Tax reform

[ChickenSandwich 9,843]

On 12/18/2018 at 12:16 PM, babysdaddy said:

10k in property taxes means you're living in a $650kish home.  Is that middle class to you?  

 

On 12/18/2018 at 10:32 AM, David Dennison said:

We do. We want to raise their rates and increase the number of brackets. 

A shit load of middle class Americans in states like Texas are getting fucked by the SALT elimination.

Show your work. This only effects the top 20% of US households. The middle class won’t notice. 

The TPC estimated that the top 20 percent of income-earners get 84 percent of the benefit from the SALT deduction, but they get 67 percent of the benefit from the property tax deduction alone.

Twenty-five percent of tax filers in 2015 claimed a property tax deduction, according to IRS data.

Taxpayers in certain states are still more likely to take the property tax deduction. “Just six states (California, New York, New Jersey, Texas, Illinois, and Florida) claim more than 50 percent of the property tax deduction,” the Tax Foundation says.

As for the House bill’s $10,000 cap on the property tax deduction, the average deduction claimed was about half that in 2015, the TPC says. But “the average amount claimed for taxpayers with incomes above $200,000 was $10,250,” the TPC says, with higher averages in some states.

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2017/11/facts-salt-deduction/

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

There needs to be another bracket at 5-10M and probably another past that.  The thing is there’s still so many ways to legally work around paying taxes at those numbers, the extra brackets will only appease the masses, not really lead to that much extra tax revenue.  

This thread popped in my head when I saw the % I would owe then outs like investment in opportunity zones (Bipartisan tax loophole) etc. The game is rigged.  I know everyone knows that but clamoring for more brackets is only a small part of the solution.

[David Dennison 18,934]

3 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

There needs to be another bracket at 5-10M and probably another past that.  The thing is there’s still so many ways to legally work around paying taxes at those numbers, the extra brackets will only appease the masses, not really lead to that much extra tax revenue.  

This thread popped in my head when I saw the % I would owe then outs like investment in opportunity zones (Bipartisan tax loophole) etc. The game is rigged.  I know everyone knows that but clamoring for more brackets is only a small part of the solution.

Getting rid of the ridiculously low long term capital gains tax rates would help. 

[happyfunball 481]

 

[Brisketexan 105,161]

1 minute ago, happyfunball said:

 

But, I mean, look at all we got for that.  It created literally......wait......I got this.....it created.........a lotta share buybacks.  Did I miss anything else?

[wildcat09 29,355]

19 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

 

And by the time 2027 rolls around, it will turn out that the original estimation was off by quite a bit more than $600 billion, because that's how these things always fucking work. 

[Mapache 1,117]

26 Billionaires Own The Same Wealth As The Poorest 3.8 Billion People

They need more tax cuts! How can they survive on only several billion?

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oxfam-report-wealth-inequality-poverty-tax_us_5c408586e4b027c3bbbeb91d

 

Edited January 21, 2019 by Mapache

[Brew 3,049]

Man, after the first week of returns coming through the door, these changes are an epic clusterfuck. The IRS is behind on guidance, the forms look ridiculous, if you own a partnership or rental real estate good luck on getting your return correct, etc. One positive is fee increases are going up substantially, so for those that pay someone to do your return go ahead and grab your ankles and get prepared.

[David Dennison 18,934]

2 minutes ago, Brew said:

Man, after the first week of returns coming through the door, these changes are an epic clusterfuck. The IRS is behind on guidance, the forms look ridiculous, if you own a partnership or rental real estate good luck on getting your return correct, etc. One positive is fee increases are going up substantially, so for those that pay someone to do your return go ahead and grab your ankles and get prepared.

What's the problem with rental property? Will a CPA have trouble?

[Brew 3,049]

If you own a rental house, probably none. If you own a few or commercial, QBI could come into play and change the game. IRS released guidance Friday and it confuses the discussion more in some cases.

