OK BT.....explain why this is such a bad idea because at first blush I am incredulous as to the existence of such a loophole. In fact...I am so shocked by it that I am certain there is a patriotic, economic necessity for such a loophole to have been implemented in the first place and we will all be doomed even further if Obama does away with it: "One high-profile proposal involves closing the loophole that has allowed some Wall Street investment managers to pay lower tax rates than their low-paid assistants. Wall Street lobbyists have fought such changes in the past and won, but the current political environment is so sour on financial executives that the proposal could garner more support now. Under current law, investment managers have been exploiting a loophole in our tax code to pay 15 percent on their earned income, the same rate that a middle-class family making $80,000 a year pays. The budget calls for closing the so-called 'carried-interest' loophole," says the administration's list, without being specific about how much revenue that will bring in to the federal government." You have the floor BT.....
...you're gonna have to wait until I clean the vomit off my laptop. I was just reading Obama's budget proposal......Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, Madison, et al are all rolling over in their graves as one. My God what have we done......
This is a winner take all power grab. If Obama wins we are no longer a free market democracy but a socialist republic. If he loses and the economy tanks for good we may have a chance to re-build with traditional values.
He can't pay for that on the backs of those making 250K or more. He claims that 95% of Americans will recieve a tax cut, I can't see how he can keep that promise. It's a new "read my lips no new taxes" type of statement. Maybe he can get creative and find more ways to tax people that don't involve income tax but eventually people will figure it out.
I still would like some sort of explanation as to why there is a 15% tax loophole for filthy rich investment managers while I am paying through the nose on my taxes. I have been in one of the worst tax categories in existence for the past several years and I don't have to worry about Obama's $250,000 classification of "rich" either. Unfortunately however, I don't have that problem anymore with the loss of my job.
This isn't new, I remember it comming up before and I don't know why it's there and why it remains. But I do remember something about it being a creative interpretation of the rules that stood up to legal challenges. Also the last time I remember a furor over it there were about a 100 people who could take advantage of it. I could be wrong though.
Seems wrong to me....very wrong when such a large percentage of my income was going to taxes and I had no recourse and yet these guys that make a couple of cool million or so or more get off with paying 15% Fed taxes because of a "loophole". I had my tax accountant check last year and John McCain paid approx. the same in taxes as I did for the tax year 2007 and he made over $110,000.00 more in income while Sarah Palin made a little less than I did but paid $15,000 less in federal taxes. I should have fired the guy on the spot... :x
But did he pay all the taxes that he should have? As opposed to say most of Obama's cabinet appointees. Are you serious that you even cared how much in taxes Sarah Palin paid? How pathetic.
Actually Gipper the accountant took an off the cuff remark I made and pulled their returns on his own just for comparison sake. I wish I hadn't seen those numbers because it made me envious of their ability to pay significantly less than I do.
If there was another person with similar income who paid more income tax than you did, how would you respond to his indignation upon learning that you paid less income tax than he did?
With the AMT and phased out credits for me it's pretty hard for someone who made what I did to pay more than I did. Unless you have no deductions whatsoever....like no kids....no mortgage... no married filing jointly....etc. then maybe. And I would feel lots of sympathy for that person but the only ones that have to worry about increases as individuals under this new tax plan are those making over $250,000.00 and I am unfortunately headed in the opposite direction from that.
...loophole, schmoophole....it's no more a loophole than suggesting that a lower rate for capital gains is a loophole. It's just rhetoric.....many could argue that carried interests shouldn't be taxed at all as a public policy matter since the earnings of the carried entity are already taxed by Uncle once.....if you keep taxing an earnings stream at each stop, eventually there is nothing that comes back and becomes a productive part of society. There is a fundamental flaw in the logic of those that believe that taking money out of the private sector and giving to Nancy and the first Comrade is a good thing.....it is destructive to any growth dynamic in any economy. For those that believe they have gotten the short end of Uncle Sam's tax stick, tell them that the captains of industry will make them a deal, they can trade in their tax bill and in return, those that have received such favorable treatment will gladly send them theirs.....they can swap even up. As well they should, they've been getting favorable tax treatment for all these years....should be a no brainer....
So you are saying that the 15% tax rate on earnings for these investment advisors is misleading and the article is incorrect for suggesting it?
.....in quotes if you don't mind, please show me where I said that. If you cannot, then I would greatly appreciate it if you would refrain from bastardizing my comments.
I found this as a simple example of why paying capital gains is logical and good policy. So I assume that if you said that it is unfair for these guys to pay capital gains on their profits, then maybe what you are saying that all capital gains should be taxed as ordinary income, that of course would negatively impact millions of investors and cause quite an uproar. It seems to me that the problem comes when the Press/Media focuses in on a "rich" guy who's income is from these types of transactions and makes it seem like they are scaming the system. I wonder if the media were to write an article about Grandma MCG who sold some stock she'd held and didn't pay same rate as Grandson MCG did on his ordinary income and made her seem like a tax scoflaw because of it, would that get many people worked up over Grandma's tax advantage? :wink: :wink:
Dead on TOK....dead on....loophole my a$$. What the President and his happy band of socialists fail to realize that the more you tax something, the less of it you get.....for us to climb out of this ditch, we will need massive amounts of capital investment - PRIVATE preferrable - to flow back into the system. Trick question of the day.....if you hike tax rates on capital investment returns, will you get more or less of it.....? This is like a bad f$%king joke.... The zeal to redistribute wealth from those who have been successful to those that have not is getting in the way of our collective common sense.....I am rethinking my approach to raise my children. I no longer think it responsible of me to nurture them towards ambition, hard work and self-reliance......they may spend their lives getting penalized and having to work harder to pay for their neighbors stupidity. I think they would be better served if I directed them towards becoming wards of the mushrooming welfare state - its the best growth business in town. Surely this will stop.....it will backfire.....it must. I don't believe the people can't see what is happening.....and if they do, I can't believe they think its a good idea....and if they do, we're f&&Ked!