Romney/Ryan Lose 2012 Election Thread

[Corcaigh]

I hope you're be sarcastic. I know TSF was.

He should consult with a lawyer.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

You might want to read documents that you sign and submit to the IRS in the future.

I hope you're be sarcastic. I know TSF was.

I wasn't being sarcastic. If you think I remember what my income tax form says off the top of my head, you're wrong. I'd have to go look at it, and I could do that, but I don't have it in front of me. What I remember is that I got a refund. Do you both remember what your income tax returns actually said about withholdings and what you owe?

Also, I haven't filed my 2011 tax returns yet because my account got an extension.

He should consult with a lawyer.

I am a lawyer.



---------- Post added September-19th-2012 at 11:25 AM ----------

Also, I thought this article really explained evenly some of the problems with Romney's comments, and some of what was right about it:

http://www.tnr.com/blog/plank/107453...ement-medicare

[DjTj]

Finally, the purpose of FICA taxes is to fund 2 very specific federal programs, and the argument here is not whether payers of FICA taxes are entitled to the benefits from the programs they have paid into. The argument is whether people who only pay FICA are entitled to the benefits from programs funded through the federal income tax. In my opinion, the answer would clearly be no if the government were actually keeping FICA taxes in a lock box type system. Since that's not the case, and FICA taxes are actually used to fund the general operations (and soon to be vice-versa), then maybe there's an argument to be made that FICA payers have earned other benefits. In my opinion, that's still pretty weak.

So you're saying that, if my business has a bad year and I end up living off my savings and only paying FICA taxes, I shouldn't be allowed to drive on federally funded highways for the year? The State Department should refuse to give me a passport?

Citizenship isn't a timeshare program that we all buy into. We got rid of the landowning requirement a long time ago. So when one of us falls on hard times, we still count as Americans, and we still help each other out. I don't want to live in a country where your status as a citizen is dependent upon how much money you gave the government that year. That is how the most corrupt governments are run.

[Corcaigh]

Do you both remember what your income tax returns actually said about withholdings and what you owe?

I don't recall the dollar amount, but I know my Federal tax liability wasn't zero, whether I get a refund or not.

I am a lawyer.

Yeah. I know. It was a joke. A lawyer signing documents they haven't read wouldn't be what I'd expect.

[Larry]

FICA taxes are not an income tax. They are a tax on gross receipts. Income is your receipts less expenses, deductions, exemptions, and credits.

1) Credits are not a part in any way of a person's income. A credit is an adjustment to a person's taxes.

2) So, in your opinion, a person who, say, earns wages of $50,000, but who has deductions and exemptions of $50,000, has no income? Interesting. I wonder how many of those 47% who "pay no income taxes" "have no income"?

3) So, when I look at a form 1040, and I see an entire section labeled "Income", (of which wages are the first line), and which ends with line 22, which is labeled, in bold print, as "total income", the IRS is mis-labeling those numbers, because that's not really income, that's "gross receipts"? You should notify them that they don't know what the word "income" means.

Your employer withholds FICA taxes on all payments to you regardless of your expenses, deductions, exemptions, or credits. It is therefore a tax on your gross receipts from employment.

4) Or maybe I'm mis-reading you. Perhaps your argument is that "It's not income unless it's has loopholes and exemptions and exclusions. If it's a simply, flat, formula that applies to everybody, then it isn't income". But then, capital gains taxes have a few exemptions and deductions. But really not very many.

Furthermore, FICA taxes are not deductible on your federal income tax return.

5) Or maybe you're arguing that it isn't income unless it's deductible? But wait. Capital gains taxes aren't deductible, either. That can't be it.

Therefore, the people who pay only FICA taxes can cry me a river.

Your opinion that people who make less money than you should be treated with contempt may qualify you as a Republican. But it doesn't seem relevant to your attempt to justify an untrue talking point that Republicans have been making for decades.

When I earn $100, not only do I only get to keep $85 of it due to FICA taxes, but the full $100 counts toward my earned income on my federal return. Therefore, FICA taxes are more onerous for income taxpayers than for nonpayers because of the nondeductibility.

I'll observe that this isn't a definition of what is or isn't a tax on income, either.

But let me see if I've for your point.

Person A and Person B both have income

Both of them pay the same FICA taxes on that income.

Person B also pays income tax on part of his income.

Therefore, Person B's income isn't income?

Finally, the purpose of FICA taxes is to fund 2 very specific federal programs, and the argument here is not whether payers of FICA taxes are entitled to the benefits from the programs they have paid into. The argument is whether people who only pay FICA are entitled to the benefits from programs funded through the federal income tax. In my opinion, the answer would clearly be no if the government were actually keeping FICA taxes in a lock box type system. Since that's not the case, and FICA taxes are actually used to fund the general operations (and soon to be vice-versa), then maybe there's an argument to be made that FICA payers have earned other benefits. In my opinion, that's still pretty weak.

Ah, got it. A tax on income isn't a tax on income, unless that tax goes to one particular part of the federal government. If it goes to some other part of the government, then it isn't a tax.

You should have tried that argument on the Supreme Court, recently. They seemed to think that if the money goes to the federal government, then it's a tax.

