What is a 'fair share'?

[MrLonzo]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

[retiredguy123]

There is no answer to your question.

But, if you want to pay off the national debt, every citizen needs to pay $102,574. To me, that would be fair.

[Michael G.]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

Similar to "Our Entitlement" instead of calling it "Social Security"

[Pugchief]

There is no answer to your question.

Sure there is. It's equal to some phantom amount that will make your constituents drool.

But, if you want to pay off the national debt, every citizen needs to pay $102,574. To me, that would be fair.

Ya, gonna have to disagree. I didn't ask for them to spend money they didn't have on projects I don't agree with. But I will nonetheless pony up my portion right after you get all the people living paycheck to paycheck to pay theirs.

[JoMar]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

Same as those that ask for recommendations for services at a reasonable price. There is no answer since "fair share" and "reasonable price" are individual judgements. Also, when talking about Corporate and Business taxes, they are the collectors and pass them downstream to us. Even the Billionaire tax doesn't work, sounds great but the tax code gives them outs. Change the tax code and might have a shot at a fair tax distribution, or a flat tax.....but nothing in it for the politicians so don't hold your breath for either.

[golfing eagles]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

I don't know about dollars, but since this thread will probably turn political very quickly, the 2 hours 23 minutes that it has lasted so far is more than a fair share :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[rustyp]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

Let's start with all the people who didn't pay their fair share by being paid (or paying themselves) "under the table".

[frayedends]

The fair share lingo is used by politicians to push for raising taxes on the rich. However when they raise taxes on “the rich” it seems everyone’s taxes go up. But the loopholes the rich have are not changed. So what it really means is an increase in taxes for most of us but not for their rich friends. It’s a shell game and a political phrase of deception.

[fdpaq0580]

Shoot them all and let God sort them out! Or something like that!
🤠

[shaw8700@outlook.com]

And remember the rich can live anywhere they want. Remember Roger Moore? He had to live in Switzerland because Britain charged him so much tax!

[Rapscallion St Croix]

Well, we do need to pay for a new pier.

[Karadad]

Well, we do need to pay for a new pier.

Listening to BS now!

[Two Bills]

Similar to "Our Entitlement" instead of calling it "Social Security"

Agree,
In the UK, they call our State Pensions, "Benefits."
Really annoys me.
Like we're scrounging for a handout.
Like we didn't get taxed 20%+ at least on earnings, more if you worked hard like my dear wife and I, for 40+ years.
Benefits my ****!

:crap2:

[NoMo50]

There is no answer to your question.

But, if you want to pay off the national debt, every citizen needs to pay $102,574. To me, that would be fair.

You could lower that amount, if you also included non-citizens. They do, after all, contribute heavily to the national debt.

[M2inOR]

Fair Share...

1. What should the taxes be on any tax-free investments? Like the municipal bonds sold to pay for public projects that benefit everyone. Yes, anyone can purchase tax-free municipal bonds that pay dividends not subject to federal or state income taxes.

2. There are several types of savings for retirement. Pensions, IRAs, Roth IRAs, 401K, and Roth 401K.

Many of you know that Roth IRAs and Roth 401K can have cash, bonds, and or other investments that can grow, and none of the withdrawals are subject to taxes, state or federal.

These are open to almost everyone who want to save for retirement.

So...if one has all their savings in a Roth fund, how much should they pay in taxes? At what value should holder be considered "rich"?

Everyone has the opportunity to work hard, save, and live within their means.

Everyone!

[huge-pigeons]

Who are the rich? Have you seen the stats on what constitutes the top 5%? Top 1%? I’ll bet the majority in TV are in the top 5% if not the top 1%. The majority of 65 year olds can’t afford to pay for a $1000 emergency.
But that’s not my fault and the people that worked and worked hard for the majority of their lives should not have to be penalized by paying the majority of the taxes.
Social security is not a benefit because we all contributed to it growing up. It was not an option for me and if it was, I would have funded my own retirement fund.

[Cuervo]

In the past there was a flat percentage that was floated that everyone should pay.
The problem with this and many other ideas is the write offs.
By the time the slick lawyers and the savvy accountant step in the wealthy will not only not pay their fair share, but the taxpayers will also even subsidies them.

[mike234]

The fair share lingo is used by politicians to push for raising taxes on the rich. However when they raise taxes on “the rich” it seems everyone’s taxes go up. But the loopholes the rich have are not changed. So what it really means is an increase in taxes for most of us but not for their rich friends. It’s a shell game and a political phrase of deception.
it is a political buzzword....would they ever close the tax loopholes, that the politicians use themselves? never.....it is also a scheme that the politicians use to divide people.....so called "rich". vs not rich. people look at the division in this country, and fail to look at the politicians, who are the ones who cause it

[dewilson58]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

Political question.

