U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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)
 
 
Old 01-31-2015, 01:52 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,538,376 times
Reputation: 29083

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
On the contrary, I think you should grab the crayola and paint us a picture of how things should be in the retirement investment arena, according to you. Your original post made absolutely no sense to me.

I second the request that you tell us how you pay more taxes than absolutely necessary.
It doesn't have to make sense to you or anyone else. It was the tone of the OP I found objectionable - the fundamental distaste toward paying taxes on any Social Security income. No one, including me, enjoys paying taxes. However, taxes are a bit of a necessary evil and unless overly punitive or "debilitating," certainly not something I'm going to get all wrapped around the axle about.

Beyond that I simply expressed an opinion which I believe is permitted. You and others may get as flummoxed about it as you wish.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-31-2015, 01:54 PM
 
71,971 posts, read 72,020,102 times
Reputation: 49554
the entire American tax system is based on the fact that your fair share of taxes is whatever you can legally figure out you have to pay. that has nothing to do with tax avoidance or tax dodging just tax intelligence .

if it makes you feel like more of a patriot paying in more than what your fair share could be or should be with a little better tax planning than by all means go right ahead.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 01:58 PM
 
Location: Ubique
4,156 posts, read 3,171,154 times
Reputation: 2644
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Curmudgeon is making a very valid point and one that is at the crux of our national discussion on income, wealth and inequality.
Who says that's a national discussion? Sure we can have that discussion, but that would be off-topic here, no?


Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Curmudgeon like many of us has a pension which is a pre-determined fixed income stream that has limited ability to create flexible distribution with It is taxed as ordinary income. One of the few if not only ways to construct it differently for tax purposes is with spousal benefits/life insurance. For those with pensions and SS other than when to take the streams it is pretty fixed and difficult to manage for tax purposes if of a decent amount. On the other hand those of us with investment streams have flexibility in distribution, source and timing. Having all of I recognize the difference in how retirement income is treated and understand Curmdgeons sentiment. For us it make no difference but for others I know it can. MathJak and I can have similar base incomes but the way his is constructed creates some tax options I don't have. We can have similar ones with other incomes but my pension and SS will be barring a disaster no lower than it is now and in all probability going up. Any self created investment streams will be on top of that. At the crux of much of the tax inequity discussion in the country is the nature of income and should it be taxed the same? I can appreciate and understand the nuances of the differences but I am sure many other well reasoned and intelligent people wouldn't.
From the point of view of retirement investments and income -- what is your's and Carmudgeon's point? Retirement Income inequality? Or Tax evasion? Or what? Shoot straight and make a point. What do you want?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 02:01 PM
 
Location: Ubique
4,156 posts, read 3,171,154 times
Reputation: 2644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
It doesn't have to make sense to you or anyone else. It was the tone of the OP I found objectionable - the fundamental distaste toward paying taxes on any Social Security income. No one, including me, enjoys paying taxes. However, taxes are a bit of a necessary evil and unless overly punitive or "debilitating," certainly not something I'm going to get all wrapped around the axle about.

Beyond that I simply expressed an opinion which I believe is permitted. You and others may get as flummoxed about it as you wish.
I see no difference between someone using legal means to minimize tax liability, and you refusing to pay one cent more than what you owe.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 02:08 PM
 
29,838 posts, read 34,929,245 times
Reputation: 11766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
Who says that's a national discussion? Sure we can have that discussion, but that would be off-topic here, no?




From the point of view of retirement investments and income -- what is your's and Carmudgeon's point? Retirement Income inequality? Or Tax evasion? Or what? Shoot straight and make a point. What do you want?
Note I said I can see both points as I am in both boats! I appreciate where others are coming from. MathJak and I are buddies but I find it entertaining that at his retirement income level he might be not paying full SS taxes and someone with a much lower level of income would be. For us full SS taxes are unavoidable and I have no complaints at all about that. The trade offs are worthwhile. SS taxation is a tad different than income taxation as my understanding is the exemption was a form of SS means testing for benefits. If you don't believe tax policy and wealth distribution are part of a broad current discussion and this thread is in that context, ok! The OP has posted frequently as have many of us and I understand his question and how it relates to discussions here and in the economic forum.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 02:13 PM
 
Location: Ubique
4,156 posts, read 3,171,154 times
Reputation: 2644
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
If you don't believe tax policy and wealth distribution are part of a broad current discussion and this thread is in that context, ok!
This is a forum for Retirement, not Economics. We can surely have the discussion about "wealth distribution" elsewhere. We can talk about definition of those terms, what they really mean, who came up with the terms, why, etc. etc.

But this topic is about.. whatever the subject says -- Avoiding Tax on Soc Sec Benefits.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 02:17 PM
 
29,838 posts, read 34,929,245 times
Reputation: 11766
And that believe it or not as noted in multiple posts involves wealth and varies with the level and sources of that wealth
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Ubique
4,156 posts, read 3,171,154 times
Reputation: 2644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
No one, including me, enjoys paying taxes. However, taxes are a bit of a necessary evil and unless overly punitive ...
Overly punitive? So "punitive" is ok? But "overly punitive" is not?

You seem to attach a rather ideological and emotional rant to the issue of taxation, rather than have a practical discussion.

Taxation is a major aspect of retirement planning and investment. How can we talk about retirement without talking about taxation? If you would do without it, you should write to your Govt representative and eliminate taxes altogether.

Secondly, why shouldn't people legally minimize tax liability? Do you really think that Tax Legislation was random and esoteric?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Exeter, NH
5,303 posts, read 4,411,341 times
Reputation: 5709
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdflk View Post
What are some good strategies for keeping retirement income low enough to not pay taxes on Soc Sec.?
Here's one tidbit that I came across on a CPA site: Be very careful about holding off on taking your SS benefits until age 70. One very frugal woman that had scrimped and saved her whole life when to a CPA, who told her to wait until age 70 to take her SS benefits, in order to get a higher amount. She lived like a pauper and eventually made it to age 70.

Then, she found out that her higher SS benefit was JUST ENOUGH to disqualify for her many public assistance programs that would have helped her immensely with her health problems. So she got her pitiful SS monthly benefits, but lost everything she had saved in short order, and spent her entire LIFE in poverty.

I suggest taking your SS benefits as early as possible, just to avoid the near-certainty of either dying before getting anything, or getting your benefits reduced over time as the insolvency of the Ponzi-Scam SS system forces government to rob the Baby Boomers of a "retirement plan" they've paid for twice over already.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-31-2015, 02:40 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,538,376 times
Reputation: 29083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
Overly punitive? So "punitive" is ok? But "overly punitive" is not?

You seem to attach a rather ideological and emotional rant to the issue of taxation, rather than have a practical discussion.

Taxation is a major aspect of retirement planning and investment. How can we talk about retirement without talking about taxation? If you would do without it, you should write to your Govt representative and eliminate taxes altogether.

Secondly, why shouldn't people legally minimize tax liability? Do you really think that Tax Legislation was random and esoteric?
What I really think is that at this is not worth an on-going argument or any more of my time, even if I am retired. I'll pass. G'Day!
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.


 
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 > Retirement
Similar Threads
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