Should Mitt release his tax returns?

[SaltyDawg]

I guess it's always easier to put your head in the sand while repeating ideological mantra.

The point is, for 12 years we've seen record low tax rates, the upper class benefiting the most, CEO pay go through the roof, all while job creation sucked and the middle-class disappeared. That is what has happened. And exactly what you and folks like Mitt Romney seem to ignore.

On paper, CEOs should be creating tons of jobs because "ideologically" they are the job creators. Unfortunately, in the real world this isn't happening.

"Job Creators" aren't creating jobs because they don't have to. The other classes lack purchasing power enough to warrant job creation.

Trickle-down economics have failed. Even one of their greatest advocates, Bruce Bartlett, has admitted this.

The true job creators are the other classes. CEOs will be forced to create jobs once the other classes have enough buying power to force job creation. Hence, why these handouts to the rich need to expire and we all need to get serious about what to do about the disappearing middle-class.

I agree with your over all point. We've had the Bush tax cuts for many years now and the economy is a lot worse than it was before those tax cuts. And at the same time, corporate profits are at an all time high, CEO (and execs in general) pay is through the roof, the stock market is doing fine, and the middle class is on life support.

I disagree that the middle class having purchasing power will create more jobs though. Yes, that absolutely HAS to happen before jobs will be created. But just that alone won't be enough.

The problem we have here is there are plenty of jobs being created, but they are all in China, India, Mexico, etc. We need to do something about these free trade agreements and tax loopholes that encourage companies to outsource.

As long as a company can hire 20 overseas workers for the price of 1 American, and there is no rule against it and even a tax break for doing it, then it will continue to happen. We can give the middle class purchasing power, they will show the corporations that there is a demand for more production, and the corporations will put a nice help wanted ad in the local Chinese newspaper.

The big distraction here is all this talk that we HAVE to lower taxes on the "job creators" in order to get jobs. And this lie is ironically being spread by the same folks who claim that the free market trumps all.

I say raise the taxes on the corporations and richest people, kill these horrible free trade agreements, and then let the free market take over from there.

You want to sell products in the USA, you better be here making these products and paying taxes. If you're against that, fine, go sell your products in India. If you actually do leave the USA, great, the free market will take over and someone else will take your place.

 

[asian_roger]

I agree with your over point. We've had the Bush tax cuts for many years now and the economy is a lot worse than it was before those tax cuts. And at the same time, corporate profits are at an all time high, CEO (and execs in general) pay is through the roof, the stock market is doing fine, and the middle class is on life support.

I disagree that the middle class having purchasing power will create more jobs though. Yes, that absolutely HAS to happen before jobs will be created. But just that alone won't be enough.

The problem we have here is there are plenty of jobs being created, but they are all in China, India, Mexico, etc. We need to do something about these free trade agreements and tax loopholes that encourage companies to outsource.

As long as a company can hire 20 overseas workers for the price of 1 American, and there is no rule against it and even a tax break for doing it, then it will continue to happen. We can give the middle class purchasing power, they will show the corporations that there is a demand for more production, and the corporations will put a nice help wanted ad in the local Chinese newspaper.

The big distraction here is all this talk that we HAVE to lower taxes on the "job creators" in order to get jobs. And this lie is ironically being spread by the same folks who claim that the free market trumps all.

I say raise the taxes on the corporations and richest people, kill these horrible free trade agreements, and then let the free market take over form there.

You want to sell products in the USA, you better be here making these products and paying taxes. If you're against that, fine, go sell your products in India. If you actually do leave the USA, great, the free market will take over and someone else will take your place.

Great idea, but hard to do when large corporations donate so much money and free private jet flights to politicians. You can bet that large corporations are spending bank to make sure everything works in their favor. Unless there is an unpleasant revolution, the people with money will continue to own our politicians.

 

[SaltyDawg]

Great idea, but hard to do when large corporations donate so much money and free private jet flights to politicians. You can bet that large corporations are spending bank to make sure everything works in their favor. Unless there is an unpleasant revolution, the people with money will continue to own our politicians.

