Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[SeattleLionsFan]

seat... My inlaws paid a lot of taxes in inheriting land that was not worth 5.5M. I realize they said estate taxes, but I was talking about a reduction in all inheritance taxes. So basically the ubber rich are getting a benefit while others still others still pay the same inheritance tax. I'd adjust inheritance tax across the board. Though in general, I'm for promoting savings and I'm fine with that reduction.

Also.. again, skimmed the article while walking, but I thought there was a point about reducing your tax liability to nothing and eliminating the ability to do so. A deduction max is what I called it. Did I misread?

Ent, while I know nothing of your inlaws experience, including when it happened, there is a difference between estate tax and inheritance tax. The first taxes the estate while the latter taxes the actual inheritance. I don't think there is a federal inheritance tax (I may be wrong), but the estate tax they are proposing getting rid of effects only estates worth more than 5.5M.

As to the second point, I think you may have misread. The article refers to the Alternative Minimum Tax which is designed to prevent people from deducting thier tax liability to -0- The proposal eliminates the AMT, allowing people including the President to reduce his tax liability to pennies on the dollar. You however still get to pay full price! Isn't that nice?

[entropy]

Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

seat... sorry.. I guess I think of estate planning and inheritance in similar fashions. Regardless of how the taxes are labeled or described, I'm pro savings and passing on savings. No issues.

and yes, it appears I did misread. I thought it was preventing people from reducing their taxes to pennies. I'm actually against what is being proposed..

[froot loops]

Happy Friday, drain the swamp

[Da Geezer]

SLF:

So it appears that The Dons tax cuts would increase my tax bill $1500 PER MONTH. At the same time it would cut his tax bill by 26 Million (at least for the one year we have any info about.). It would also lower his tax rate to 25%.

You care to go into those numbers a little more. Washington doesn't have a state income tax, so you have basically the same deductions as 2016. Your marginal rate goes from 39.4 to 35%. If you are making in the 300-400k range, that 4.4% off the top should be significant. Where do your taxes go up?

Really, no one can figure accurately what they will save because we don't know the beginning and ending points for the brackets.

And how do you figure Trump would save $26M off a $38M tax bill? I believe the top rate was 36% in 2006.

[Da Geezer]

..... Lou Whitaker and Chet Lemon didn't stand for the anthem and the republic survived.

They were Jehova's Witnesses, you nitwit. There is nothing of red team v blue team about that.

[Da Geezer]

what I don't like is the 3 levels.. 7 was too many, but maybe 4 or 5 would be better. Huge difference in what people can afford. I also not sure the top tax bracket needs to be lowered. Something I wouldn't touch if I was the R's

I agree. People at that income level are getting enough of a break with the elimination of the Estate/Gift tax and the AMT.

I happen to think that the folks in CA or NY that pay state income taxes of 11% or higher shouldn't have to be subsidized by the folks in the middle of the country who make far less on average. If they want Democrat governance, then let them pay for it without subsidy.

In the same vein, the mortgage interest deduction should be capped. Real estate prices are higher on the coasts, so mortgages tend to be higher, and the deduction is higher. Why should a guy with a $ 900,000 house on which he owes 800,000 be entitled to write off $48,000 (6% mtg rate)? They should cap it at 10-15k. That will never happen, but it should.

Crash, I read that NBC article, and you should be one who can recognize the "anti-Trump" bias in the article. No way in the world a family making around $ 80,000 will pay more taxes. For starters, the standard deduction goes to 24k from 12k. That is an additional $ 12,000 of income that comes right off the top for most people in the 80K range. Then you have the lowering of rates. And again, no one knows where the brackets begin, so for NBC to come out with a specific number like $ 78,561 or whatever, is nonsense.

[The Oracle]

Poor middle America. Always getting a dick in the ass.

[froot loops]

They were Jehova's Witnesses, you nitwit. There is nothing of red team v blue team about that.

What a fucking snowflake.

There is nothing red versus blue about Kaepernick's original stance, it wasn't about Red versus Blue, it was about police brutality. And it doesn't matter what the reason is, they did it and everyone got along fine. Get a fucking clue you piece of shit, also find a fucking quote when Chet Lemon talks about it.

Lemon is quite clear he doesn't believe in the anthem and that other people don't believe in the anthem for different reasons. From Chester himself:

"But the national anthem is a ritual. You have to think about what's being said -- rockets' red glare, bombs bursting in air? We do not believe in nor do we salute war. And for all practical purposes, I'm not the only player to not to salute the flags. Others all over America don't do it for different reasons, and a lot of them don't understand why and don't understand why we don't, either."

[Da Geezer]

As to the second point, I think you may have misread. The article refers to the Alternative Minimum Tax which is designed to prevent people from deducting thier tax liability to -0- The proposal eliminates the AMT, allowing people including the President to reduce his tax liability to pennies on the dollar. You however still get to pay full price! Isn't that nice?