Capital gains are an income tax. First of all, capital gains on assets held for less than 1 year are taxed at the individual's ordinary income tax rate. Second of all, all capital gains earned by corporations are taxed at that corporation's marginal income tax rate regardless of whether they are short term or long term. Third, losses from capital assets can offset ordinary income up to certain thresholds, with carryforwards (just like net operating losses from ordinary income can be carried forward). Fourth, when the income tax was originally established in 1913, all capital gains were taxed as ordinary income. There are plenty of other areas of the code in which congress has given preferential treatment to certain types of assets -

Ah, got it. "Capital Gains taxes are income taxes, because here's some of the rules for how capital gains taxes are calculated".

I don't understand why this preferential treatment should exclude something from being called an income tax.

Ah, another potential definition:

If it's taxed less than earned income, then it's an income tax. If it's taxed more than earned income, then it isn't.

That's a good one.

[Mad Mike]

Ya know, with all of the importance Romney puts on judging americans by the taxes we pay, I just want to ask again.... Lets see more of YOUR tax returns Mr. Romney.

Come on. I'm sure you have nothing to hide.

[MattFancy]

A point I haven't seen talked about much from that donor dinner is when Mitt said, "this would be easier if I was Latino." What does that even mean?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Ya know, with all of the importance Romney puts on judging americans by the taxes we pay, I just want to ask again.... Lets see more of YOUR tax returns Mr. Romney.

Come on. I'm sure you have nothing to hide.

No way he releases them now, especially if it is as it has been speculated that there may have been years where due to losses on the market that he paid zero taxes....man that would be a death knell.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I don't recall the dollar amount, but I know my Federal tax liability wasn't zero, whether I get a refund or not.

That's what I don't understand.... how does someone have zero liability? Am I wrong that everyone has some liability, but then you deduct payroll taxes and other deductions first? My understanding was that the poor in this country often don't pay income tax because their payroll taxes wipe out their income tax liability? But, they have liability before they deduct the payroll taxes? Are you saying that pre-payroll tax deduction people can have zero liability?

[AsburySkinsFan]

A point I haven't seen talked about much from that donor dinner is when Mitt said, "this would be easier if I was Latino." What does that even mean?

Dontcha know that Latinos have life so much easier than white millionaire children of privilege?

Or how about the "If Latinos start voting for the Democrats as faithfully as the African American population does then we are in trouble, as a party and as a nation."

So...Mitt...am I hearing you say that if the African Americans and Latinos lead us then America is in trouble?

[Tulane Skins Fan]

Or how about the "If Latinos start voting for the Democrats as faithfully as the African American population does then we are in trouble, as a party and as a nation."

So...Mitt...am I hearing you say that if the African Americans and Latinos lead us then America is in trouble?

I said it earlier... I thought a lot of his other comments were worse than the 47% comment.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I said it earlier... I thought a lot of his other comments were worse than the 47% comment.

Agreed, the 47% line insults all who vote Democratic and all of those who might receive some Federal assistance (corporate CEOs I assume are in that 47% too), but the racial comments....my goodness what was he thinki......oh yeah that's right....

[renaissance]

A point I haven't seen talked about much from that donor dinner is when Mitt said, "this would be easier if I was Latino." What does that even mean?

That he would automatically win over the Hispanic vote.

[Corcaigh]

That's what I don't understand.... how does someone have zero liability? Am I wrong that everyone has some liability, but then you deduct payroll taxes and other deductions first? My understanding was that the poor in this country often don't pay income tax because their payroll taxes wipe out their income tax liability? But, they have liability before they deduct the payroll taxes? Are you saying that pre-payroll tax deduction people can have zero liability?

It's not the payroll tax.

People will have deductions and tax credits for a whole variety of interest including mortgage interest deduction, dependent allowances and dependent care, retirement contributions, charitable donations etc

Here's a simple example from : http://www.calcxml.com/calculators/f...-tax-estimator

Estimated Tax Analysis
Gross income $50,000
Qualified plan contributions - $1,000
Adjusted gross income = $49,000
Standard/Itemized deductions - $500
Personal exemptions - $7,600
Taxable income = $40,900
Tax liability before credits $5,265
Child tax credits - $2,000
Estimated tax liability = $3,265

Estimated federal income tax liability will be approximately $3,265. Your average tax rate is 6.5% and your marginal tax rate is 15.0%.

By lowering the income or increasing the deductions and credits, you could have zero tax liability.

[DjTj]

That's what I don't understand.... how does someone have zero liability? Am I wrong that everyone has some liability, but then you deduct payroll taxes and other deductions first? My understanding was that the poor in this country often don't pay income tax because their payroll taxes wipe out their income tax liability? But, they have liability before they deduct the payroll taxes? Are you saying that pre-payroll tax deduction people can have zero liability?

There is no payroll tax deduction. Everyone with a job pays the payroll tax, and you don't get to deduct that from your AGI.

There is a personal exemption, which is $3,800 per person. And there is a standard deduction, which is $11,900 for married couples and $5,950 for singles. If your income is below the exemption plus the standard deduction, you will pay no income tax. So any married couple making less than $19,500 and any single person making less than $9,750 pays no income tax. And if you get the EITC, child credits, or other deductions, you can make a little bit more and still pay no income tax.