I agree the system is so corrupt it will be difficult to fix. Only a fool would argue against that at this point. I was just saying that low tax rates on the richest won't help us, and buying power for the middle class is only half the problem.

 

[northeast]

One Brow,
I believe IRS Publication 925 will cover it. Franklin just pulled something out of his butt that was not a correct reference, to
just be a lazy bluffing bullsheeting blowhard.
Feel free to read it yourself.

While we are on the subject, what the heck is a "passive business" anyway? Is seems to me a contradiction in terms. It doesn't seem like a horse would be one, more likely the real estate that the horse is grazing on. Are rich people able to write off expenses on their extensive estates simply by sticking expensive pets on them? It sure seems like it -- a whole new topic. Why are all these passive businesses not classified simply as investments if they are passive? (serious question)

 

[Jazz Spazz]

The IRS does not sign off on anyone's taxes as proper.
For that matter, Deloitte and Touche probably does not either, beyond their own calculations.

Someone with Deloitte did sign the return, so I call that signing off on it.

As to the IRS, they can go back so many years but I'm pretty sure they would have someone check into a 1.6 million dollar return before sending the check.

 

[northeast]

Come on Spazz, you know what I mean. Most accountants are not going to take responsibility for bad inputs given them by the client, and they will have the client sign something to that effect. Are you serious, or are you BS'ing us?

and the IRS does not sign off on a return, although that was a nice job backtracking and re-spinning it, I'll give you that.

 

[northeast]

Salty and Thriller, you both make solid points, but I've got to lean towards Thriller. Without giving it much thought , my immediate reaction is that the transfer of wealth to the rich has been a hugely important factor on the jobs issues, and improvement by changing that probably was/is more feasible in the short term then rewriting and reversing NAFTA and globalization.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I guess it's always easier to put your head in the sand while repeating ideological mantra.

The point is, for 12 years we've seen record low tax rates, the upper class benefiting the most, CEO pay go through the roof, all while job creation sucked and the middle-class disappeared. That is what has happened. And exactly what you and folks like Mitt Romney seem to ignore.

On paper, CEOs should be creating tons of jobs because "ideologically" they are the job creators. Unfortunately, in the real world this isn't happening.

"Job Creators" aren't creating jobs because they don't have to. The other classes lack purchasing power enough to warrant job creation.

Trickle-down economics have failed. Even one of their greatest advocates, Bruce Bartlett, has admitted this.

The true job creators are the other classes. CEOs will be forced to create jobs once the other classes have enough buying power to force job creation. Hence, why these handouts to the rich need to expire and we all need to get serious about what to do about the disappearing middle-class.

I don't belong to any party, and you know next to nothing about me, so claiming I have my head in the sand and that I repeat ideological mantra is pure rubbish. That is just you playing politician and trying to smear my name, and is part of the reason I don't put much stock into anything you say. You seem to be the one spouting "ideological mantra".

How is it that the upper class benefit the most from the lower taxes? You keep saying that, but "I do not believe that means what you think it means." If we have record low tax rates, what was the prior record and when was that. What is the tax rate right now? Do you even know what you are talking about? I don't know how you can even see where my head is if yours is up that political donkey's behind.

How is raising taxes going to create jobs? Are you talking about government jobs? Is that the kind of job you want created?

I don't care about trickle down, for all I know you are trickling right now. Tell me this, how will higher taxes create jobs?
What are the handouts to the rich you are talking about? Do you have anything besides rhetoric, do you have anything of substance to show that there are handouts to the rich?

A company needs to be able to make money to be able to hire people. It takes time to recover from what the banks, and housing industry did to this country. I've seen companies go under because of it, I've seen plenty of friends lose jobs because of it, and I have seen only some of them find jobs. It always takes time to fix deep problems. These problems had and have next to nothing to do with too low of a tax rate.