Politics will answer.

:mornincoffee:

[GizmoWhiskers]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?
"Render to Caesar what is Caesar's..." - God

"Stupid is as stupid does." - Forrest Gump

So what is "fair share"?

The answer lies between the One that doesn't promise "fair"
and the other that suggests that actions have consequences; somewhere in between the wisdom and guides of these two geniuses.

[MandoMan]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

Very few homeowners in The Villages would pay a penny of this “fair share.” It won’t get passed anyway, but even if it did, almost certainly you don’t have enough income for it to affect you, so don’t worry about it. It would affect Gary Morse’s three kids (in their sixties), but do they even live here? The dollar amount depends on their income.

[Norge]

There is no answer to your question.

But, if you want to pay off the national debt, every citizen needs to pay $102,574. To me, that would be fair.

Start paying then

[mike234]

Sure there is. It's equal to some phantom amount that will make your constituents drool.



Ya, gonna have to disagree. I didn't ask for them to spend money they didn't have on projects I don't agree with. But I will nonetheless pony up my portion right after you get all the people living paycheck to paycheck to pay theirs.
I care about about the national debt, as much as the politicians care about the national debt......they could care less about it, cuz they keep doing it......and I could care less about it also

[bragones]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

9% of your income

[Robbb]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

In the US, its a political term justifying redistribution of wealth. It's a concept not an amount. The basic premise is life is not fair until will are equally poor.

[denniskathyb]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

I have been paying 10% Federal tax on my adjusted gross income for a number of years. I do not feel that 10% is extreme.

[dewilson58]

9% of your income

:1rotfl::1rotfl:

That would generate less than 50% of the current tax revenue.

Good Luck balancing that budget.

[Ken D.]

Fair Share...

1. What should the taxes be on any tax-free investments? Like the municipal bonds sold to pay for public projects that benefit everyone. Yes, anyone can purchase tax-free municipal bonds that pay dividends not subject to federal or state income taxes.

2. There are several types of savings for retirement. Pensions, IRAs, Roth IRAs, 401K, and Roth 401K.

Many of you know that Roth IRAs and Roth 401K can have cash, bonds, and or other investments that can grow, and none of the withdrawals are subject to taxes, state or federal.

These are open to almost everyone who want to save for retirement.

So...if one has all their savings in a Roth fund, how much should they pay in taxes? At what value should holder be considered "rich"?

Everyone has the opportunity to work hard, save, and live within their means.

Everyone!
You forget people already paid taxes at the time of conversion. You make it sound tax free, only what you earn on the investment is.

[sdifede313@aol.com]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?
A fair share is a more evenly distributed tax based on percentages of one’s earnings. However, some elected politicians Re-define far share based on wealth of individuals and not earnings, which would present its own set of problems.

[golfing eagles]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

I don't know about dollars, but since this thread will probably turn political very quickly, the 2 hours 23 minutes that it has lasted so far is more than a fair share :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

I guess I was half right----the thread has turned political, yet it lives on.......

[Two Bills]

I guess I was half right----the thread has turned political, yet it lives on.......

Or only half wrong!

[waterflower]

The IRS is a private corporation, registered in P.R. The funds are transfered to the crown-City of London & the Vatican Bank. We get a very small portion of those fund collected by the collection agency. Let's audit the IRS then we can talk. United we are strong-Divided we are weak.

[sdifede313@aol.com]

Good luck with all that! The most radical financial indicators of taxation on wealth is the “plan” Senator Warren had proposed “ tax earnings on IRA’s - unrealized “ as a way to “make them pay” their fair share. Dems will eventually destroy this nation.

[Two Bills]

............and here we go! :boom:

[Cheapbas]

Similar to "Our Entitlement" instead of calling it "Social Security"

Social Security is not an entitlement.

[dewilson58]

Social Security is not an entitlement.

Actually it is...........by definition.

Some people are offended by the word, but it's accurate and correct.

[Andyb]

So how many people do you think have $103,000 lying around to pay for wasteful spending? Hope you were joking?

[retiredguy123]

Social Security is not an entitlement.
Social Security is a cleverly disguised wealth transfer system. If it were optional, it would disappear.

[Nordhagen]

In the US, its a political term justifying redistribution of wealth. It's a concept not an amount. The basic premise is life is not fair until will are equally poor.

