U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-01-2019, 06:27 AM
 
Location: Wooster, Ohio
1,036 posts, read 785,100 times
Reputation: 1489

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
not much a good accountant can do about salary, common myth that anyone who is rich can magically make their tax bill next to nothing. When you're getting W-2 income there really isn't a whole lot to shelter it. Maybe a deferred comp plan, if the company offers one, but that's just kicking the can down the road.
Another common myth is that there are high return perfectly safe investments that are only available to the wealthy. Bernie Madoff made use of this belief in his Ponzi Scheme.

Deferred Compensation plans do kick the tax can down the road, but in the meantime, you are earning money on the invested deferred taxes. Also, the Ohio and federal income tax rates have been decreasing (despite the predictions of numerous pessimists) so that these deferred taxes will be at a lower rate than at the time they were deferred. My prediction is that Donald Trump will be re-elected, making us safe from federal income tax increases through 2024.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-01-2019, 07:03 AM
 
1,148 posts, read 523,448 times
Reputation: 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez View Post
Are most people making more than a million a year on a W-2? How many are consultants, in sales, etc. who can claim a large portion of their income as business expenses?
Kicking the can down the road can be very beneficial if you start to pay those taxes at 71 after your working days are long gone. IRA RMD's only amount to about 4% of your balance and can be extended to age 96. If you don't live to 96 your heirs pick up the RMD schedule.

Then there's all of these:
https://www.accounting-degree.org/accounting-tricks/
The thread was about people whose salary is more than a million a year, which I always associate with being W-2. Consultants who are independent contractors, if they have expenses against that income, then what they actually made is less. So they pay tax on the lesser amount. Sales people who are W-2 can no longer deduct unreimbursed business expenses so that's a moot point.

As for deferred comp, yes it can be beneficial. IRA's don't offer a lot of deferral for people making 7 figures so really the only option is nonqualified deferred comp. This has to be offered by an employer, you can't do it on your own, and you're stuck with what the plan design is. What investments are offered for the money deferred? Are you comfortable being an unsecured creditor of the company, if they go bankrupt you stand in line with everyone else. How long after retirement can you take payout? Your deferral of the compensation also defers the company's tax deduction, not something they want hanging around their balance sheet forever. What happens if the company is taken over? Normally the deferred comp will be fully paid in a change of control scenario which could bunch up all of that income in a year that's not convenient for you. You also run the risk of higher tax rates when the funds are paid out. May not be a great risk in the near term but in the longer term it's a definite possibility.

As for the article you linked, only one was relevant to salaried individuals and the article says it's already been eliminated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 07:06 AM
 
1,148 posts, read 523,448 times
Reputation: 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by mshultz View Post
Another common myth is that there are high return perfectly safe investments that are only available to the wealthy. Bernie Madoff made use of this belief in his Ponzi Scheme.

Deferred Compensation plans do kick the tax can down the road, but in the meantime, you are earning money on the invested deferred taxes. Also, the Ohio and federal income tax rates have been decreasing (despite the predictions of numerous pessimists) so that these deferred taxes will be at a lower rate than at the time they were deferred. My prediction is that Donald Trump will be re-elected, making us safe from federal income tax increases through 2024.
I don't disagree, but I think there is risk of higher rates beyond that. Unfortunately you have to plan that far ahead with these plans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 07:26 AM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
28,484 posts, read 62,084,629 times
Reputation: 32141
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
The thread was about people whose salary is more than a million a year, which I always associate with being W-2.
Don't mistake an OP's phrasing with what they are actually saying/asking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 10:20 AM
 
Location: 5,400 feet
2,613 posts, read 2,572,282 times
Reputation: 3647
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobspez View Post
Kicking the can down the road can be very beneficial if you start to pay those taxes at 71 after your working days are long gone. IRA RMD's only amount to about 4% of your balance and can be extended to age 96. If you don't live to 96 your heirs pick up the RMD schedule.