Some CPA’s can handle it, some can’t. In 20ish years in the business, I’ve met plenty of stupid ones.

[CO Horn 167]

32 minutes ago, Brew said:

Man, after the first week of returns coming through the door, these changes are an epic clusterfuck. The IRS is behind on guidance, the forms look ridiculous, if you own a partnership or rental real estate good luck on getting your return correct, etc. One positive is fee increases are going up substantially, so for those that pay someone to do your return go ahead and grab your ankles and get prepared.

Yep, seeing the same thing here. For those people that self-prepare with any complexity, they will likely be doing things wrong. 

[CO Horn 167]

Have plenty of clients with a Schedule C, a couple of rentals, Farm income with sales to Co-Ops, 3 or 4 K-1s. The QBI calculation will be fun. 

Not to mention K-1s that we don’t prep, the new partnership audit rules, etc. Will be interesting to see what our revenue increase is. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26,496]

But, I mean, look at all we got for that.  It created literally......wait......I got this.....it created.........a lotta share buybacks.  Did I miss anything else?

Here comes Tahoe to tell us how you just gotta wait and see

[David Dennison 18,934]

3 hours ago, CO Horn said:

Have plenty of clients with a Schedule C, a couple of rentals, Farm income with sales to Co-Ops, 3 or 4 K-1s. The QBI calculation will be fun. 

Not to mention K-1s that we don’t prep, the new partnership audit rules, etc. Will be interesting to see what our revenue increase is. 

The QBI only applies when incorporation is involved, correct?

[CO Horn 167]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

The QBI only applies when incorporation is involved, correct?

No, it applies to anything other than a C Corp. Sole Proprietors, Partnerships, and S Corps, and rental real estate under certain circumstances. 

[zork 629]

https://www.greenbushfinancial.com/rental-income-will-taxes-2018/

first result that is pretty explanatory from this search:

https://www.google.com/search?q=QBI+calulation+rental&rlz=1C1CHBD_enUS773US773&oq=QBI+calulation+rental&aqs=chrome..69i57.20687j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

and on the other front:

Nominal 2018 vs 2017 receipts increased but under the rate of inflation:

To whit:

Quote

...

However, this nominal increase is well below the rate of inflation – meaning that the value of revenue collection has actually declined in real terms. 

...

http://www.crfb.org/blogs/tax-bill-did-not-cause-revenue-rise

Spending is the problem.  I doubt the projected into the future budgetary spending increases drop with Pelosi in charge and was extremely disappointed that Ryan didn't do anything in that regard at all.

If the spending doesn't stop the meteoric rise it won't make a shit.

Edited January 26, 2019 by zork

[elfenix 34,328]

spending is only a problem if you continually insist on kneecapping tax collection.

[Anastasis 23,479]

1 minute ago, elfenix said:

spending is only a problem if you continually insist on kneecapping tax collection.

[zork 629]

much more recent article on QBI and recent IRS rulings on it:

https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2019/jan/sec-199a-qbi-deduction-201920483.html

[Brew 3,049]

1 hour ago, zork said:

https://www.greenbushfinancial.com/rental-income-will-taxes-2018/

first result that is pretty explanatory from this search:

https://www.google.com/search?q=QBI+calulation+rental&rlz=1C1CHBD_enUS773US773&oq=QBI+calulation+rental&aqs=chrome..69i57.20687j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

and on the other front:

Nominal 2018 vs 2017 receipts increased but under the rate of inflation:

To whit:

http://www.crfb.org/blogs/tax-bill-did-not-cause-revenue-rise

Spending is the problem.  I doubt the projected into the future budgetary spending increases drop with Pelosi in charge and was extremely disappointed that Ryan didn't do anything in that regard at all.

If the spending doesn't stop the meteoric rise it won't make a shit.

Links like the one above are the reason people get in trouble on their taxes.