Except the ruling class, of course.

[Nordhagen]

So how many people do you think have $103,000 lying around to pay for wasteful spending? Hope you were joking?

Even if we all paid it, the politicians would just do it again.

[villager7591]

Since a l-e-f-t-y said it, you could pay 100% and he would want more...

[Dusty_Star]

And remember the rich can live anywhere they want. Remember Roger Moore? He had to live in Switzerland because Britain charged him so much tax!
As did Mick Jagger & the Rolling Sones, they went into tax exile in the 1970s because the UK tax was so high on their earnings. I think it has improved since then, but it was high.

[villager7591]

Disagree. SS is a personal savings account for each individual paying into it. Signed into law in 1935, shortly after The Great Depression, our Gov't. assumed that citizens were too stupid to save 'for retirement,' so it created SS. If I live long enough, I will get about 1% on MY money.
SS is MY money, not an entitlement.

[Bill14564]

Social Security is a cleverly disguised wealth transfer system. If it were optional, it would disappear.

Given that I will likely get more out of Social Security than I put into it, just who is the wealth being transferred from?

I could support the suggestion that it is a Ponzi scheme.

I agree that many would not contribute to Social Security if it were optional but there is no doubt in my mind that many would then find themselves either destitute or working until the day they die. I believe it is the mandatory aspect of Social Security is keeping many people fed today.

What is my "fair share?" Some feel my fair share is more than what I have been taxed. I feel my fair share should be less than what I have paid.

[Cheapbas]

Actually it is...........by definition.

Some people are offended by the word, but it's accurate and correct.

Entitlement is a right to something, but in this case that right only exists because its beneficiaries spent their entire careers paying into it.

The context that is being pushed politically is it’s a freebie and it’s clearly not.

[retiredguy123]

Disagree. SS is a personal savings account for each individual paying into it. Signed into law in 1935, shortly after The Great Depression, our Gov't. assumed that citizens were too stupid to save 'for retirement,' so it created SS. If I live long enough, I will get about 1% on MY money.
SS is MY money, not an entitlement.
It's not a personal savings account because there is no money in it. If you think Social Security is not an entitlement, do the math on how the benefits are paid. You may only get 1 percent, but some low income people will get more than 100 percent.

[Haggar]

Disagree. SS is a personal savings account for each individual paying into it. Signed into law in 1935, shortly after The Great Depression, our Gov't. assumed that citizens were too stupid to save 'for retirement,' so it created SS. If I live long enough, I will get about 1% on MY money.
SS is MY money, not an entitlement.

SSA is not a personal savings account. You're not getting back the money you put into it plus an earnings percentage. You're getting back money based on what current workers are putting it.

I've seen an annual rate of return on contributions from 2.4% to 5.7%. Earners with low income get a better return. High earners get a lower return. People who die early don't do well. But live to 102 and the return is wonderful.

[Proveone]

There is no answer to your question.

But, if you want to pay off the national debt, every citizen needs to pay $102,574. To me, that would be fair.
Wrong! Fair tax refers to billionaires, who some pay little to no taxes, to some corporations who pay 8 %, when someone who earns $11,000 a year pays 10%. $44,000 to $95,000 pay 22%. Fair tax means billionaires and corporations should pay what the rest of us pay proportionately. The national debt should be paid buy the billionaires, who received tax breaks, and the people who passed the tax breaks. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.

[coralway]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?


Everyone pays about 35% of their income, irregardless of how much they make - well, except for the top 1%. The top 1% pays zero taxes and they get a $1.9 trillion dollar tax cut because , well, you know. It's called the tinkle down theory.

[golfing eagles]

Wrong! Fair tax refers to billionaires, who some pay little to no taxes, to some corporations who pay 8 %, when someone who earns $11,000 a year pays 10%. $44,000 to $95,000 pay 22%. Fair tax means billionaires and corporations should pay what the rest of us pay proportionately. The national debt should be paid buy the billionaires, who received tax breaks, and the people who passed the tax breaks. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.

Fair is everybody paying the same rate. Right now the top 10% of earners pay 90% of income taxes. Please tell me how that is "fair".

[golfing eagles]

Everyone pays about 35% of their income, irregardless of how much they make - well, except for the top 1%. The top 1% pays zero taxes and they get a $1.9 trillion dollar tax cut because , well, you know. It's called the tinkle down theory.

Total BS

[oneclickplus]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

trying to delete post but there is no delete button. Carry on.