 

[nightmare3983]

Why are all these passive businesses not classified simply as investments if they are passive? (serious question)

It mostly relates to when gains are recognized for tax purposes. So with passive income like rent from an apartment building you own, you would recognize that income immediately (to the extent that it exceeds passive losses) and pay taxes on it for the year you recognize the income. With an investment such as stocks, when the value of your stocks increase, you realize some income because your stocks are more valuable. But you don't recognize the gain and pay tax on it because the realized income doesn't actually put any money in your pocket. You would only recognize a gain or loss (and pay any applicable taxes) in the year you sell the investment.

EDIT: It seems this may only be part of it, because you could still have a gain or loss when you sell a passive business that you have recognized income on. Stupid taxes are fun to try and understand.

 

[franklin]

i do get a return but not as much as I put in. No I do not claim my daughters. I am not able to claim one of them at all. I let her claim the other.

That would suck ***. Do you claim head of household at least?

I'm sure you're extra glad you get a good chunk of your income shielded through the federal retirement program and medical benefits.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Come on Spazz, you know what I mean. Most accountants are not going to take responsibility for bad inputs given them by the client, and they will have the client sign something to that effect. Are you serious, or are you BS'ing us?

and the IRS does not sign off on a return, although that was a nice job backtracking and re-spinning it, I'll give you that.

Arthur Anderson was held responsible for audits that went through that they signed off on.
Why would tax returns be any different? Accountants, especially CPA's can be held responsible for stuff like that. Deloitte could be off the hook, but whoever signed the form would in the least have their name muddied for doing so.

If the IRS pays the money on the return, is that not the same as acceptance?
If you pay Costco for your bulk face cream, isn't that cash given the same as acceptance of the product?

 

[franklin]

I agree with your over all point. We've had the Bush tax cuts for many years now and the economy is a lot worse than it was before those tax cuts. And at the same time, corporate profits are at an all time high, CEO (and execs in general) pay is through the roof, the stock market is doing fine, and the middle class is on life support.

You mean the Obama and DNC tax cuts enacted under a democratically controlled house, senate, and executive.

The problem we have here is there are plenty of jobs being created, but they are all in China, India, Mexico, etc. We need to do something about these free trade agreements and tax loopholes that encourage companies to outsource.

Every dollar that leaves in trade must return. That's by definition, you should look it up sometime. You're propogating lies.

As long as a company can hire 20 overseas workers for the price of 1 American, and there is no rule against it and even a tax break for doing it, then it will continue to happen. We can give the middle class purchasing power, they will show the corporations that there is a demand for more production, and the corporations will put a nice help wanted ad in the local Chinese newspaper.

Americans save money at the checkout which creates jobs elsewhere. Everyone inside America gets more for less, and we end up getting it for almost free as we inflate the value of those dollars sent overseas away. If not, they are spent back into our economy creating higher tech jobs, which equals a stronger middle class.

 

[franklin]

And probably an even smaller percentage of the money he is hiding overseas. And that 45,000 times figure is debatable.

It's a conservative figure and I think you should let Northeast take this one. The tables, maximum benefit, and all the stuff that's necessary to make the calculations are easy enough to find.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I agree with your over all point. We've had the Bush tax cuts for many years now and the economy is a lot worse than it was before those tax cuts. And at the same time, corporate profits are at an all time high, CEO (and execs in general) pay is through the roof, the stock market is doing fine, and the middle class is on life support.

I disagree that the middle class having purchasing power will create more jobs though. Yes, that absolutely HAS to happen before jobs will be created. But just that alone won't be enough.

The problem we have here is there are plenty of jobs being created, but they are all in China, India, Mexico, etc. We need to do something about these free trade agreements and tax loopholes that encourage companies to outsource.

As long as a company can hire 20 overseas workers for the price of 1 American, and there is no rule against it and even a tax break for doing it, then it will continue to happen. We can give the middle class purchasing power, they will show the corporations that there is a demand for more production, and the corporations will put a nice help wanted ad in the local Chinese newspaper.

The big distraction here is all this talk that we HAVE to lower taxes on the "job creators" in order to get jobs. And this lie is ironically being spread by the same folks who claim that the free market trumps all.

I say raise the taxes on the corporations and richest people, kill these horrible free trade agreements, and then let the free market take over from there.

