$14.5 B Tax Refunds Issued By "error"

I don't even file/collect tax returns because it's so damned confusing, haven't filed/collected since 2006.

(My view towards government taxes)


paged >____<

If you're just working one job with one source of income you probably just need to do a 1040EZ which takes about 15 minutes and is largely just copying numbers from your W2 over to the form and doing a little simple math.

Your image is accurate, because that's what the government is doing. Chances are they've owed you money every year and, by not filing, you've let them keep it.

So, you are basically stating that only those who have a need to steal are the only one's who steal?

Heck, I'm optimistic about humanity's ability to control oneself, but even I know a good portion of people who steal do it for the "rush" (i.e. kleptomaniacs) or challenge.

Ramyrez (and extension, Jet) made a good point in showing that most, if not nearly all accountants do not deal with shady (or aggressive) practices, but neither of them answered my real question, which you are eluding to.

Show me how people hire accountants to hide income from the government, as to prevent taxation of said income.

Heck, use the code itself to show it if you have to and why it is considered "hiding income."

I can guarantee you that there are no income being hidden, all income are being reported and taxed appropriately.

Can you prove that statement, or are you just showing your ignorance again?

Name a loophole. Strange thing is, every time I ask this question, it never gets answered.

As for tax laws not influenced by the public, I will call bull *** on your statement, and that's just two of the laws that I can easily come up with off the top of my head.

Side warning, by not filing your tax returns, you are losing possible refunds and keeping your returns open for audit.

Statute of Limitations don't apply if you never filed a tax return. If for whatever reason you were to get audited (I highly doubt it, since you probably don't make much anyway and IRS only goes after big fish), you would literally have no defense on these returns and can be hit with a penalty of 25% of the tax liability owed (and IRS doesn't have the burden of proof of payments made, you do, so those withholdings you had will not be counted against taxes owed from income from your W-2 wages).

It is always a good idea to file your returns on time every year just to prevent these situations from occuring. IRS has audited people with low incomes, they do it every year to create the illusion of non-partisan audit selection (which is a lie, when 75+% of all audits are on people making the top 20% of the income in America and only 5% of all audits are on the people who make the bottom 50% of the income, and even then, most of those are for NOLs).

So by not taking my tax refund they will say I am evading taxsation? lawls

And if I get audited they are more than welcome to question how I aquired a backpacks worth of material possessions XD

so it's better to watch people die, while sitting there for decades trying to find a permanent solution, than going with temp solutions untill a perm solution has been found?

go ahead, tell that to the homeless people, to people who have to search trash cans for food, to the families of people who have been killed during robbery, to the families of people who have commited suicide because they couldn't stand poverty anymore, and so on.....

and don't forget to vid it, i really want to see their reaction and how fast you are able to run.....

Never said that.

And I'm just showing possibilities. Like there is a very remote possibility that you may become rich (like winning the lottery). That may trigger an audit in hopes that you wouldn't fight it for a small amount.

If you have 10 years of unfilled returns, you would have nearly no defense on 7 of those 10 years (assuming that you never filed until the day you won the lottery). That's a 25% penalty on each of those 7 years for any W-2 wage income you have. You are looking at a significant sum that you just gave away for free.

Just throwing a hypothetical. It is your choice to do whatever you want to do. Just don't give out advice like "Don't file your returns, they will never go after you."

Sorry I didn't mean to sound ungrateful for the advice. You do make some good points.
(I don't gamble though) :P

Because what many of us consider a "loophole" you consider "valid aspect of tax law".

Personally I think the capital gains tax rate is pathetically low compared to individuals who make most of their money through their actually salary.

I'd be game with that particular issue being fixed via a lessening of the tax burden on individuals, though, vs. raising the capital gain tax.

How many people die from starvation in America due to lack of ability to get welfare? Heck, even the homeless in America gets better benefits than a single person making minimum wage and working full time.

Hi2u shelters funded by both public and private funds.

Maybe in the EU, but not here in the US, where you can get decent food for doing absolutely nothing.

What does that have anything to do with the EITC/ACTC?

I can't comment on people who commit suicide, as it is impossible to ask them why they killed themselves. You can't poll a dead person....

