jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (18 posts)

At 102%, His Tax Rate Takes the Cake

  1. paradigmsearch profile image92
    paradigmsearchposted 6 years ago

    Those who are more knowledgeable than me (which is pretty much everyone smile ) can sort this one out...

    "Yet Mr. Ross told me that he paid 102 percent of his taxable income in federal, state and local taxes for 2010. “My entire taxable income, plus some, went to the payment of taxes,” Mr. Ross said. “This does not include real estate taxes, sales taxes and other taxes I paid for 2010.” When he told friends and family, they were “astounded,” he said."

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/102-tax-r … 10322.html

  2. paradigmsearch profile image92
    paradigmsearchposted 6 years ago

    No response to this?

    Is it true?

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      It may not be true but it is right.  The only way he had money is because he had to take it from people poorer than him.  Isn't that how it works.  The poor people have all the money until somebody comes in and sneaks it out from under the floor boards and stashes it in the Cayman Islands or Switzerland.  If it wasn't for people who should be forced to pay 100% or more of that money back the poor would be trillionaires. Right?!?!

  3. knolyourself profile image60
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    Sounds true to me. Someone has to pay for America's wars. "U.S. Corporate Tax Rate Plunges To 40 Year Low Of 12.1%"

  4. Hollie Thomas profile image59
    Hollie Thomasposted 6 years ago

    That's depressing.

  5. habee profile image94
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    Well, the article came from the NYT, so it must be true. That amount of taxes is ridiculous! We have to reform our tax code!!

    1. paradigmsearch profile image92
      paradigmsearchposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Are you saying that we have the same opinion of NYT?

      I'm actually, really curious here. smile

      1. habee profile image94
        habeeposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        I don't have a high opinion of the NYT, but most liberals do. I figured if the Times was reporting someone wealthy who pays A LOT of taxes, it has to be true.

        1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
          uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          So as the number of NYT subscriptions declines can we hope that one of two things is happening.  One, liberals are budgeting their declining incomes more carefully in order to help Mr. Get the Money Out of Politics raise a $BILLION for his re-election bid.  Two, and more desired, there are just that many fewer liberals.

  6. Glenn Stok profile image98
    Glenn Stokposted 6 years ago

    If you subtract all your deductions from your gross income, you are left with your taxable income.  Then you pay the tax on THAT.

    Mr. Ross is suggesting that he is paying 102% because he is comparing his taxes to his taxable income, rather than to his total income.

    Due to the alternative minimum tax, I believe him when he says he is paying 102% of his taxable income.  But he is still paying less than his total income.

    If it's true that people making over a million dollars get screwed like this, that is contrary to all the problems that are known about the tax codes.

    As far as I understand it, people in that high income range take advantage of many loopholes that help them legally avoid many taxes. So this story just doesn't make sense.

    I'd like to see an accountant chime in on this thread, and see what he or she says. Any accountants out there?

    1. profile image0
      JaxsonRaineposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Something I just want to point out. People always talk about the rich taking advantage of loopholes, but those 'loopholes' are no different than middle-class Americans itemizing deductions, or lower-income people getting $4,000+ of EIC.

      I'm tired of seeing the double standard where the rich are crucified for 'taking advantage' of the tax code, when some people make more on their returns than in a year of working by 'taking advantage' of the tax code.

      1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
        uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

        If Democrats despise "loopholes" so much why do all of them seem to take full advantage there of.  Also why do they act as if these same disgusting "loopholes" just spontaneously generate from piles of money.  The majority of the tax code has been written and re-written by the Democrats in Congress.  Tax simplification was the cry of Republicans as far back as Phil Graham and Dick Armey - who by the way authored one of the most equitable flat tax programs for the working poor one could imagine - killed by Democrats and weak Republicans.

        1. profile image0
          JaxsonRaineposted 6 years agoin reply to this

          It is ridiculous. There is no good reason for things to be as complicated as they are, unless it is to keep the lawyers and politicians employed.

          Tax reform, budget reform(no more automatic increase), reduce government... we've got a lot of work to do.

          1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
            uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years agoin reply to this


            And what has he won, Johnny Donovan?

            A NEW CAR!!!!!!  and a life time supply of rice a roni, the San Francisco treat.

            Government exists for several purposes not the least of which is to eat the economy and get bigger.  Government exists for those in it.  This is the way governments have always been and will always be.  That is precisely why we have a Constitution.  You remember that document, the one politicians, lawyers, judges, journalists regularly wipe themselves with and we refuse to rise up and return to its place of reverence.

            1. profile image0
              JaxsonRaineposted 6 years agoin reply to this

              Wait... are you saying that the foundation of one of the greatest nations in history should be regarded as... I don't know... maybe a good thing?


              1. uncorrectedvision profile image60
                uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                I am saying there is no set of secular documents that should ever be held in higher regard than the foundational documents of The United States.  Sure all the others can love their Magna Cartas and all but those didn't lead to the most sustained expansion of prosperity and liberty the world has ever seen.  One event triggered that change, the American Revolution.

                Yess, Yess, it was built on the Enlightenment but where that led to the guillotine, the American Revolution led to the "liberal" revolutions in the 19th century that restrained and rewrote the monarchical systems, relationships and powers all over the world.

                Thanks Montesquieu, Locke, Burke, etc... nice ground work but you didn't quite get the foundation laid.  That took Americans.

  7. aguasilver profile image80
    aguasilverposted 6 years ago

    Wasn't it you guys who shouted "No Taxation without representation" well I guess the greater American public are now tax slaves to a much more elite group than King George represented!

    Income tax is the wrong way to go, all taxation switched to purchase tax, with variable rates to account for basic good to luxury items is the way to raise taxation.

    Legislation to tax assets transferred offshore would deal with the problem.

    Just a thought.

  8. Teylina profile image60
    Teylinaposted 5 years ago

    I know less than you about taxes and skipped reading comments because no point. I still wouldn't get it. However, may get my genius financial-genius daughter to look at this out of curiosity. If she has anything to offer besides those offered when you wrote, she can do it.