[opinionist]

We would need a fair money system in order to pay fair taxes. We could use treasury notes as a currency and not pay interest on the debt notes that we are forced to use. The national debt is the product of a dishonest and unfair money system. The debt notes make banker families wealthy beyond reason, and they use that wealth to push more borrowing from their dishonest and unfair money system. Why then do we use debt notes? The Creature from Jekyll Island is a book that tells the story.

[retiredguy123]

Wrong! Fair tax refers to billionaires, who some pay little to no taxes, to some corporations who pay 8 %, when someone who earns $11,000 a year pays 10%. $44,000 to $95,000 pay 22%. Fair tax means billionaires and corporations should pay what the rest of us pay proportionately. The national debt should be paid buy the billionaires, who received tax breaks, and the people who passed the tax breaks. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.
The OP's question was: "How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?" You didn't answer it.

By the way, someone who earns $11,000 doesn't pay any income tax.

[Caymus]

Everyone pays about 35% of their income, irregardless of how much they make - well, except for the top 1%. The top 1% pays zero taxes and they get a $1.9 trillion dollar tax cut because , well, you know. It's called the tinkle down theory.

If true you should be able to post links.

[Bill14564]

Wrong! Fair tax refers to billionaires, who some pay little to no taxes, to some corporations who pay 8 %, when someone who earns $11,000 a year pays 10%. $44,000 to $95,000 pay 22%. Fair tax means billionaires and corporations should pay what the rest of us pay proportionately. The national debt should be paid buy the billionaires, who received tax breaks, and the people who passed the tax breaks. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.

Someone making $11,000 per year pays $0 in taxes and likely receives check for a tax credit. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.

[Bill14564]

Everyone pays about 35% of their income, irregardless of how much they make - well, except for the top 1%. The top 1% pays zero taxes and they get a $1.9 trillion dollar tax cut because , well, you know. It's called the tinkle down theory.

Woohoo!! I must be special! I don't pay anything close to 35% and I'm sure not in the 1% or receiving a $1.9T tax cut.

[Joe C.]

FAIR SHARE ??

10% of your earned income, no deductions, no write offs.
7% of your savings and investment interest ....no exemptions.

If you make 10 thousand dollars, you pay 1 thousand in tax.
If you make 10 million dollars you pay 100,000 in tax.
What could be fairer than that?

The reason I say 7% on savings and investment is to encourage people to save and invest.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Saw this quote on the internet.....

“The people who are arguing that the rich should pay their ‘fair share’ of taxes, should have paid greater attention in the classes where percent and percentage were taught. There is no such thing as a mathematical ‘fair share’ “

[Stu from NYC]

FAIR SHARE ??

10% of your earned income, no deductions, no write offs.
7% of your savings and investment interest ....no exemptions.

If you make 10 thousand dollars, you pay 1 thousand in tax.
If you make 10 million dollars you pay 100,000 in tax.
What could be fairer than that?

The reason I say 7% on savings and investment is to encourage people to save and invest.

Not sure if your percentages are correct but do agree with the concept.

Our entire tax system has been corrupted by special interests getting congress to pass bills favoring individuals and businesses.

Govt takes a higher and higher percentage of gnp and go find someone who thinks they spend money efficiently while running huge deficits.

[jimbomaybe]

Wrong! Fair tax refers to billionaires, who some pay little to no taxes, to some corporations who pay 8 %, when someone who earns $11,000 a year pays 10%. $44,000 to $95,000 pay 22%. Fair tax means billionaires and corporations should pay what the rest of us pay proportionately. The national debt should be paid buy the billionaires, who received tax breaks, and the people who passed the tax breaks. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.

The reason for tax deduction is that the deductions represent money spend that benefits the economy, businesses and corporations make huge outlays of money to run and expand their businesses, business create wealth by creating something of value you are willing to pay for, if you save , invest take advantage of the 401s IRAs you are contributing to the economy as well as yourself , people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos have amassed huge fortunes but have by their efforts made everyone much wealthier

[LonnyP]

I think it has to do with the billionaires paying less taxes than a teacher making 60k a year, or perhaps those that only have to pay into SS up to earnings on 160k, even if they earn 450k.

[Two Bills]

As did Mick Jagger & the Rolling Sones, they went into tax exile in the 1970s because the UK tax was so high on their earnings. I think it has improved since then, but it was high.

Probably overall the same.

In 1974 tax was 98% on incomes over £20,000 (about $220,000 at today's value.)
That's when those who could, left the country.
They kindly left the lights on for us peasants!

