Tomorrow — go to the small business office in your local city (i.e. San Francisco) — pay them $150 and START A C Corporation — it’s easy, and a good first step (even if you only have an ‘idea’ for a company). You will learn a good bit, and maybe even start something successful — I guarantee you won’t PAY LESS overall if you follow the rules, and you will work MUCH HARDER and will have a lot less time to complain.

Tax ‘write-offs’ are designed to encourage small company growth — if misused, then people call them tax-’breaks’ by the cheaters. The whole system has checks/balances based on personal ethics — ANYONE CAN CHEAT ON THEIR TAXES — just like in school — the government does not have control over your pen or computer keyboard !!!!!

It’s up to the individual to ethically follow the free-market guidelines outlined by our government, run a decent company and employ people — this is the key to spreading wealth — not through government re-distribution and communist-style oversight.

If you don’t like how you are being taxed, go start a C corporation yourself — you can do it for less than $200 — even in California — I did it twice in San Francisco!!!! — you can be CEO, pay no corporate taxes, and pay yourself everything you make — any difference? didn’t think so.

The truth: the tax code for corporations is set up BY THE GOVERNMENT to ENCOURAGE PAYING EMPLOYEES and HIRING NEW PEOPLE and REINVESTING PROFITS — it make A LOT OF SENSE IN A FREE MARKET. There are VERY STRICT RULES about what is classified as an INVESTMENT — your government watches this very closely. Taxing a corporation is a PENALTY and results in LESS JOBS and LESS INVESTMENT — it is set up BY OUR GOVERMENT this way!!!!!!!!

That CEO your are complaining about is taxed on what he earns PERSONALLY — the government is WELL AWARE of this and will hit him up on his PERSONAL taxes.

Also the truth: CORPORATIONS are watched and monitored by the government using a very mature and sophisticated tax code to promote economic growth. POLITICIANS are NOT governed by these rules — this breeds CORRUPTION and wasteful, illogical government spending.

I have NO PROBLEM following the governments RULES regarding how I am investing my profits and paying my people (including myself). I DO HAVE A BIG PROBLEM with allowing politicians to FREELY TAX AND SPEND with no oversight — the media should be focusing on HOW CAN WE ENFORCE CONTROLS ON OUR GOVERNMENT?

Answer is WE CAN’t if the government gains too much control over the free market — the system for controlling our GOVERNMENT has been altered from what our Founding Fathers intended — God Bless America — we are going to need it.

One question though: if they are paying so little taxes, how do they receive such huge tax refunds? That implies they are over paying. Anyway, could you shed some light on this portion of the issue for me?

Thanks!

Does this writer work for the heritage foundation.

Your math is pretty faulty.

Americans need to understand down to their very bones that their money is going to – and their country is being run by – people who know that an inconvenient tax law doesn’t need to be suffered, it needs to be changed. These people know that if $200k of lobbying saves them $200m in taxes that lobbying is their most financially efficient tax strategy. Americans need to understand that the entire system is rigged against people who take the 1040EZ, who always get the Standard Deduction, who think that their $10k account on eTrade makes them a “player.” The entire system is rigged so heavily against the individual with a middle-class income that the average taxpayer still thinks he’s a small fish in a small pond – he doesn’t even realize he’s a goldfish in an aquarium bought and paid for by people whose fortunes dwarf his so extravagantly that scientific notation is necessary to illustrate the difference.
The AP ran a pie chart in 2001 that I saw in a newspaper once and haven’t seen since. It broke down who, exactly, benefited from the Bush Tax Cuts – remember, back when you got a $300 check as pablum to get you to shut up? Prosperity for everybody, right?
That graph had a lot of stuff on it that wouldn’t surprise you. “Businesses” got a big chunk of it. “The Middle class” got a tiny chunk of it. “The wealthy” got a big chunk of it. But way down at the bottom, next to a “2%” there was an asterisk. That asterisk, down in the footnotes, said “Samuel, John, Christy, Alice and James Walton.”1
2% of the benefits of an entire national tax cut – about four billion dollars – went directly to five people. Who happen to own Walmart. They cut you a $300 check so yo wouldn’t grumble about it. Each Walton, individually, got more tax cut than 2.5 million people, collectively. But it’s okay, because you got an X-box.
That’s the system we live in. And the people who have the most direct power to change it are the ones that are benefiting the most. Be angry at GE. Be angry at the tax laws. Be angry at the lobbyists. Be angry at the people taking advantage of it. If you aren’t outraged, you aren’t paying attention.
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporality embarrassed millionaires.” — John Steinbeck

Sources:
1 – http://1.usa.gov/gxo6I0
2 – http://usat.ly/eUml1W
3 – http://www.walmartmovie.com/facts.php

“FAST has calculated that in 2004, assuming the Walton family continues to hold their 1.68 billion shares of Wal-Mart stock and the company actually pays the 48 cent per share dividend projected, the five Walton family members (Helen, Rob, Alice, Jim and John) will save at least $190,367,803 in federal income taxes.”

What’s that figure again?

Oh…and before the sunshine conservabot crew chimes in about how lowering the rate magically increases revenues….no…it doesn’t.

It didn’t during the Kennedy cuts. It didn’t during the Reagan cuts, and it didn’t during the Bush cuts.

I’ve charted all three, using source data and inflation adjusted dollars.

3 years for revenues to bounce back after Kennedy’s cuts
5 years after Reagan’s
6 years (and an overheated economy with a nasty surprise at the end) after Bush’s.

So…since trickle down hasn’t produced the promised jobs, and since revenues don’t increase, and since Greenspan’s argument that it might be BAD if we pay off the debt seems to have done a COMPLETE about-face these days, and the conservabots who once thrilled to phrases like, “Ronald Reagan showed us that deficits don’t matter” are now suddenly reformed spendaholics and now keen on righting the financial ship, shouldn’t we start looking to new revenue sources, in addition to cutting spending?

The charts for the three tax cuts can be found here, along with the spreadsheet, along with links to the source data. (if this link doesn’t take you right to it, it’s the 3rd post from the bottom)

http://uvent.info/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=24&p=4341#p4341

Run the numbers yourselves.