NetJets Sues IRS Over $642.7M Tax Bill - Thanks OBAMA...

[152SIC]

If there is a reduction in the rate of taxation on the rich from it's current level of 35% for income, or 15% for capital gains, to the proposed 9% there would be a decrease in the velocity of money for that income segment. I am not sure if there is an exemption for lower income consumers and the 9% national sales tax. If there isn't the tax is regressive.

The argument could be made that more jobs would result because of increased domestic investment. Trickle down type economics. However, companies are already sitting on record amounts of cash. Not much is trickling down. Here is an example I read recently: http://www.npr.org/2011/08/17/139703989/companies-sit-on-cash-reluctant-to-invest-hire

 

[gunfyter]

The reason the sales tax is not regressive is that it replaces Hidden Embedded Taxes we already pay.... I will show this below and also how it will bring jobs from overseas to the US...

Studies show 22% of the price of items we purchase represents embedded taxes. If we abolished all taxes, this embedded cost could be removed such that a $100 item today would only cost $78.

The same item coming from china does not have the embedded US taxes ... It sells for say $90. But we have now undercut the Chinese so those jobs come back to America..

But how then do we fund the government? We impose a 30% sales tax. This returns the us product to it's original $100 price. The chinese product is now $117. We collect the same revenue as before, while abolishing the need for the IRS and the tax code. This is effectively a tariff on foreign products.

This tax plan is called The FairTax. That is phase 2 of the 9-9-9 plan. It has a prebate also that untaxes everyone up to the poverty level. It is progressive not regressive.

The UAW should support this plan. Imagine the price advantage us cars would have over foreign cars.

 

[152SIC]

I have heard this line of reasoning before and on the surface it sounds like a great idea. However the "embedded" taxes could refer to "costs" like EPA regulations and the difference between labor laws between the US and China.

If you have the actual study which shows how they came up with the 22% number I would be interested in looking through it.

 

[gunfyter]

Jorgenson, Dale W. (1998-05-18). "The Economic Impact of the National Retail Sales Tax" (PDF). U.S. House of Representatives. Retrieved 2008-02-20.

----------

Please Consider that even for someone who pays no income tax, it takes $107.65 to bring home $92.35. Normalizing this it means it takes $117 in compensation to buy something that has a price of $100.

Turbo tax tells me my effective tax rate is 17%. That means it takes me $134 of compensation to buy an item priced at $100. Even worse, my marginal rate is 25%, meaning I have to earn $142 to be able to afford a $100 increase in my bills. that’s a 42% tax rate on this middle class guy. God help the rich!

The FairTax is looking very, very good to me , sir…. Once we include the prebate….
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#5

It looks even better!

 

[waka]

How many of you guys will vote for Obama and his IRS-loving cronies again????? Let's all tax the rich because they can clearly afford it!!!! Who cares about the collateral damage (i.e., the pilots, mechanics, flight attendants, dispatchers, etc.). The fractional business and I assume the charter business (and private aviation in general) are under assault by this Administration. That's a fact... Read the blurb from AIN below:

Correct me if I am wrong, but the current excise tax on tickets has been around well before Obama. Right or wrong, the IRS is using their interpretation of existing law. It will be settled in court and the outcome will have nothing to do with the President. So, exactly what does this tax bill have to do with an "assault" by the current administration?

 

[rigger]

Correct me if I am wrong, but the current excise tax on tickets has been around well before Obama. Right or wrong, the IRS is using their interpretation of existing law. It will be settled in court and the outcome will have nothing to do with the President. So, exactly what does this tax bill have to do with an "assault" by the current administration?

Aaaaaa everything.......look bush sucked we get it and agree....but bumbles sucks x3....... All this crap on rich paying the fair share is a moot point until the 47% not paying ANYTHING pays thier fair share.....it's so friggin simple tax people more for success and you get less of it....they take the ball and go home....proven facts cannot be argued...progressives like you guys here don't like it so you argue on your emotions.....EVERY SINGLE TIME IN PAST AND RECENT HISTORY TAXES ARE LOWERED INCOME GOES WAYYYYYY UP..... Stop with your stupidity and class warefare already...we get it you hate anyone who is doing better than you and you want to TAKE the unfair earnings away and give it to some moochers. You know best how to spend my money, I know, I know.....now for the bumbles lovers name 1 thing he has gotten right thus far....and I will show you 5 that have devastated the economy even more than Bush did...... WAKEEEEE WAKKKKKEEEEEE nomes......

 

[152SIC]

Jorgenson, Dale W. (1998-05-18). "The Economic Impact of the National Retail Sales Tax" (PDF). U.S. House of Representatives. Retrieved 2008-02-20.

----------

Please Consider that even for someone who pays no income tax, it takes $107.65 to bring home $92.35. Normalizing this it means it takes $117 in compensation to buy something that has a price of $100.

Turbo tax tells me my effective tax rate is 17%. That means it takes me $134 of compensation to buy an item priced at $100. Even worse, my marginal rate is 25%, meaning I have to earn $142 to be able to afford a $100 increase in my bills. that’s a 42% tax rate on this middle class guy. God help the rich!

The FairTax is looking very, very good to me , sir…. Once we include the prebate….
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#5

It looks even better!

I looked through the PDF file briefly and it sounds interesting. I don't have a lot of time on my hands today, my 7 month old takes priority

Correct me if I am wrong; is this plan basically like a negative income tax with a supplemental income tax? The negative income tax made sense from what I remember from reading Friedman years ago. Here is the negative income tax: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax

 

[gunfyter]

I see your point on the NIT. I am not sure about that. It is a rebate to ensure low income people are not negatively affected by the plan.

 

[waka]

Aaaaaa everything.......look bush sucked we get it and agree....but bumbles sucks x3....... All this crap on rich paying the fair share is a moot point until the 47% not paying ANYTHING pays thier fair share.....it's so friggin simple tax people more for success and you get less of it....they take the ball and go home....proven facts cannot be argued...progressives like you guys here don't like it so you argue on your emotions.....EVERY SINGLE TIME IN PAST AND RECENT HISTORY TAXES ARE LOWERED INCOME GOES WAYYYYYY UP..... Stop with your stupidity and class warefare already...we get it you hate anyone who is doing better than you and you want to TAKE the unfair earnings away and give it to some moochers. You know best how to spend my money, I know, I know.....now for the bumbles lovers name 1 thing he has gotten right thus far....and I will show you 5 that have devastated the economy even more than Bush did...... WAKEEEEE WAKKKKKEEEEEE nomes......

Wow! Everything you say is pure emotion and a 180 from reality. This is what happens when you get drunk and post.

 

[johnsonrod]

Regardless of how we all feel about Obama, most of us in aviation should conclude that his policies are NOT FAVORABLE toward avaition. His views towards the "rich" and their requirements for income redistribution will certainly not benefit the fractional business - especially on the lower end of the income spectrum where big tax bills can make a difference. I think we can all agree about that - right?

Ask anyone who lives in California or New York whether $250K makes you a "rich" person after taxes and living expenses.