[zork 629]

We are under $315k so it gave me some relaxation.  Haven't started yet though.  Was a good year.

[Incredulity 11,675]

Since I first heard an explanation of QBI I have been giving my CPA shit that the Tax Reform was the Accounting Job Security Act of 2017.  What a shitshow.

Anyone here old enough to have professionally lived through the changes in the mid-80’s?  Was it this fucked up for guidance? In my adult life the other changes have been fairly benign, rates and new taxes.  The whole QBI is really fucktastic.

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-25/richest-in-u-s-have-a-few-tricks-to-avoid-democrats-tax-plans

Good read.  Will take forever to try to fix the loopholes.  Even then, the D’s have played along with many of them so if the wealthy remain creative, I don’t see these issues fixed in my lifetime.  

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

On 1/5/2019 at 2:23 PM, David Dennison said:

Getting rid of the ridiculously low long term capital gains tax rates would help. 

That problem just got a LOT worse with opportunity zones, bipartisan tax cheat that was passed.  

[Incredulity 11,675]

8 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-25/richest-in-u-s-have-a-few-tricks-to-avoid-democrats-tax-plans

Good read.  Will take forever to try to fix the loopholes.  Even then, the D’s have played along with many of them so if the wealthy remain creative, I don’t see these issues fixed in my lifetime.  

That article is leftist propaganda.

Legal deductions aren’t “clever and complicated tactics”. Nor are they cheating.

Also, it is patently false pass through business owners who run a business can simply take distributions in lieu of wages. In fact under the new QBI rules there can be situations where it is more tax efficient to pay an owner W2 wages, especially above the SS limit, to maximize the QBI deduction.

[gmr548 16,584]

31 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

That article is leftist propaganda.

Legal deductions aren’t “clever and complicated tactics”. Nor are they cheating.

Also, it is patently false pass through business owners who run a business can simply take distributions in lieu of wages. In fact under the new QBI rules there can be situations where it is more tax efficient to pay an owner W2 wages, especially above the SS limit, to maximize the QBI deduction.

Bloomberg is leftist propaganda in Trumpkinland lol

Edited January 26, 2019 by gmr548

[Incredulity 11,675]

30 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Bloomberg is leftist propaganda in Trumpkinland lol

Do you think for yourself or rely on MSNBC for your daily marching orders?

$50 says you don’t know the difference between a C-Corp and S-Corp off the top of your head.

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

That article is leftist propaganda.

Legal deductions aren’t “clever and complicated tactics”. Nor are they cheating.

Also, it is patently false pass through business owners who run a business can simply take distributions in lieu of wages. In fact under the new QBI rules there can be situations where it is more tax efficient to pay an owner W2 wages, especially above the SS limit, to maximize the QBI deduction.

Oh I overlooked A LOT of that in the article. 

Just pointing out it’s a much more complicated problem than, ACO for example, represents it as.  

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

1 hour ago, gmr548 said:

Bloomberg is leftist propaganda in Trumpkinland lol

I hate Trump.  And I wouldn’t say Bloomberg is biased but whoever wrote that article is either very misinformed or biased.  No other way to explain what was in that article.  

[CO Horn 167]

2 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

That problem just got a LOT worse with opportunity zones, bipartisan tax cheat that was passed.  

I disagree on the opportunity zones.  They don’t eliminate capital gains, just defer them. Also, investments in opportunity zones can improve economically depressed areas. Colorado did a good job at establishing these zones. Only one gave me pause. 

[pacman 7,359]

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

 

Legal deductions aren’t “clever and complicated tactics”. Nor are they cheating.

They are clever and complicated in the sense 99% of American can not understand, nor take advantage of, a tax code that is roughly 75,000 pages long.

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

1 hour ago, CO Horn said:

I disagree on the opportunity zones.  They don’t eliminate capital gains, just defer them. Also, investments in opportunity zones can improve economically depressed areas. Colorado did a good job at establishing these zones. Only one gave me pause. 

