Georgia state income tax (house, to buy, best schools)

[Mishap]

Originally Posted by 10 feet tall

If the government didn't want to "lose" the money (as if it belonged to the government to begin with), then they should make it illegal. But it isn't illegal. So what is the issue?

That brings up another difference between conservatives (true ones anyway) and liberals. Conservatives believe that the money they make belongs to them first, then they give some to the government. Liberals believe that they money they make belongs to the government first, and then the government lets you keep some of it.

EITC in itself isn't illegal just as most tax shelters aren't illegal. There are cases where it is illegal but you can't categorize one as fraud and the other as savvy business. Just b/c you have 40 layers of obfuscation and a team of accountants filing shell corporations doesn't make a fake loss any more real. Whether you're fudging income up to maximize EITC or shaving 20% off your corporate tax rate by generating a mountain of fake paperwork to imagine a fake liability, you're leaving more of the burden for the rest of us.

Case in point:
Romney as Audit Chair Saw Marriott Son of BOSS Shelter Defy IRS - Bloomberg

GAO reports to lawmakers: EITC fraud drains billions

[noah]

Devils Advocate: If its not fair that they have to pay taxes on their property how would you pay for local services. We do provide a senior exemption to help with their property taxes.

Would you have a 15% sales tax instead? No one likes paying property taxes but at least some level of taxes have to be paid to have basic services and property taxes seems to be a top choice for local revenue although around here I see they also get school revenue from sales taxes.

Originally Posted by cittic10

((()))

If someone is retired and all their retirement savings was wiped out by Bernie Madoff, and they don't have any money coming in, they would still be required to come up with thousands of dollars each year to pay rent to the government. That's not fair. And expecting them to move isn't right either. They shouldn't have to do that.
)))

[MiamiRob]

Originally Posted by Big L

That's true. In addition, if you live somewhere like Orlando or Miami, the tolls will begin to eat away at whatever you may have saved by not having state taxes taken out of your check.

Florida has no state income tax and food is not taxed at all. Florida sales tax is at 6% with the highest being 7.5% in Miami Dade county (0.5% for the Health Trust system that runs the county hospitals & clinics, 0.5% that pays for Indegent Care & 0.5% for Transit). As for tolls Orlando is actually worse than Miami but they are avoidable since both cities are built on grids.
The killer of course is property taxes & homeowner's Insurance. There's always a trade off somewhere!

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by rcsteiner

I'm not sure I see a difference. Both result in a net loss to the government

Someone keeping more of THEIR own money is not the same thing and is not a "loss to the government." That's the problem. Too many people think of tax as the "government's money." It's the taxpayer's money that the government confiscates.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by Mishap

So if Romney "legally" paid 0% (or some sub sales tax rate) by using all the tax shelters availed to him, he's morally just as much a deadbeat as your "Obama types"

Just for the record, the term "Romney types" was used by another poster first, and I just used the parody of "Obama types" in response.

As for someone who pays 0% (which doesn't happen), if it's done legally, then more power to them. If someone uses the abortion known as the tax code and comes out on top....I say great. That's not the same as someone who comes with their hand out and takes other people's money that's been confiscated by the government and redistributed.

I say a flat tax is the only fair way to tax. The more you make, the more they take, and everyone pays the same rate. Fair, easy.

[Mishap]

Originally Posted by neil0311

Someone keeping more of THEIR own money is not the same thing and is not a "loss to the government." That's the problem. Too many people think of tax as the "government's money." It's the taxpayer's money that the government confiscates.

So lets say a person getting the EITC precisely zeroes their tax liability. Is that person merely tax minimizing or are they freeloading? It's their money right?

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by Mishap

So lets say a person getting the EITC precisely zeroes their tax liability. Is that person merely tax minimizing or are they freeloading? It's their money right?

The EITC is a welfare program. How can you get a refund when you pay nothing? I would abolish the EITC.

As stated, a flat tax, with no deductions, that starts at an income above some floor (say $20K). Every single wage earner pays the flat rate...period. Fair and simple. No punishing people for being successful, and no rewarding people for being unsuccessful. No complicated rules and paperwork.

[Mishap]

Originally Posted by neil0311

The EITC is a welfare program. How can you get a refund when you pay nothing? I would abolish the EITC.

As stated, a flat tax, with no deductions, that starts at an income above some floor (say $20K). Every single wage earner pays the flat rate...period. Fair and simple. No punishing people for being successful, and no rewarding people for being unsuccessful. No complicated rules and paperwork.

Actually EITC is a refundable tax credit for low income people and poor people do have an income tax liability albeit small and easily zeroed (or made negative) if you have dependent children.

For simplicity, let's say you're a single person making 12k gross. Standard deduction is $5950. Your AGI for EITC is 12k. That's $120 credit. Your federal tax liability is $600 leaving a net of $480 as well as payroll taxes they've also had deducted. If you only made $7499, you get $457 on EITC against a tax liability of $155. It's much more generous if you have kids but obviously if you have kids, your income gets eaten up by food/shelter costs.

Your floor for income would probably leave a lot of these people untaxed just the same.

[10 feet tall]

Originally Posted by neil0311

The EITC is a welfare program. How can you get a refund when you pay nothing? I would abolish the EITC.

As stated, a flat tax, with no deductions, that starts at an income above some floor (say $20K). Every single wage earner pays the flat rate...period. Fair and simple. No punishing people for being successful, and no rewarding people for being unsuccessful. No complicated rules and paperwork.

BOOM! There it is. The flat tax.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by 10 feet tall

If the government didn't want to "lose" the money (as if it belonged to the government to begin with), then they should make it illegal. But it isn't illegal. So what is the issue?

I personally have an issue with the waste in both cases, but since their actions are currently legal, more power to them.