, is she an Obama supporter and just did this to Please her POTUS or did she get a little voice in her hear from an Obama staffer that Obama would Smile Down on her for her assistance?
I don't think we'll ever know the hole truth, but I'm sure Obama was briefed on all the goings on in his Administration and some one looking for Extra Brown Nose Points would've made sure Obama knew they'd taking special care of that charity for his brother.
edit on 15-5-2013 by guohua because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join