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.
With the Sub chapter S corporation I own with my two partners I get taxed on the front end for the corporations taxes at 34%. I get taxed on my wages that we pay ourselves same as every other working stiff. I then get taxed on any capital gains at 25% from my share of the corporations AFTER tax profits on my personal income taxes. Do you think I need to pay any more frigging taxes? Did you see where I got Taxed TWICE on the same money?
Obviously you have never run a business and have no understanding of our countries tax structure and its impact on small businesses.
Think the above scenario is a JOBS maker in this economy? I fired two employees last month so we could take their income and save it for the potential tax bill coming from The Triad of Gluttony-Obama, Pelosi and Reid in 2011.
For companies its not what you make that's taxed it is what is left over from the business operations for that year. Your net profit to put it simply.
You want to stimulate the economy? Quit spending so much and cut the tax rates even more than the current rates set by the Bush Administration.
Why, if you are subchapter S, are you having your corporation pay taxes, and then you pay taxes? Sounds like a subchapter C status.
A form of corporation that meets the IRS requirements to be taxed under Subchapter S of the Internal Revenue Code. This gives a corporation with 100 shareholders or less the benefit of incorporation while being taxed as a partnership. This means that any profits earned by the corporation are not taxed at the corporate level, but rather at the level of the shareholders. Also known as "S corporation".
Having S corporation status can prove a huge benefit for a corporation. The corporation can pass income directly to shareholders and avoid the double taxation that is inherent with the dividends of public companies, while still enjoying the advantages of the corporate structure. In order to qualify, a corporation must be a small business corporation. This means the following requirements must be met:
1) Must be a domestic corporation
2) Must not have more than 100 shareholders
3) Must include only eligible shareholders
4) Must have only one class of stock
Your labor union executives make double that annually.
I know for a fact that's not true. The dad of one of my sons best friends is an area director over 6 or 7 states for the international of a labor union. I know for a fact he makes considerably less than $100,000.00, because we've talked about saving for college with large families (we have 5 kids, they have 4). He also has to travel non-stop (sometimes he can only come home every other weekend). He has a masters in public administration/human resources. If he were working in private industry, he'd make much more. They have great benefits though...
Why do you make stuff up like this when you don't know what you're talking about? It's easy enough to check. Non profit have to file tax reports, and all of the info is public record.
Apparently, the Obama crew needs to vet their hand picked audience better...
How does a family get picked for an Obama backyard chat? A nice yard helps | The Upshot Yahoo! News - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100930/pl_yblog_upshot/how-does-a-family-get-picked-for-an-obama-backyard-chat-a-nice-yard-helps - broken link)
He asked his question and the president responded. This won't be the first time someone's mic gets turned off. On top of that he doesn't make enough for it to affect him.
I think the attitude that if it doesn't effect you personally you shouldn't care is just wrong. I don't make anywhere near $250,000 and this issue bothers me a lot. I think in all cases where some people pay a bigger percentage than the others is unfair.
And if you look at it another way, raising taxes effects the economy, which in turn can effect everyone.
Question for the legal crowd concerning this thread.
The gentleman in question stated that he "plowed most of his revenue back into the company". Wouldn't this revenue be considered tax deductable?
I'm not a tax lawyer by any means, however: in Subchapter S the profits, or losses, of the corporate entity are paid out to the shareholders.
Now, the board of directions (you still have directors and officers in "S" corporations) may, of course, direct that a portion of the money coming into the corporation stay in the corporation (i.e. 'plowing revenue back into the company'), using it to purchase additional inventory, expansion space, salaries, advertising, etc. All normal expenses of running a corporation.
If, at the end of the year, your S corporation has 'profit', then said profit is divided among the shareholders, who then report it on their personal tax return. If loss, you may use the loss on your personal tax return to offset other income you may have.
One part I am not sure about: I assume, but do not know, if the gentlemen the subject of this tread is able to pay himself a salary as an officer of the S corporation.
The following is speculation:
He is probably a member of the board of directors. No doubt his wife is also on the board (she is probably a shareholder, also). Acting in their capacity of board members they set the salary for the President or CEO of the company (the gentleman in question). Let us say the board votes to pay the CEO $100,000.00 per year.
So, out of the revenue' of the corporation you have a corporate expense of $100,000.00 to the CEO.
Now, the CEO is also a shareholder of said S corporation. At the end of the fiscal year the corporation:
1. Has a profit of $200,000.00. If the gentleman and his wife are the only shareholders, then they split the money: $100,000.00 each, which he adds on his taxes to his CEO pay. OR
2. Has a net loss of $30,000.00. Hence, the gentleman's share of the loss (as a shareholder) is $15,000.00, which he is able to deduct against his earnings (as CEO) of $100,000.00.
Again, I am not a tax lawyer, though I was once learned in corporation law two decades ago (indeed, back in law school, in 1983, you could not have more than 20 shareholders in a subchapter S corporation; now it is 100).
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 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.