Tax allowance 0%..........£12570............................... (approx $15,100)
Then.
Basic rate 20%........£37,700..............................( approx. $45250)
Higher rate 40%........£37,701 to £125,140........ (approx. $150,168)
Additional rate 45%........Over £125,141

There is also National Insurance at 9% on earnings for health care and pensions.
Add 20% Value Added Tax on most services and goods, and you can use any left to pay for your local Council Taxes, mortgage etc.
Food is optional.

Because my wife and I worked hard and saved for our retirement, we still have the privilege of paying tax on our pensions and savings!
But.
We get FREE Health Care!!

[crash]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

A fair share is not a dollar number. If you make $400,000 and pay $40,000 in taxes is it fair that a person making $40,000 pays $10,000. That’s 10% vs $25%. Make it so everyone over a minimum level pays the same percentage. In the above example that would be $60,000 vs $6,000 in the above example at 15% tax.

[paqdkq]

You have got to be kidding me

[Bill14564]

You have got to be kidding me

With 64 posts and 47 posters, it would be useful to provide a clue as to whom you are replying.

[Cliff Fr]

Fair is everybody paying the same rate. Right now the top 10% of earners pay 90% of income taxes. Please tell me how that is "fair".

Your comparing percentage to dollars. Apples to oranges. Someone earning $200,000 a year has a heck of a lot more money left over after paying for necessities than someone making $30,000 a year.

[LianneMigiano]

I was under the impression that the distinction regarding "fairness" referred to how much the businesses were being charged vs. what a typical homeowner was assessed. I thought that the previous attempt to assess businesses a more equitable fire fee was meant to address that inequity - but it didn't win out for some strange reason.

[SHIBUMI]

this is a stupid term.......there is nothing fair in a capitalist system....its ability to pay as we have a progressive tax....BUT, wealthier citizens do not pay more because they are given more deductions from income...

progressive tax is good but better without deductions
the key to taxes is deductions............we need to lower the max tax to 33%band create a simple tax form for the wealthy

We will call it the 1040EZM....ez form for millionaire income
you write your name and social security number and your income, then you pay 33% on that money. Pretty straight forward and progressive. The govt has no business creating deductions
that make it unfair. There is no fair share as the end result of capitalism is income bias. And as such there should be tax bias or more on the wealthy. Capitalism is not the problem, its great,
politicians cater to their donors and thats not fair. Its bribery.


With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

[HORNET]

There is a rumor out of DC that illegals can apply for a $50 thousand bebit / gift card for free if they qualify to help settle in this country, with government funding

[Bill14564]

There is a rumor ...

You should have stopped right there.

The "facts" that people hear are frequently untrue, the rumors they hear are even less reliable.

[Cliff Fr]

There is a rumor out of DC that illegals can apply for a $50 thousand bebit / gift card for free if they qualify to help settle in this country, with government funding
It is true that NYC is giving out $53 million dollars to illegals there in the form of reloadable debit cards. I'm not sure how many they are giving out.

[manaboutown]

“Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes. Over and over again the Courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everyone does it, rich and poor alike and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands.”

― Learned Hand

[Shipping up to Boston]

You should have stopped right there.

The "facts" that people hear are frequently untrue, the rumors they hear are even less reliable.

Rumors....great song from Timex Social Club

[Caymus]

There is a rumor out of DC that illegals can apply for a $50 thousand bebit / gift card for free if they qualify to help settle in this country, with government funding

So far, the only debit cards are given in NYC.

[GoRedSox!]

Social Security has made it so that senior citizens went from being the demographic group most likely to live in poverty in 1935 to the demographic group least likely to live in poverty.

Some folks say they could have done better investing on their own then what they’ll get from Social Security. That’s true. But many would also have done worse, and many may not have invested at all.

And Social Security is not just about retirement. It provides income to families with kids who lose a parent. It provides income to the permanently disabled and Medicare provides health coverage to the permanently disabled and those with end stage renal disease. We might do better than Social Security for retirement, but it would be almost impossible to replicate the lifelong safety net for situations described in this paragraph.

As for your “fair share,” that is subjective for sure. But I think we can start with the wealthiest should at least pay the same percentage of their income as everyone else. Warren Buffett has said many times that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. That being said, oppressive taxes on the rich will not solve our dilemma. There must be some combination of more revenue and less spending to balance the budget. It was done 4 straight years in the late 90’s and that’s it for many decades.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Let's start with all the people who didn't pay their fair share by being paid (or paying themselves) "under the table".