SLF, about a month or two ago you said you didn't know what the AMT was. I said something on the order of "any fiduciary has to know what the AMT is...." Now you are giving (incorrect) advice about it!

Ent, the AMT applies to "tax preference items". The simplest case is a tax-free municipal bond. A ten-year municipal bond yields around 2.00% tax-free. A similar 10-year CD yields about 3% taxable. What SLF is telling you is that Donald could invest in only tax-free municipals, and theoretically pay no income tax on the interest. But Donald is accepting 2/3 of what he could get for taxable interest. That savings goes to the municipality or school issuing the tax-free bonds in reduced interest expense to the municipality. Money is fungible. There is no free lunch with tax-advantaged bonds but they would appeal more to persons in the 35% bracket rather than in the 12% bracket. That is how the very rich get tagged with the false claim that they are "paying pennies....." They are "paying" by accepting a substantially lower rate of return. In a very real sense, tax-free bonds are a way of depriving the feds of tax money, and instead directing that amount to a local school or government in the form of lowered interest rates.

Long-term capital gains are also included in the AMT. I can go into a discussion about them too, but basically, the idea is that when you buy a cottage for 10k in 1980, and you sell it for 250,000 in 2017, you shouldn't be taxed on the whole 240k gain because part of it is inflation. So the LTCG rate is less than the rate for ordinary income.

And, as for the death tax, the federal death tax is called the Estate Tax (or the Gift Tax which is the same thing). The phrase "inheritance tax" is usually (for all I know it could be "always") a State death tax. Maybe that is what SLF is thinking about - that WA somehow taxes "what you receive". There is no federal "inheritance tax".

The estate tax exemption (the amount that can be left to heirs tax-free) was $ 600,000 for many years. It is only in the last few years that the exempt amount has reached $5.5 M. The estate tax does not generate enough money to warrant all the planning that everyone seems to think should be done.

[froot loops]

You didn't have the slightest clue what the individual mandate was but it never stopped you from boring everybody with terrible health care takes.

[CGVT]

Poor middle America. Always getting a dick in the ass.

[ame]https://youtu.be/9ausPKEMVk0[/ame]

[hack]

AND A GOOD DAY TO YOU SIR

[froot loops]

Why does Walter think a high school student like Larry would own a Vette? So stupid and perfect.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I was gonna respond to Geeze this morning, but then he assholes it up. I have no need to engage in a bad faith discussion on the weekend.

One point about the standard deduction, the proposal gets rid of exemptions. So while the deduction increases by 12k, it gets rid of 4K for each dependent.

[The Oracle]

SLF, about a month or two ago you said you didn't know what the AMT was. I said something on the order of "any fiduciary has to know what the AMT is...." Now you are giving (incorrect) advice about it!

Ent, the AMT applies to "tax preference items". The simplest case is a tax-free municipal bond. A ten-year municipal bond yields around 2.00% tax-free. A similar 10-year CD yields about 3% taxable. What SLF is telling you is that Donald could invest in only tax-free municipals, and theoretically pay no income tax on the interest. But Donald is accepting 2/3 of what he could get for taxable interest. That savings goes to the municipality or school issuing the tax-free bonds in reduced interest expense to the municipality. Money is fungible. There is no free lunch with tax-advantaged bonds but they would appeal more to persons in the 35% bracket rather than in the 12% bracket. That is how the very rich get tagged with the false claim that they are "paying pennies....." They are "paying" by accepting a substantially lower rate of return. In a very real sense, tax-free bonds are a way of depriving the feds of tax money, and instead directing that amount to a local school or government in the form of lowered interest rates.

Long-term capital gains are also included in the AMT. I can go into a discussion about them too, but basically, the idea is that when you buy a cottage for 10k in 1980, and you sell it for 250,000 in 2017, you shouldn't be taxed on the whole 240k gain because part of it is inflation. So the LTCG rate is less than the rate for ordinary income.

And, as for the death tax, the federal death tax is called the Estate Tax (or the Gift Tax which is the same thing). The phrase "inheritance tax" is usually (for all I know it could be "always") a State death tax. Maybe that is what SLF is thinking about - that WA somehow taxes "what you receive". There is no federal "inheritance tax".

The estate tax exemption (the amount that can be left to heirs tax-free) was $ 600,000 for many years. It is only in the last few years that the exempt amount has reached $5.5 M. The estate tax does not generate enough money to warrant all the planning that everyone seems to think should be done.

Geez are your suv drivin, red dog drinkin, water moccasin dodging, Ted Nugent cock sucking red neck hero patriots from the coffee shop doing anything for Puerto Rico?

No? Weird.