At today's tax rate, I suggest a mix of Roth and tax deferred plans. When my wife and I were working, the federal tax rates were much higher and Roths were not generally available to us. So, we maxed out our 401Ks, which was beneficial tax-wise. But now those increased RMDs bring us additional costs to taxes. Next year, my wife and I will pay 2 1/2x the usual Medicare premium and 3x the Part D drug plan premium (total, about $6,400).


Everyone needs to look at their own situation and decide what will work best for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Formerly Pleasanton Ca, now in Marietta Ga
5,433 posts, read 4,080,880 times
Reputation: 7247
Quote:
Originally Posted by deb100 View Post
According to this book the cost of a marriage license in Tennessee in the nineteenth century was fifty cents.

https://books.google.com/books?id=RD...entury&f=false
Thanks for the link.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 12:04 PM
 
2,687 posts, read 1,618,570 times
Reputation: 5488
Quote:
Originally Posted by liveurdream View Post
Brain surgeon, pro athletes, CEO's, top lawyers in the country, top tier actors, and the like. There aren't that many people that earn a million a year in income.

The people who foam at the mouth about taxing the rich more would be a rude awakening to find out how few people that would actually impact. That's why it's never anything more than political talking points to brain wash dumb people and never something that gets voted into place in the House and Senate.

It isn't the amount of people that need to be impacted, it's by how much they would be impacted. As far as taxing salary/wages goes, that's meaningless. To tax the rich appropriately, you need to take away their largest advantage and equalize the playing field.


Quote:
Originally Posted by skeddy View Post
exactly .... many dolts have no clue, they just whine that life ain't fair....

Life isn't fair. I make over $250k a year which means I'm in the 24% tax bracket since I'm married and the wife doesn't work.



Now look at someone like Jeff Bezos, who is the richest man in the world, making only $81k per year as his salary. His money comes from his stock holdings, and the capital gains tax rate currently sits at 15%. That is the why the rich get richer, because they're not being taxed anywhere near what the rest of us are.


The capital gains tax rate should be raised for those making over $1 million a year. It used to be as high as 28%, and now is either 15% or 20% depending on your circumstances. That is far lower than what most of the middle class pays as a tax rate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 12:14 PM
 
2,687 posts, read 1,618,570 times
Reputation: 5488
Quote:
Originally Posted by mshultz View Post
Another common myth is that there are high return perfectly safe investments that are only available to the wealthy. Bernie Madoff made use of this belief in his Ponzi Scheme.

Just because you do not know about them does not mean they do not exist.


They're called "private placements" and to be eligible to invest in them, you need to demonstrate you are an accredited investor (you have to prove you have a high income level and asset level.) Only the rich qualify for this.



Now, are the investments perfectly safe? Of course not, no investment is without some risk. But when you look at who these private placements are offered to (some of the wealthiest people in the world, along with large brokerage firms with lots of financial backing) they aren't interested in ventures that are shaky or dodgy. These kinds of deals ARE generally pretty safe to generate a return, and none of them are ever scrutinized by the SEC because they don't even have to be listed to be offered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 01:56 PM
 
9,351 posts, read 6,245,937 times
Reputation: 17626
Not enough to pay for all of the free stuff the dems want to give out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2019, 02:02 PM
 
1,148 posts, read 523,448 times
Reputation: 1228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katana49 View Post
Just because you do not know about them does not mean they do not exist.


They're called "private placements" and to be eligible to invest in them, you need to demonstrate you are an accredited investor (you have to prove you have a high income level and asset level.) Only the rich qualify for this.



Now, are the investments perfectly safe? Of course not, no investment is without some risk. But when you look at who these private placements are offered to (some of the wealthiest people in the world, along with large brokerage firms with lots of financial backing) they aren't interested in ventures that are shaky or dodgy. These kinds of deals ARE generally pretty safe to generate a return, and none of them are ever scrutinized by the SEC because they don't even have to be listed to be offered.
Private Placements (generally speaking) are only available to accredited investors because they are very risky and the securities laws don't want them marketed to people without the means to evaluate the investment opportunity themselves and withstand the loss of capital if it doesn't work out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top