Yup - that begins with all of the people who mow your lawn, do your pesticides, the "handyman," the guy who resurfaces your driveway, the person who will come to your house to fix your golf cart, and everyone else who prefers that you pay them in cash. Cash payment = easier to not include in income when it's time to send your forms in to the IRS.

[Shipping up to Boston]

Yup - that begins with all of the people who mow your lawn, do your pesticides, the "handyman," the guy who resurfaces your driveway, the person who will come to your house to fix your golf cart, and everyone else who prefers that you pay them in cash. Cash payment = easier to not include in income when it's time to send your forms in to the IRS.

Right but you called them to do that work to save some cash (not a bad thing). Mostly to avoid paying for a company that has to pay a worker a fair wage, health insurance, 401K etc. And the taxes. We’ve now come full circle

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Right but you called them to do that work to save some cash (not a bad thing). Mostly to avoid paying for a company that has to pay a worker a fair wage, health insurance, 401K etc. And the taxes. We’ve now come full circle

rustyp is suggesting that people who get paid cash, should be the FIRST people to look at, when it comes to solving the "fair share" payments of taxes. Some who agree, might even be trying to say "them thar illeguls" without actually saying "them thar illeguls," which is nasty (especially since it's their bosses who are doing the illegal thing by hiring them in the first place).

I pointed out why he's shooting himself in the foot when he suggests such a thing.

There are wealthy people who have so many write-offs and deductions and back doors to tax avoidance measures, that they pay no income tax at all. One wealthy person's income tax will be enough to cover all "them thar illeguls" income tax in a year. Two wealthy person's income tax will cover them, AND the retirees who don't want Social Security to know they're still working (and thus reduce their monthly check), AND the single women who can't make ends meet without a side gig like making soap or other crafts.

Three wealthy people? Fuggedaboudit. Now we're getting into "paying an entire small town's expenses for 6 months."

I agree that if you work and genuinely earn a certain minimum income, you should be accountable to pay income tax on it. But the little guy who gets $500/week mowing lawns in The Villages is not the first guy I'd go to, to set the example.

[Curt Steele]

With regard to taxes, I keep hearing the term 'fair share', but I don't know what that means. How much is a 'fair share' in dollars?

There's one for you, nineteen for me. TAXMAN

[manaboutown]

I agree that if you work and genuinely earn a certain minimum income, you should be accountable to pay income tax on it. But the little guy who gets $500/week mowing lawns in The Villages is not the first guy I'd go to, to set the example.

If he/she works 50 weeks a year he/she makes $25,000. US income tax starts at 10% at $11,000 for a single filer who gets at least the standard deduction of $13,850 so if the mower is a single person he/she may owe enough income tax to buy a few Big Macs.

[golfing eagles]

I think it has to do with the billionaires paying less taxes than a teacher making 60k a year, or perhaps those that only have to pay into SS up to earnings on 160k, even if they earn 450k.

SS is a different issue, not affiliated with the general treasury. And anyone who thinks billionaires pay less tax than a teacher making 60K has some serious research to do. But I do believe they repeat that crap on MSNBC every 7 minutes after the hour.

[golfing eagles]

Your comparing percentage to dollars. Apples to oranges. Someone earning $200,000 a year has a heck of a lot more money left over after paying for necessities than someone making $30,000 a year.

So what? They probably have more education and more responsibility in their jobs and worked a lot harder to get there. And while on the subject---"earned income credit", "child care credits", etc----why am I subsidizing other people's children? It's just more socialistic robin hood programs.

[Bill14564]

If he/she works 50 weeks a year he/she makes $25,000. US income tax starts at 10% at $11,000 for a single filer who gets at least the standard deduction of $13,850 so if the mower is a single person he/she may owe enough income tax to buy a few Big Macs.

$1,118 should buy more than a few Big Macs. But of course, the tax forms are just a bit more complicated than that.

[manaboutown]

$1,118 should buy more than a few Big Macs. But of course, the tax forms are just a bit more complicated than that.

$25,000 - $13,850 - $11,000 = $150. The 10% tax on $150 is $15.00 which might buy a Bog Mac meal in today's world. I was wrong. It will not buy a few Big Macs.

[Bill14564]

$25,000 - $13,850 - $11,000 = $150. The 10% tax on $150 is $15.00 which might buy a Bog Mac meal in today's world. I was wrong. It will not buy a few Big Macs.

Good math but bad understanding of tax tables. Tax is 10% on first $11,000 then 12% on the remaining $150.