There was a permanent solution already. It's just been changed to become a temporary solution due to budget constraints and political motivation, especially from the "feel good" constitutes/politicians out there who must change the law just so they look like they "care" but really don't.

I know that you won't believe me, because you are so gungho on the notion that a solution was already made, but because a democrat/liberal changed it for the worse just to buy votes (that's the only explanation of why the EITC/ACTC was changed in 2009, as the system was not broken, it was working as intended, but changed to be a handout for those who are vulnerable and creates dependency on a specific party) for the future. If you are truly want to combat poverty, you don't limit help to a specific group of people and tell everyone else "FU".

Then let us agree what the definition of a "loophole" is. That's always a good first step to a debate.

Also, just to let you know, Capital Gains Tax is a form of double taxation. You are being taxed on income from already taxed sources. Like how dividends are taxed twice, once from the income of the company, another as a distribution of post-taxed income.

The reason why it is a low amount is because of the double taxation aspect, but also to spur investment towards stocks and long-term non-interest bearing bonds.

I'm just not a fan of long, overblown tax code in general. Make flat tax rats, increasing as you earn more up to a certain cap.

Stop giving deductions for kids, owning hybrid vehicles, buying houses, investing, whatever.

Pay a simple percentage and be done with it.

1.) we had a couple people dying here due to starvation in the last decade.....

2.) the US has more than 1.6 million homeless children, more than 100k homeless ex-soldier...... so what gives you the idea of people being taken care of and they having good benefits?

3.) well food stamps.... awesome.../irony

4.) we were talking about short-term solution in combination with long-term-solutions vs. only-long-term solutions.
so why are you switching the subject?

5.) of course it is very difficult to find a direct link...... but if it's constantly declining, and then there are some drastical changes and it begins to climb.... well, pin it down to the drastical changes.....

anyhow, back to the permanent solution thing..... the way money is created has to been changed... it's actually created by debt and that's a major problem....

Um...that's a progressive tax system. That's our current code.

Not politically possible.

Politically possible, but highly unlikely, unless there's a Republican Supermajority.

There isn't a tax deduction for buying houses, just financing houses with debt. And only for a personal residence plus one additional property.

Not politically possible. You would have better luck with getting rid of deductions for kids and other dependents than getting rid of tax attributes from investing.

While plausible, the rate would be higher than you would think it is. Somewhere around 15-19% would it be remotely feasible, and that would apply to everyone, not just the top 53% of income earners in the country.

Except not so much, because in my system you pay or assigned percentage or you go to jail. No deductions. No workarounds. No need for accountants or lawyers. You made money. You pay on it or you don't.


*shrug*

I know most of my ideas are impossible in the current political landscape. They're just ideals in my head.

What if I make 100k but sell my home for a 200k loss, what do I pay in taxes in your system?

Thanks Ram, made my life easier. While a poor person might be educated on taxes, thats the exception not the rule. This holds true for much of the worlds criminal activity.

It's not like I've sat down and drafted Rammie's Big Book of Flat Tax here. I'm just saying a simplified tax code would do wonders for us across the board. If I had hard and solid ideas you think I'd be sitting here on a forum telling you folks all about them, or somewhere trying to get someone to listen to this great ***I've got brewing in my brain?

Hell, if I could figure out how to get the world to listen to me you'd be seeing pictures of me on your money already.

You could alsways photo shop your face onto money and post it here for us to see. Quick easy and does not require a Corporate America bankroll.

Tax capital gains at the same rate as income.
The US would be like UAE can suck my gold dipped balls. As for losses, they are a deduction to offset income/gains, not a new concept thus liability incurred for 100k earnings would be offset by the loss on the sale of the house.

If capital gains were taxed in the same fashion as income it might actually lead to the 1% paying almost as much as the middle class... but that won't be allowed by the Overlords. Carry on nothing to see here.

No need for the 1% to pay what we pay. Can't we all pay what the 1% pays?

Hell no....oh wait, I already do that.

For somebody who accuses others of copy/pasting responses.....

1) Few people? How about quantifying it instead of alluding to only 2 people in 10 years?

