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.
You know, it's funny. I always see this argument of "double taxation."
But the people who bring it up never suggest that the resolution could be eliminating the personal income tax, they ONLY want to eliminate the corporate income tax. I wonder why that is?
Individual income tax is NOT double taxation, for starters. I would support eliminationof the income tax in toto, as well.
Half of those payroll taxes are paid by corporations. Nice spin.
Actually, no, they aren't. That's because approximately half of all payroll taxes are paid by employers, a group which includes not only corporations, but also sole proprietorships, partnerships, LLCs, public employers, self-employed individuals, and non-profits. Also, some employers fail to pay their payroll tax burden (which is why I said approximately half of all payroll taxes are paid by employers).
S-corporations are flow through entities. That means that profits flow through to the owners personal income tax
So I repeat: why didn't personal income tax receipts grow over that time period? Why did the increase show up in the form of payroll taxes, rather than personal income taxes?
Individual income tax is NOT double taxation, for starters.
Obviously a single tax cannot be considered double taxation. That's pretty obvious.
Quote:
I would support eliminationof the income tax in toto, as well.
I'm not sure where toto is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Rossi
It isn't logic, per se, it is fact. Corporations can't vote - period. Fact, not logic.
If corporations can't vote, then you're considering them as entities independent of their owners, which means that personal tax + corporate tax is NOT double taxation.
If you think double taxation is a "Thing", then you're considering corporations to be entities consisting of owners, which means that corporations can vote.
You can pick one or the other, but to attempt to claim both is intellectually dishonest.
Obviously a single tax cannot be considered double taxation. That's pretty obvious.
I'm not sure where toto is.
If corporations can't vote, then you're considering them as entities independent of their owners, which means that personal tax + corporate tax is NOT double taxation.
If you think double taxation is a "Thing", then you're considering corporations to be entities consisting of owners, which means that corporations can vote.
You can pick one or the other, but to attempt to claim both is intellectually dishonest.
Only if you play childish, nit-pcking games. The income in earned by a company owned by its owners (in collective). When the income is earned it is taxed, but when it goes to the owners pocket in what would be called owners distribution in a sole prop. it is taxed again. Taxed once, taxed twice - double tasxation. You can't tilt at windmills if you wish, build imaginiary logical constructs if you want, but the facts are simple and plain.
So I repeat: why didn't personal income tax receipts grow over that time period? Why did the increase show up in the form of payroll taxes, rather than personal income taxes?
An S-corporation (small business) by law must pay the owner a salary that must be a reasonable and comparative salary just as they would pay an employee from outside. This means the owner gets a paycheck and payroll taxes must be deducted from that paycheck just like an employee. It's w2 income.
When payroll taxes increased it also increased taxes on the small business owner and yes they contributed to the increase showing up in the form of payroll taxes.
Obama went after the little guy in many ways. The big corporations skated. Before you demand something you should really educate yourselves because big government will know you do not know the difference and will take advantage of you.
Knowledge is power, lack of knowledge will cause you losses.
Corporation shouldn't even pay income tax. They aren't people, can't vote, and are just "us" by extension. The income they are taxed on, is retaxed upon distribution to the owners - double taxation. The shrinking beige line is a good, no, check that, a GREAT thing.
But the corporation is a separate entity from the individual owners, so it's not really double taxation. The corporate form provides the individual shareholders the advantages of limited liability, transferability and continuity. That's not true of, say, a partnership.
Hey, everyone wants Uncle Sugar to give them goodies, that money has to come from somewhere. And with more and more of the corporations that employee Americans actually being overseas, that money is going to come from us the taxpayers.
Today, it looks more like those freebies and goodies are going to the same institutions that went over seas, via tax breaks, Government Contracts, and free FED money to central Banks around the world.
Many American's would be utterly flabbergasted if they knew how much of our tax payer money went to foreign entities, or Banks and Companies that have moved their operations overseas but still are allowed to meddle in our governmental affairs.
What really astounds me, is the same ones that are against a foreign person serving as president, and understandably so, because there would be a conflict of interests, would support companies that have most of their interests overseas, have a voice in our government.
Those Multi National Companies and Global Investment Banks are not fighting on your behalf in our government, for our countries best interests, but fighting to maximize their profits at our expense for their foreign interests abroad.
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.