[rustyp]

rustyp is suggesting that people who get paid cash, should be the FIRST people to look at, when it comes to solving the "fair share" payments of taxes. Some who agree, might even be trying to say "them thar illeguls" without actually saying "them thar illeguls," which is nasty (especially since it's their bosses who are doing the illegal thing by hiring them in the first place).

I pointed out why he's shooting himself in the foot when he suggests such a thing.

There are wealthy people who have so many write-offs and deductions and back doors to tax avoidance measures, that they pay no income tax at all. One wealthy person's income tax will be enough to cover all "them thar illeguls" income tax in a year. Two wealthy person's income tax will cover them, AND the retirees who don't want Social Security to know they're still working (and thus reduce their monthly check), AND the single women who can't make ends meet without a side gig like making soap or other crafts.

Three wealthy people? Fuggedaboudit. Now we're getting into "paying an entire small town's expenses for 6 months."

I agree that if you work and genuinely earn a certain minimum income, you should be accountable to pay income tax on it. But the little guy who gets $500/week mowing lawns in The Villages is not the first guy I'd go to, to set the example.

Wow - out of bounds! I am suggesting illegal as in Illegal per the existing tax codes. How about all those business owners claiming false deductions ? These people are stealing from us law abiding citizens.

Stop stealing from me by cheating on your income tax. You are breaking the law. Once we can all play by the existing rules then it would be more appropriate to discuss changing the rules.

[fdpaq0580]

So what? They probably have more education and more responsibility in their jobs and worked a lot harder to get there. And while on the subject---"earned income credit", "child care credits", etc----why am I subsidizing other people's children? It's just more socialistic robin hood programs.

So, Robin Of Loxley was a bad guy? I thought he was a supporter of good King Richard, and a foe to evil would be tyrant scumbag Prince John and his henchman, the sheriff of Nottingham. Well open my eyes and call me "woke"! The things you can learn on TOTV!
😳

[Shipping up to Boston]

rustyp is suggesting that people who get paid cash, should be the FIRST people to look at, when it comes to solving the "fair share" payments of taxes. Some who agree, might even be trying to say "them thar illeguls" without actually saying "them thar illeguls," which is nasty (especially since it's their bosses who are doing the illegal thing by hiring them in the first place).

I pointed out why he's shooting himself in the foot when he suggests such a thing.

There are wealthy people who have so many write-offs and deductions and back doors to tax avoidance measures, that they pay no income tax at all. One wealthy person's income tax will be enough to cover all "them thar illeguls" income tax in a year. Two wealthy person's income tax will cover them, AND the retirees who don't want Social Security to know they're still working (and thus reduce their monthly check), AND the single women who can't make ends meet without a side gig like making soap or other crafts.

Three wealthy people? Fuggedaboudit. Now we're getting into "paying an entire small town's expenses for 6 months."

I agree that if you work and genuinely earn a certain minimum income, you should be accountable to pay income tax on it. But the little guy who gets $500/week mowing lawns in The Villages is not the first guy I'd go to, to set the example.

Agree. This is not a political statement....just an example. Mitt Romney, former Governor of MA and a candidate for POTUS at that time, got pinched for hiring a landscaper who employed undocumented workers. I’m sure there are dozens of other examples as well. It just shows there is no socioeconomic barrier when it comes to saving money....or taxes

[Pugchief]

Some folks say they could have done better investing on their own then what they’ll get from Social Security. That’s true. But many would also have done worse, and many may not have invested at all.



The main value of SS is to force people to save for retirement. Most people would just spend now / worry later.

[JMintzer]

Actually it is...........by definition.

Some people are offended by the word, but it's accurate and correct.

Correct. We were forced to pay in with the promise of a payout. We are "entitled" to that money...

But many lump it together with "Welfare" and call them both "Entitlement Programs"... It's done to purposely obfuscate the programs... Welfare is a handout. No one is "entitled" to that money...

[JMintzer]

Wrong! Fair tax refers to billionaires, who some pay little to no taxes, to some corporations who pay 8 %, when someone who earns $11,000 a year pays 10%. $44,000 to $95,000 pay 22%. Fair tax means billionaires and corporations should pay what the rest of us pay proportionately. The national debt should be paid buy the billionaires, who received tax breaks, and the people who passed the tax breaks. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.

No one who makes $11K actually pays 10% in Federal taxes...

[JMintzer]

I think it has to do with the billionaires paying less taxes than a teacher making 60k a year, or perhaps those that only have to pay into SS up to earnings on 160k, even if they earn 450k.

