Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 10-28-2021, 07:31 AM
 
2,741 posts, read 1,768,322 times
Reputation: 4433

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by albert648 View Post
Still a war on the middle class.

Things like property taxes alone could be $15k+. If you're self-employed and have large credit card bills, that's easily mid 5 figures.

And AFAIC the less snooping the IRS is allowed to do the better. Frankly reporting requirements should be banned and the IRS should never be allowed anywhere near our financial data absent a warrant.
Presumably, 99% of the middle class is paying those things like property taxes out of their W-2 income, so that wouldn't trigger the reporting requirement.

I didn't read the entire proposal but I would assume there was a provision in there for the SE income to be used in lieu of W-2 in determining the reporting threshold.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-28-2021, 07:39 AM
 
585 posts, read 223,246 times
Reputation: 672
Whether its $600 or $10,000+ the shady and corrupt IRS needs to get a warrant or stay out of my business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 08:06 AM
 
Location: NYC
20,550 posts, read 17,604,980 times
Reputation: 25616
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
There never was a proposal to have every individual transaction over $600 reported. The proposal was to have the aggregate inflows and outflows for the year from bank accounts with over $600 of transactions reported.

You bought the misinformation that was pushed to beat back this proposal.
This is still the same thing because it's an aggregated total report of all your transactions and it's an invasion of privacy. IRS will have the data that shows who you send money to and that can be used to trace or look at behavior or relationships.

It's a serious violation of privacy and it has nothing to do with income taxes. Because the requirements are already set that any income from securities or earned income from employment must be reported so this type of policy is invasion of privacy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 09:30 AM
 
2,741 posts, read 1,768,322 times
Reputation: 4433
Quote:
Originally Posted by vision33r View Post
This is still the same thing because it's an aggregated total report of all your transactions and it's an invasion of privacy. IRS will have the data that shows who you send money to and that can be used to trace or look at behavior or relationships.

It's a serious violation of privacy and it has nothing to do with income taxes. Because the requirements are already set that any income from securities or earned income from employment must be reported so this type of policy is invasion of privacy.
I had $127,565 and $124,682 of inflows and outflows in my account. Who did I send money to?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 11:57 AM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
6,913 posts, read 3,340,146 times
Reputation: 8629
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
Reporting individual transactions were never part of the proposal.
Give me a break - never said it was but still TOO INTRUSIVE. Since we don't work (retired) and every account has $10K, every single account me or my DW have would be under this oversight if it went forward. You continue to try and defend a bad idea by claiming not that bad - bad is bad - very happy it is likely going away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 12:03 PM
 
2,741 posts, read 1,768,322 times
Reputation: 4433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
Give me a break - never said it was but still TOO INTRUSIVE. Since we don't work (retired) and every account has $10K, every single account me or my DW have would be under this oversight if it went forward. You continue to try and defend a bad idea by claiming not that bad - bad is bad - very happy it is likely going away.
I'm not trying to defend anything, I couldn't care less if this becomes law or not. What I was pointing out was the misinformation that was pushed so people thought the proposal was something it wasn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 12:12 PM
 
Location: Las Vegas & San Diego
6,913 posts, read 3,340,146 times
Reputation: 8629
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
I'm not trying to defend anything, I couldn't care less if this becomes law or not. What I was pointing out was the misinformation that was pushed so people thought the proposal was something it wasn't.
I never said what you "corrected" - that would seem to be defending. You are so worried about misinformation that you incorrectly claimed I put out misinformation - that is defending - not just correcting.

This thread is in economics, not politics - should be about the implementation, not the politics which is what you are doing when saying not so bad - the policy is bad whether $6, $600, or $10K. The bottom line is it is intrusive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 12:17 PM
 
2,741 posts, read 1,768,322 times
Reputation: 4433
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddeemo View Post
I never said what you "corrected" - that would seem to be defending. You are so worried about misinformation that you incorrectly claimed I put out misinformation - that is defending - not just correcting.
the original post I responded to did, sorry if I carried that through to your post responding to where I corrected that information, that brought up the irrelevant point that the proposal originally started at $600.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 12:17 PM
 
19,615 posts, read 17,907,428 times
Reputation: 17146
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuiteLiving View Post
I'm not trying to defend anything, I couldn't care less if this becomes law or not. What I was pointing out was the misinformation that was pushed so people thought the proposal was something it wasn't.
Sorry. That's hard believe as you've been playing the pro- side of this for weeks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2021, 12:18 PM
 
2,741 posts, read 1,768,322 times
Reputation: 4433
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
Sorry. That's hard believe as you've been playing the pro- side of this for weeks.
I don't really care what you believe.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:27 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top