Oh the intent was great.  I’m in many of them.  But there’s areas such as DUMBO in NYC where real estate is $2000/sq foot that qualify.  The Marriott right across from where the pacers play in Indy.  There’s dozens more examples.  

Remember you pay what you owed on the initial cap gain - in 10 years if it’s held that long.  Then ZERO on whatever gains you make on that project.   

Sure, if they stuck to what it was supposed to be and truly operated out of depressed areas needing an infusion of cash you can argue it’s good...even then the present value of what the govt gets today vs in 10 yrs would be hard to swallow. 

[CO Horn 167]

5 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Oh the intent was great.  I’m in many of them.  But there’s areas such as DUMBO in NYC where real estate is $2000/sq foot that qualify.  The Marriott right across from where the pacers play in Indy.  There’s dozens more examples.  

Remember you pay what you owed on the initial cap gain - in 10 years if it’s held that long.  Then ZERO on whatever gains you make on that project.   

Sure, if they stuck to what it was supposed to be and truly operated out of depressed areas needing an infusion of cash you can argue it’s good...even then the present value of what the govt gets today vs in 10 yrs would be hard to swallow. 

Don’t disagree with that, but think 1031 exchanges are even more egregious. 

[David Dennison 18,934]

2 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

All I know is that this is the best year for me getting my “interest free loan to the government” as you all call it. Paid in a lot but getting back a lot. Go tax cut!

Why is "interest free loan to the government" in quotes? That's precisely what it is.

[ChiTownDoc 21,154]

9 minutes ago, CO Horn said:

Don’t disagree with that, but think 1031 exchanges are even more egregious. 

For sure.  

[gmr548 16,584]

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Do you think for yourself or rely on MSNBC for your daily marching orders?

$50 says you don’t know the difference between a C-Corp and S-Corp off the top of your head.

Not an old, no cable. It is just incredible to me that anything to the right of Breitbart is all of a sudden the big, bad, liberal media. The liberal media treated Trump and the Rs with kid gloves relative to the magnitude of their words and actions for so long - and continues to do so in many cases - that they are as much responsible for the circus we have today as anyone. And yet Trumpkins will still whine and cry about "leftist propaganda." It's a pathetic state of affairs.

I sure as fuck don't know the difference between those, not at a particularly high level anyway - neither does Donald Trump or most of the American public, left or right. Which, if at all relevant, actually undermines to the idea that the article is "leftist propaganda." Bloomberg exists to report on business and financial markets. It is in the belly of the beast when it comes to free market capitalism. It isn't leftist propaganda. The article itself is attempting to simplify something far too complex to be simplified in a brief internet article. It doesn't do a particularly good job. But the overarching point that AOC's proposal of simply adding a marginal tax rate on the super rich is not some silver bullet is correct. The theme of the article is essentially that AOC's plan isn't necessarily going to have the desired effect. WhAt A lEfTiSt HiT PiEcE!1!1!

 

54 minutes ago, pacman said:

They are clever and complicated in the sense 99% of American can not understand, nor take advantage of, a tax code that is roughly 75,000 pages long.

This. It isn't cheating, but they have the best in the business doing their taxes for them. That is already going to result in favorable tax outcomes. Throw in some bullshit giveaways in the tax code and it is easy to interpret the situation as cheating, even if it's within the rules of the game.

[Brew 3,049]

1 hour ago, pacman said:

They are clever and complicated in the sense 99% of American can not understand, nor take advantage of, a tax code that is roughly 75,000 pages long.

For the majority of Americans there is nothing to understand because there is nothing to take advantage of. Special interests, differences in regional situations, and the government trying to modify behaviors have made it the complex mess it is today. They would be better off deleting the whole individual tax code and starting over with staggered tax brackets and no deductions. The business activity side is more complicated and would require some work, but individually it could be much simpler. Lucky for me it will never happen.