Your first point is nonsense. Your 2nd point has some merit...

Except that SS payments are capped and if you pay more in you only receive more benefits up to a defined limit...

[JRcorvette]

They use the term all the time but will never say what a Fair Share is. Everyone should have to contribute something. I have heard that people get money back even if they did not pay anything in (not sure that is true). One thing that is True our government spends and wastes too much of our money. More fair share just means they will spend more than ever comes in! Here think about this for a minute or two…

[JMintzer]

Social Security has made it so that senior citizens went from being the demographic group most likely to live in poverty in 1935 to the demographic group least likely to live in poverty.

Some folks say they could have done better investing on their own then what they’ll get from Social Security. That’s true. But many would also have done worse, and many may not have invested at all.

And Social Security is not just about retirement. It provides income to families with kids who lose a parent. It provides income to the permanently disabled and Medicare provides health coverage to the permanently disabled and those with end stage renal disease. We might do better than Social Security for retirement, but it would be almost impossible to replicate the lifelong safety net for situations described in this paragraph.

As for your “fair share,” that is subjective for sure. But I think we can start with the wealthiest should at least pay the same percentage of their income as everyone else. Warren Buffett has said many times that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. That being said, oppressive taxes on the rich will not solve our dilemma. There must be some combination of more revenue and less spending to balance the budget. It was done 4 straight years in the late 90’s and that’s it for many decades.

This lie has been debunked, many times...

He purposely muddle her Marginal tax rate vs his "Capital Gains" tax rate (since he receives minimal, if any, pay as salary...)

Her ACTUAL tax rate (after normal deductions) is about half of his Capital Gains tax rate...

[JMintzer]

Yup - that begins with all of the people who mow your lawn, do your pesticides, the "handyman," the guy who resurfaces your driveway, the person who will come to your house to fix your golf cart, and everyone else who prefers that you pay them in cash. Cash payment = easier to not include in income when it's time to send your forms in to the IRS.

So Dean's pays no taxes?

Willie's Golf Cart Repair pays no taxes?

[JMintzer]

rustyp is suggesting that people who get paid cash, should be the FIRST people to look at, when it comes to solving the "fair share" payments of taxes. Some who agree, might even be trying to say "them thar illeguls" without actually saying "them thar illeguls," which is nasty (especially since it's their bosses who are doing the illegal thing by hiring them in the first place).

I pointed out why he's shooting himself in the foot when he suggests such a thing.

There are wealthy people who have so many write-offs and deductions and back doors to tax avoidance measures, that they pay no income tax at all. One wealthy person's income tax will be enough to cover all "them thar illeguls" income tax in a year. Two wealthy person's income tax will cover them, AND the retirees who don't want Social Security to know they're still working (and thus reduce their monthly check), AND the single women who can't make ends meet without a side gig like making soap or other crafts.

Three wealthy people? Fuggedaboudit. Now we're getting into "paying an entire small town's expenses for 6 months."

I agree that if you work and genuinely earn a certain minimum income, you should be accountable to pay income tax on it. But the little guy who gets $500/week mowing lawns in The Villages is not the first guy I'd go to, to set the example.

Um... YOU'RE the one who brought up "them thar illeguls", not RustyP...

Don't try to transfer YOUR preconceived biases onto others...

[JMintzer]

If he/she works 50 weeks a year he/she makes $25,000. US income tax starts at 10% at $11,000 for a single filer who gets at least the standard deduction of $13,850 so if the mower is a single person he/she may owe enough income tax to buy a few Big Macs.

Exactly... Thats the difference between Marginal and Actual tax rates that people love to ignore...

[JMintzer]

Agree. This is not a political statement....just an example. Mitt Romney, former Governor of MA and a candidate for POTUS at that time, got pinched for hiring a landscaper who employed undocumented workers. I’m sure there are dozens of other examples as well. It just shows there is no socioeconomic barrier when it comes to saving money....or taxes

Are you suggesting he hired that company because he knew they hired undocumented workers, just to save money?

That said, are we to examine the Green Cards of every employee of every company with whom we do business?

Some say that would be racist...

[Shipping up to Boston]

Are you suggesting he hired that company because he knew they hired undocumented workers, just to save money?

That said, are we to examine the Green Cards of every employee of every company with whom we do business?

Some say that would be racist...

I’m not suggesting that. Even in that timeframe it was a hot button issue. As a candidate for POTUS you would think your team would’ve vetted such possibilities. And no, obviously we can’t check green cards but there is a population out there that seeks out these kind of contractors.