2) Those statistics are skewed. They are counting a "homeless child" as somebody who's parent/guardian as not having a mailing address. That doesn't make them homeless. If there were 1.6 million children homeless on the streets, wouldn't you, I don't know, actually see them?

3) So, are you saying that "digging through somebody else's trash" also means "having food stamps to purchase food from"? I'm a little confused as to your point.

4) Long-term solutions apply to both short-term goals to long-term overall events. When you have a 15 year plan, it doesn't automatically apply all on the 15th year, it builds itself over the life of the plan. I thought you were intelligent enough to figure that out, but I guess not.

5) You are the one making the bold claim like "a lot of people are dying from starvation" and then going from a "lot of people" to a "couple of people" I'm sorry that I asked for proof, I'll know better next time when I deal with a radical ideologist like you.

Wait, so you want the 1% to pay less? Raising Capital Gains rate will not do that....

Maybe this graph will help you realize your inherent mistake....



Notice that the lowest 40% does not pay taxes, but actually receives money from the government instead? Ever asked yourself why and how?

Maybe it has something to do with a large, unorganized refundable credit...

Pay more, not less.
5.5%, 40% where?
Capital gains, this is income as in wages, earned from work.

You are a CPA?

I don't see a point here.

Also feel tax distribution should be returned to that around the 1960's/70's taxes have disproportionately been lowered over the decades for income over 200k/ year.

People who earn capital gains do so via investment, sales of property, royalties and the like. Poor people rarely have capital gains, middle class also rarely, selling a car or a house maybe minor investments. The 1% derive hundres of million/ billions via capital gains. Capital gains is taxed considerably less than income.
Thus the 1% pay the least tax on money they make vs the middle 30% who earn almost all through a wage (income).

Read the graph a little closer. It says "expanded cash income," as in income from all sources.

But where do you get this "5.5%" and "40%" figure from? Well, besides your imagination.

What this graph tells you is that the top 1% of income earners in the nation paid 51% of income taxes in the year. That is in all income taxes. Not "Capital Gains Only", not "Ordinary Income Only", but all income taxes.

Raising the Capital Gains rate will increase the disproportionate share of income taxes the 1% already pay. Why not just say that you want somebody else to pay your bills for you, because you are basically saying that already.

You are confused. The 70-90% tax rates of the prior years also included pretty much every deduction known to man. Such deductions allowable prior to 1986 tax reform act included credit card interest, gambling losses, foreign taxes, club dues, life insurance payments, uniforms, interest from car loans, and so on. They brought down the actual effective tax rates from 70+% to 28-32%.

You want to go back to that system? Fine by me, I always want to deduct cat food like they did back in the 60s.

Correct.

partially correct. Only on property held for investment, not for property held for income-generating purposes.

Incorrect. Royalties are ordinary passive income.

Partially correct. Qualified dividends are taxed at Capital Gains rate.

Incorrect.

Neither of these are income for the middle class. A car is never deductible for a person who doesn't use it for business, so it is not taxable for them when they sell it. Selling a house is subject to the $250k/$500k primary residence exemption on the gains on the house. Even if your house is sold for over a million dollars, your gains are generally less than $250k.

Partially incorrect. While there is a significant amount attributed to Capital Gains, an equal amount is also attributed towards ordinary income, some passive, some active.

Good for you, you finally got something correct again.

Incorrect. The wealthy pay ordinary income just as much as you do. They pay ordinary income from passthroughs, interests, stock options, rental, royalties, retirement accounts, and other ordinary income items.

Please, I strongly suggest that you stop pretending that you know taxes, when it is obvious that you have absolutely no clue as to what you are talking about.

No matter how you set it up the top 1% will always end up paying a larger amount of the taxes in the US solely for the fact that they hold so much of the wealth of the United States. Its at a staggeringly disproportionate rate for such a small percentage of the actualy population.

Im not saying, in this post, that anyone should be taxed more or less just stating what should be obvious.

Yes it is obvious, but some people seem to think that the 1% do not pay ordinary rates at all. Whereas, a significant portion of their income is taxed at ordinary rates.

That's where I am getting at.