You want to sell products in the USA, you better be here making these products and paying taxes. If you're against that, fine, go sell your products in India. If you actually do leave the USA, great, the free market will take over and someone else will take your place.

Even better than just raising taxes on corp's and rich people... add to that the loopholes they want of tax breaks if they invest their money into US jobs, or companies that create US Jobs somehow. They will always look for the tax breaks, so give it to them... just funnel it into something that helps our nation. Better than cheaper products for the world, funnel it into US services, manufacturing, and whatever it takes. Then they get the breaks they are looking for and will find one way or another, but the "common americans" get some sort of benefit from this.

Believe it or not, I'm not necessarily against raising taxes for corporations and rich people, as long as it is done in such a way that it actually helps people.

 

[northeast]

Arthur Anderson was held responsible for audits that went through that they signed off on.
Why would tax returns be any different? Accountants, especially CPA's can be held responsible for stuff like that. Deloitte could be off the hook, but whoever signed the form would in the least have their name muddied for doing so.

If the IRS pays the money on the return, is that not the same as acceptance?
If you pay Costco for your bulk face cream, isn't that cash given the same as acceptance of the product?

audit does not equal tax return
regardless, I did not say that the accountant is not responsible for their work, but that this does not relieve the client of responsibility as well

 

[franklin]

Even better than just raising taxes on corp's and rich people... add to that the loopholes they want of tax breaks if they invest their money into US jobs, or companies that create US Jobs somehow. They will always look for the tax breaks, so give it to them... just funnel it into something that helps our nation. Better than cheaper products for the world, funnel it into US services, manufacturing, and whatever it takes. Then they get the breaks they are looking for and will find one way or another, but the "common americans" get some sort of benefit from this.

Believe it or not, I'm not necessarily against raising taxes for corporations and rich people, as long as it is done in such a way that it actually helps people.

That's a nice gesture but the Saltocrats of the world aren't interested in fixing anything they claim is wrong with America. That's why Obama stood back doing absolutely nothing for two years of full control. The Salty/Rev9/Thriller/Northeast types would rather watch the world burn than fix it because burning is the only way for them to achieve their goal of destroying everyone who's achieved anything.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

audit does not equal tax return
regardless, I did not say that the accountant is not responsible for their work, but that this does not relieve the client of responsibility as well

Okay, they are both responsible. I don't have a problem with that.

 

[northeast]

It's a conservative figure and I think you should let Northeast take this one. The tables, maximum benefit, and all the stuff that's necessary to make the calculations are easy enough to find.

all lies, as well as your previous post.
why don't you look it up FOR ONCE, quote your sources, and show us your calculations , so we can laugh at your BS.

 

[SaltyDawg]

You mean the Obama and DNC tax cuts enacted under a democratically controlled house, senate, and executive.

No, I mean the Bush tax cuts that Obama was forced to extend by a bunch of Republicans that had more filibusters than any other time in history.

Every dollar that leaves in trade must return. That's by definition, you should look it up sometime. You're propogating lies.

haha, hilarious. Too bad it's not "for every job that goes overseas another job must return." If that were the case then our economy would be fine. Putting another dollar in the CEO's pocket isn't doing much for this country anymore.

Americans save money at the checkout which creates jobs elsewhere. Everyone inside America gets more for less, and we end up getting it for almost free as we inflate the value of those dollars sent overseas away. If not, they are spent back into our economy creating higher tech jobs, which equals a stronger middle class.

It doesn't matter if stuff gets cheaper when the people who would be interested in that product don't even have a job. Unless they're literally giving the stuff away, of course. A 20% savings is little consolation to the guy who just had his job outsourced to China and can't find another job.

 

[PearlWatson]

That's a nice gesture but the Saltocrats of the world aren't interested in fixing anything they claim is wrong with America. That's why Obama stood back doing absolutely nothing for two years of full control. The Salty/Rev9/Thriller/Northeast types would rather watch the world burn than fix it because burning is the only way for them to achieve their goal of destroying everyone who's achieved anything.

Bunch of Nero's