[Brew 3,049]

10 hours ago, Incredulity said:

Since I first heard an explanation of QBI I have been giving my CPA shit that the Tax Reform was the Accounting Job Security Act of 2017.  What a shitshow.

Anyone here old enough to have professionally lived through the changes in the mid-80’s?  Was it this fucked up for guidance? In my adult life the other changes have been fairly benign, rates and new taxes.  The whole QBI is really fucktastic.

QBI by itself would be fine, it’s the sheer size of all the other changes that cause the problem along with the unwillingness of the IRS to provide clarification. They don’t have an idea what the intent is with chunks of the law. What will happen is people are going to be all over the board on what they do and tax courts are going to have to clean this mess up. Tax law being complicated isn’t the primary issue with this one, the government rolling out an incomplete jumbled mess is the problem. 

Technically, if you have a partnership you need a rewrite of your partnership agreement this year because of the change in tax matters partner wording and the centralized audit regime rollout. I would bet most haven’t done anything.

[Incredulity 11,675]

4 hours ago, gmr548 said:

Not an old, no cable. It is just incredible to me that anything to the right of Breitbart is all of a sudden the big, bad, liberal media. The liberal media treated Trump and the Rs with kid gloves relative to the magnitude of their words and actions for so long - and continues to do so in many cases - that they are as much responsible for the circus we have today as anyone. And yet Trumpkins will still whine and cry about "leftist propaganda." It's a pathetic state of affairs.

I sure as fuck don't know the difference between those, not at a particularly high level anyway - neither does Donald Trump or most of the American public, left or right. Which, if at all relevant, actually undermines to the idea that the article is "leftist propaganda." Bloomberg exists to report on business and financial markets. It is in the belly of the beast when it comes to free market capitalism. It isn't leftist propaganda. The article itself is attempting to simplify something far too complex to be simplified in a brief internet article. It doesn't do a particularly good job. But the overarching point that AOC's proposal of simply adding a marginal tax rate on the super rich is not some silver bullet is correct. The theme of the article is essentially that AOC's plan isn't necessarily going to have the desired effect. WhAt A lEfTiSt HiT PiEcE!1!1!

 

This. It isn't cheating, but they have the best in the business doing their taxes for them. That is already going to result in favorable tax outcomes. Throw in some bullshit giveaways in the tax code and it is easy to interpret the situation as cheating, even if it's within the rules of the game.

I didn’t say Bloomberg is fundamentally leftist propaganda.  That article absolutely is.  

Characterizing legit deductions as cheating is horseshit.  Equally lame are the aspersions cast against business and business owners with regards to hiding income and getting private planes.  Personal use of corporate planes is tax audit 101, but don’t let that reality get in the way of eating the rich.

[happyfunball 481]

 

[Message Board User 12,395]

Fuck the tax cut.  That is all.

[Captainant 27,682]

Paul Ryan is very concerned by all of this deficit spending. 

[Message Board User 12,395]

Is anybody actually getting back (besides the Surly 1%) more this year than last?

[Captainant 27,682]

 

 

[Hank Kingsley 20,987]

[Hank Kingsley 20,987]

[Brisketexan 105,161]

Add another chapter to the book of "all the shit that sane people told you was going to happen actually happened, and boy were the gullible idiots surprised."

Like fucking clockwork.  

[Hefeweizen 5,328]

Is anybody actually getting back (besides the Surly 1%) more this year than last?

Yes my tax bill is going way down. Fuck if I can figure out why though.

[BabaBooey 131]

On 1/28/2019 at 3:47 PM, Message Board User said:

Is anybody actually getting back (besides the Surly 1%) more this year than last?

We'd be paying in the same if it wasn't for a clerical error from Aetna fucking up my wife's FMLA pay. Idiots didn't take any federal taxes out when she specified the amount she wanted to be deducted. 

[gmr548 16,584]

 
 

They will vote for him again. Every single one.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk