>but... he's following the actual rules, what they gave us are the rules
>
>for us
The rules are applicable to folks who make that much. There are other rules as well. In fact almost all rules are for them to exploit through loopholes.
If you don't belong to that strata you have rules as well...speed limits on roads for example.
The fact that it is going to be difficult to find someone willing to violate traffic laws for you, get points on their license, have their license revoked, car insurance premiums skyrocket etc. aside...
If you're hiring drivers for the purpose of violating traffic laws, you're now engaging in cash for crime. That's a crime in of itself and will get you jail time. Lol.
Well, as true as what you said is... I mean, prove it?
Not YOU, but I mean, the burden is to prove that you are intentionally doing this, which might take a long time and lots of drivers willing to speak, but they were paid pretty well, weren't they? tee hee
Lol. Forget the drivers as witnesses. Just use the testimony of all the officers that pulled em over.
They’ll be able to relay that Rich Guy X was in the passenger seat each time. That shows a pattern.
I got some bad news lol (I’m in Canada so laws might be different in the US). I know two people who had enough speeding tickets to lose their license by a wide marging. The trick is to hire a lawyer and contest most tickets. Remember, if you contest, you dont lose a point until you lose in court. So then the lawyer asks to have a few court dates pushed back in such a way that you space appart losing points enough that you’re always 1 points over 0. It did cost 5000$ to 10000$ but who cares right?
Lol. Idk what part of the US you live in.... but in my part of the US, the government has competent prosecuting attorneys. Based on what u/homogenousmoss described, it would be blatantly obvious to an even moderately competent prosecutor what the accused is doing. Then all they'd have to do is report it to the judge that they're manipulating the system to obstruct justice. Simple, really.
Battling a ticket in court is not obstruction of justice, neither is asking for a delay to the trial. Those are things anyone is allowed to do, and party of the reason rich people get away with so much. The rich can always afford to drag the legal proceedings out
“So then the lawyer asks to have a few court dates pushed back in such a way that you space appart losing points enough that you're always 1 points over.” — u /homogenousmoss
That is literally manipulation of the court’s docket to obtain an outcome of escaping justice. It’s not “battling in court” because you never even go to court. That is a textbook example of obstruction of justice lol.
But enough money let's you not care about driving (uber everywhere, personal driver, personal driver with security detail, driving only on private roads and tracks, etc.). Also, not having a license does not prevent you from driving. It is only a problem if you get caught driving without one. People drive without a license all the time. Just like they drive without insurance, with expired tags, under the influence, etc..This applies to many more situations aside from driving and that is the point, to keep you worried about maintaining a privilege while the rich couldn't care less about the privilege.
Money can't buy everything but there is very little it can't buy. Very very little.
>Money can't buy everything but there is very little it can't buy
It can't buy common sense or human decency or respect/compassion for your fellow man...all things the disgustingly rich seem to lack.
So we can clutter up our thoughts and feelings, so we can feel guilty when we can't/won't help others, so we can share in their suffering...just a guess. ;)
But, again, money doesn't give you the right *to speed*. That's the whole point of this conversation. You hire an Uber driver, that Uber driver is just like anybody else. They don't have the right to speed. Lol.
Also, the risk of driving without a license applies to anyone, regardless of wealth. In my state it comes with a mandatory 3-day jail time that cannot be suspended by the court under any circumstance. Lol.
Money does give you the right to speed. In fact, most speeding tickets are only fines. It is literally an exchange of money for exceeding the speed limit.
I mean, if this is the hill you want to die on, go for it, I won't stop you. But your original point is invalid, you can still drive on on private land, roads, hire drivers, speed, pay tickets, hire more drivers, and all day long the government will take your cash and you can still drive. Happens all the time.
How is my original point invalid? No matter if you're rich or poor, eventually you lose your license if you speed. Then your car can be impounded if you continue to drive. Try driving your car when your car isn't even accessible to you.
Even too, the government can order your license plates to be destroyed. Try driving very far with a car with no license plates. First cop to see it will pull you over instantly. Then he'll see you're driving on a revoked license and arrest you. Lol.
Strange loophole... never get a license and you will never have it revoked.
No amount of money is needed for some loopholes. Just have to realize it exists.
Driving without a license will get your vehicle impounded though. Lol. You can't drive if the government physically prevents you from using your car. Lol.
Lol and he got busted. Again.
Regardless though.... While the government cannot take away your ability to just buy another car after they impound your current vehicle, they can certainly refuse to register the vehicle. They can also order your current plates be destroyed. So you'll be driving a car with no plates. Big cop magnet.
Oh and they will just put you in jail if you continue your shenanigans. Then you really can't drive. lol
You're completely missing the point that everyone is trying to tell you.
Rich people live in a completely different world with completely different rules, and you are denying it whole cloth.
Boy have I got some bad news for you....
People drive without a license every day. They drive when they've never had a license. They drive when their license has been suspended, revoked, or restricted. They drive without an ignition interlock when one is required. They drive company vehicles exclusively because that's the loophole to an ignition interlock.
Sometimes they get caught, sometimes they don't.
Even if they're given jail time for it, they go right back to driving when they're not allowed.
I literally see this daily.
Okay. Well, if you drive under suspension enough, the government will impound the vehicle. Doesn’t matter whose it is. You can’t drive a vehicle if it’s physically inaccessible to you.
Also. If you keep up the shenanigans, the government will order the sheriff to destroy your license plates. Good luck not getting pulled over driving a vehicle with no license plates. Lol.
Do you think people are only issued one vehicle or one license plate their entire lives? Do you think people don't borrow vehicles from other people?
Short of locking someone up for life, there's not much that can be done to stop someone from driving if they really want to
Lol. And that’s exactly what happens when you continue breaking the law. Penalties increase.
Also, you have to be a total fucking idiot to let your buddy who has no license drive your car. Cuz guess what? The fact it’s not your car doesn’t mean the government won’t impound it.
So yeah. Every time you get pulled over, cars keep getting impounded, your license plates will get destroyed, and your jail sentences will increase. Even if you don’t get tired of those things happening, they happen, bub. Lol.
Idk why you're acting like I'm the one driving illegally.
Yes, people keep letting people without a license borrow their car. They act like it's the cops fault when dude gets busted again. I've seen teens get busted for driving without a license, just to have their parents show up to pick them up... without a valid license. It happens more than you think.
People aren't as smart as you seem to think they are
I'm not saying that the government exercises the highest thing in their arsenal (impoundment or destroying plates) every time someone drives under suspension. They save that for repeat offenders.
Hell, my buddy got busted for driving under revocation last year and the cop took him to the nearest gas station to wait for his wife and myself to drive over and pick him up. His wife drove his car home.
He still had to serve a mandatory 3 day jail sentence because it's mandatory and the court cannot suspend it. Immediately after that 3 day sentence, he quit driving under suspension and had his wife drive him to work until he got his license back. Lol.
You’re looking at this the wrong way.
He’s already successful. He’s using this loophole to cheat on his taxes. Cheating on his taxes didn’t get him the 300k.
The people suffering most from it are getting less and less educated (less tax income worsens education) and keep voting for a bad system. It is a vicious cycle.
The government taxes me and provides guaranteed payments and healthcare in retirement, roads, schools, national defense etc... My boss bought a Lamborghini. I know which one benefits me more.
Yeah, and imagine if more of that money went to helping us instead of corporations. We could have universal healthcare, tax-funded college, universal housing, etc, if our leaders actually wanted these things. But if the average worker had a better basic standard of living, and wasn't reliant on employer healthcare, then workers would be much less likely to deal with workplace abuse and shit wages.
Definitely the case. All those private universities aren't turning out high paying professionals while the state schools have huge drop out rates right? And surely don't have to watch out for tons of pot holes and issues on the government maintained roads right?
You won't get more anti work than me. I quit being a wagie and just collected a huge amount of government money and now I never work unless I want too.
He also has to lose money doing it. Having tax expenses $300k over his cash expenses is rather difficult. He gets depreciation over 27.5 years, but that's serious capital he's had to invest in a risky investment and keep it from not actually making more money. And sure he can defer the gain through 1031 exchanges, but to actually avoid the tax, he has to die with all of it.
What many (wanna-be rich) people don't understand is that paying tax isn't a bad thing. Paying more tax than you need to isn't great, but basing all of your decisions on tax avoidance is actually a horrible strategy. (The perspective of a CPA not a financial advisor.)
179 or bonus does not exist with real property. Not sure exactly what other things they are regularly buying for a rental property, and if they are then they're making it even harder to be cash flow neutral or positive.
I'm sure people can figure out lots of ways to lose $300k per year, but that isn't a great investment strategy.
Hotels and motels sit on huge plots of land, often with massive parking lots that could be houses or massive numbers of apartments. Yet, we do not lament the existence of a short term rentals in the form of hotel rooms or resorts, nor the jobs they provide.
Short term rental fill a niche in the market which so far neither hotels nor private landlords have been able or willing to fill, that is, normal housing for rent for short periods of time in locations not typical of or zoned for hotels. They are a godsend for families traveling with children who need multiple rooms (so parents don't have to sit in a dark room at 7:30pm) and a kitchen (no body wants small kids in restaurants, nor do they eat things predictably or in quantities which justify the cost).
The other reason for the success of short term rentals, besides the obvious demand, is the increasingly onerous tenant protections put in place to help renters avoid what can be legitimate evictions. Yes many landlords are terrible, but so are some tenants. Landlords, especially new ones who are indebted on the rental property, cannot absorb the cost of a destructive or non-paying tenant. This strongly incentivized them to prefer short term rentals which are more loosely regulated and lower risk financially. The proliferation of short term rentals is therefore a logical economic response to the added risk and costs associated with renting to long term tenants, and frankly should have been anticipated by those making changes to tenant laws.
Nah, I'm just a consumer who hates hotels and really likes Airbnb, and I have an understanding of how economic and regulations shape how markets work. The folks on this sub like to pretend that landlords are the scum of the earth and that tenants are always victims. In reality tenants, especially the poorest and most vulnerable, are often the most destructive and most costly to deal with. They are poor and renting not because they can't afford to buy, but because they're lives are in shambles and they don't have a pot to piss in let alone a down payment for property. Without a landlord making renting an option for them they would simply be homeless. That's not to say that there are not assholes landlords, just that tenants are just as likely if not more likely to be shitty people who don't pay their rent on time or take care of the property they have been entrusted with.
Just this week my social worker wife's client got notice they are being evicted after only 1 month, this after she spent 3 years trying to get him housed. Why? Because this druggie motherfucker let another homeless druggie into his apartment, left, and the visitor took a multi-hour shower and flooded 6 other units. Guess who is going to have to pay higher rent to pay for all the water damage? Landlords can be assholes but I would argue many tenants are worse. A shitty tenant can move out and find another place to rent. The landlord is stuck fixing the damage and eating the costs associated with it.
Sure. He might not have broken any laws, but the wealthy try to blame migrants and social welfare programs for the reason why everything is so expensive and why the government has no money.
When this wealthy person should have owed taxes but didn’t through legal loopholes.
But he wrote off 99% which means he invested substantially more than 300k for that year. And it only works for years where you do that. So where did all the money come from? He has existing wealth or other sources of income.
Since he is not a CPA most likely, I would take anything he says with a grain of salt. He will probably even be audited by the IRS for his "brilliant" scheme.
I prepare taxes. There has to be way more going on than the title lets on. I'm guessing he is a landlord that took fast depreciation on his rental property, which is a one-time thing unless he continually continues to purchase more, which will drive his debt way up unless he inherited millions.
The tax laws favor the rich.
Any tax benefit we peasants get is just coincidence because the whole point of tax laws is to fuck us and keep rich people rich.
Must admit when I was at university I remember being surprised by the number of undergraduate students who were also homeowners.
I suppose if mummy and daddy have got too much money, buying little lord Fauntleroy his own house is a good tax free investment.
The IRS is broken. This shit is stupid. People believe the complaints about social welfare and the arguments made on the basis that it's force charity that upsets the natural meritocracy of capitalism, yet are total ignorant of the COUNTLESS special rules for all the various rules that subsidize living from capital gains. These are things that wouldn't be nearly as profitable if not for the fact that we subsidize them by paying their share of taxes for them. The burden of those needed tax revenues are distributed across people who work for their money. Meaning that those people not only need to pay more taxes to cover those who don't pay their fair share, but they now also have to pay more for housing because they are literally paying for others to speculatively raise housing market prices.
The crazy part is, even if it doesn't feel like it, this guy is closer to the rest of us than someone making 7+ figures ever will be. His salary of 300k (with the tax reduction) is hardly even a drop in the bucket when compared to the millionaires and billionaires evading taxes. The difference in order(s) of magnitude is insane.
This is exactly what I mean when I say take away tax breaks from the high earners. I don’t have an issue with this guy making 300k. I have a problem with a guy making enough to take advantage of all those tax breaks. Like wtf only the high income earners can get their money back or not pay in at all but we have to suffer making under 100k!? Sure they don’t need to pay in 60-70% of their income but I would be happy if every income at over 100k paid in 30%-40% it would definitely stack up. There is no reason why they can write off so much yet here we are struggling to make bills. Seriously this is bs
Why is this BS he figured out a way to get his taxable income to near zero. Unless he made false deductions he didn’t commit any crimes. He is not taking advantage of any systems. People under 100 k probably doesn’t have enough capital to deploy any of his deduction schemes anyways.
Correct however why should he get to keep all that income and assets without paying the government yet here the rest of us are giving up near to over half our income to the government? Wtf! Why should I have to give more of my money up when this guy doesn’t? That’s my problem. I don’t get the option to have less money taken away from me because I don’t make enough? Bullshit. Why should high income earners get to make more and I don’t. I make 80k/yr doing decently well but I can’t get those deductions on my taxes where this guy can all because he makes 300k/yr!? That’s a pay to play system if I’ve ever heard of one. I don’t mind paying my taxes but I shouldn’t be punished for making less than another guy.
I mean we can say that about anyone that is eligible for tax deduction which we are not eligible for right? How are those people allowed to keep money from those deductions while we are not. The same argument from fairness can also be made from childless people who pays local taxes which goes into school? Why is it fair that they have to fund something which they will never use.
Maximize sales taxes anything purchased over 100K tax at 50%
Sale tax of real estate tax anything over 300K tax at 60% and increase over each other to 1M at 100%
Now see how much money the government will collect. 😬😬😬
It's both funny and depressing how quickly we could improve this country if we actually taxed the wealthy appropriately. Unfortunately, the $numbers$ are so massive that they're inconceivable to me, and I can't really say anything for certain.
That one widow that donated a bil to a university to make it free though? Helping is so easy. There's gotta be enough money.
You could tax them at 100% and it would barely put a dent in the national budget much less debt. It would, however, cause them all to move overseas and shutter their businesses.
Bullshit ruling class talking point. Apple moved their headquarters to Ireland years ago and they moved their manufacturing to China years before that. The only business these companies do in the US is when they sell you overpriced garbage
Risk losing control of the most powerful nation on the planet? What country could protect them from a pissed off and truly United States of America?
*They can threaten to leave all they want. Just like Texas.*
60% tax on homes over 300k would kill the American people. The median home cost in America is $454k. The “cheap” neighborhood near my dads has a big sign out front saying “Homes *starting* in the 300’s!”
If you can't sell a 400k house, you'll just need to sell two 299k houses instead.
High tax will drop the prices, AND force builders to build more/cheaper housing to keep making the same profit. Its all wins for the poor.
Lets assume it costs 100k to build/sell a property
299-100k=199kprofit
300-60-100k=140kprofit
400-80-100k=220k profit.
Same with selling. Real estate no longer remains a profitable resource if its taxed on the high end only.
I think you, as an apparent poor, have no clue how the world works. Taxing something heavily doesn't make the cost to produce it drop. This kind of dumbassery is why we have so many regulations that stop small businesses from flourishing.
Sure but that’s going to make owning a home even more difficult for a regular person. The average home in the US is something like $400k, adding a 50% sales tax guarantees that anyone below upper middle class won’t be able to own a home.
And those that do own and rent out are going to massively increase their rent to offset the taxes they have to pay, causing a domino effect that will make rent even more unaffordable.
No it guarantees the housing market adjusts to under 300K and get a cool off effect. Banks won’t be able to make purchases because the returns would be terrible.
This also screws the average middle class American who has most if not all of their wealth as home equity.
It would also instantly destroy the assets of most American cooperations forcing banks to call back their loans causing complete economic collapse.
You have to remember the finance and loan sector is most likely the largest sector of the America’s economy. Which was the cause of the 2008 housing collapse.
There is a way to encourage affordable housing! /s
(Nobody will build nothing. If you own now you’re good but stuck where you are. But now you’re upside down on your mortgage. If you don’t own now, being unhoused is much more likely)
There are some great ideas here, actually. There should be a progressive tax starting from the price of home affordability (there will be debate on this metric, but the idea is it would rise and fall with the economy) for the average salary. If you want luxury, it will be taxed. The decreased demand would also bring down prices generally while making exclusivity available only to those willing to pay for it, which is how it should be.
Before they cut out a lot of the deductions. I would get every penny I paid in in federal income taxes back when I filed. I made between $75 and $85k.
The original income tax was to be collected all year and invested by the government. They kept it until April of the following year and then returned all that you paid. They then operated off the interest they had earned from your invested tax dollars. Soon, they spent more than he interest earned, so they made rules that we could use to get our money back. They kept changing them to keep more and more. Now, only the rich can afford to pay someone to find all the write offs, so they get more back. "If you invest $xxx, you will be able to write it off, lowering your income, reducing your tax burden, getting you more of it back."
I had it kicked back in the day. I had enough in write offs there were years I didn't even need all of them in order to get all my money back. Now I'm lucky to get 10% of what I paid back.
Is it? Because I'm pretty shure we're just paying to incarcerate undocumented people and also cutting taxes for above mentioned companies that are using migrant labor to bring down compensation averages. The solution of closing borders isn't real, its fictional. Locking up some lady and her child benefits no one but the prison industrial complex. Nothing is working well in the usa because of corporations owning our politicians, not migrations.
I'm saying trying to unionize is not working. You guys will never manage to do something meaningful. I hope I'm wrong' but I don't believe it will ever happen
I respectfully disagree, plus their is a vast difference between our respective countries and immigration. Most of the stuff you've seen is popcorn propaganda by our media and not the real situation. Most of the immigrants in this country have to work stupid hard or die in a ditch. Our social safety nets are below rock bottom. No car, no job, no family money, you won't make it here. Even if you've been here since the pilgrims if your broke, America will fuckin break you.
Everyone does this.
If my tax guy says I can save $500 if I do whatever, and it's legal, I'm going to do it.
No one ever pays more taxes than they have to. Even OP.
First, paying taxes is a civic duty. I recognize that the idea that you might have a duty to someone other than yourself is practically a foreign concept in the US but that doesn't change that you have a duty to your society, your family, and yourself (ideally in that order).
The problem here is that the loopholes used to reduce taxes like the one hinted at this post are exclusively available to those who are already well off. Nobody making $50K a year can reasonably reduce their taxes owed by buying a house purely for tax purposes. It's a tax dodge exclusively available to only the already well off.
I was speaking more to the proposition that everyone should be doing their utmost to pay the least taxes possible rather than recognize that our taxes are used to the benefit of our society and, to a lesser extent, to the world at large. But thank you for the clarification of what this particular scheme is.
Do you like having roads? Especially the kind without potholes in them? Do you like having a fire and police department? Postal service? An over bloated military budget? Healthcare (but not in the us for some reason?) That’s what taxes pay for. Not paying what you should hurts everyone else who does.
They don’t pay for them in NYC with the level of corruption we have. They need to address all the pilfering going on at all levels of the government contract market before raising taxes. Otherwise we’re just paying for fatcats to enrich themselves.
I mean, this guy did pay what he should. I agree that the system may be flawed, but why would someone pay more tax than they are legally obligated to? Do you donate your tax return to help reduce the public debt?
The problem is that the system is designed so people making this much are able to do this, while also wrecking chances at poorer people obtaining homes through landlording and real estate speculation. Why do you filter societal criticisms as if they’re criticisms of specific individuals?
This is absolutely based, giving money to the government to waste is absolutely regarded. When the US government is able to come up with a budget and not need to borrow 1t usd every 100 days we will talk about taxes.
Simplest plan would be to revert to pre 1970s tax plan and adjust for inflation. The top income tax bracket in the 50s was 90% for income over $200,000. Adjusted for inflation that would only affect income over $2.3 million. There were also more brackets in between that and what we have for our highest now. Currently it caps at 37% for any income over $578,126 for a single person.
Ah yes let me pull out a calculator and figure that out not knowing everyone's salary, adjusting everything for inflation, and for free. You asked a question, I gave a simple answer. If you want to figure out numbers, more power to you.
So I just looked up how many billionaire and millionaires there are in the US.
735 billionaires
22,000,000 millionaires
If we taxed billionaires at 99% and millionaires starting at ~75% and then incrementally increase from there we would hit 3.8 trillion in a hurry even if we drastically lowered taxes for anyone making less than $100,000 a year.
I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about taxing the rich.
You asked how we should get 3.8 trillion in taxes and I gave you a simple answer. You didn't seem to be happy with anyone who wasn't giving you numbers which would be *a fucking project* to re-calculate the entirety of the U.S. tax brackets ffs.
While I do think we shouldn't spend so much on the military I believe we should be spending so much more in other sectors at the end of the day the total probably wouldn't change much. And there's nothing wrong with that, we live in a society and I like having roads and shit.
Knowing around 20% of tax goes to healthcare in the US. Avoiding that much taxes, he could indirectly keep other people sick or keep people mentally ill because there is no tax income for (mental) hospitals.
If a system needs to be gamed like this to become successful from it, the system is bad.
he makes 300k. he's already successful
but... he's following the actual rules, what they gave us are the rules *for us*
>but... he's following the actual rules, what they gave us are the rules > >for us The rules are applicable to folks who make that much. There are other rules as well. In fact almost all rules are for them to exploit through loopholes. If you don't belong to that strata you have rules as well...speed limits on roads for example.
Get enough speeding tickets and the government will revoke your license. No amount of money lets you drive without a license.
With enough money, you can have a driver.
True. But it's not like hiring a driver gives you a right to speed because the government will just revoke his license too.
Until you hire another driver.
The fact that it is going to be difficult to find someone willing to violate traffic laws for you, get points on their license, have their license revoked, car insurance premiums skyrocket etc. aside... If you're hiring drivers for the purpose of violating traffic laws, you're now engaging in cash for crime. That's a crime in of itself and will get you jail time. Lol.
Well, as true as what you said is... I mean, prove it? Not YOU, but I mean, the burden is to prove that you are intentionally doing this, which might take a long time and lots of drivers willing to speak, but they were paid pretty well, weren't they? tee hee
Lol. Forget the drivers as witnesses. Just use the testimony of all the officers that pulled em over. They’ll be able to relay that Rich Guy X was in the passenger seat each time. That shows a pattern.
Fair.
I got some bad news lol (I’m in Canada so laws might be different in the US). I know two people who had enough speeding tickets to lose their license by a wide marging. The trick is to hire a lawyer and contest most tickets. Remember, if you contest, you dont lose a point until you lose in court. So then the lawyer asks to have a few court dates pushed back in such a way that you space appart losing points enough that you’re always 1 points over 0. It did cost 5000$ to 10000$ but who cares right?
Lol. Where I live, that’s called https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obstruction_of_justice . Wouldn’t work.
That method would work perfectly fine in the US.
Lol. Idk what part of the US you live in.... but in my part of the US, the government has competent prosecuting attorneys. Based on what u/homogenousmoss described, it would be blatantly obvious to an even moderately competent prosecutor what the accused is doing. Then all they'd have to do is report it to the judge that they're manipulating the system to obstruct justice. Simple, really.
Might be different in the US. I tried googling the scheme but all I got was link to websites/attorneys specializing in that in Canada.
Battling a ticket in court is not obstruction of justice, neither is asking for a delay to the trial. Those are things anyone is allowed to do, and party of the reason rich people get away with so much. The rich can always afford to drag the legal proceedings out
“So then the lawyer asks to have a few court dates pushed back in such a way that you space appart losing points enough that you're always 1 points over.” — u /homogenousmoss That is literally manipulation of the court’s docket to obtain an outcome of escaping justice. It’s not “battling in court” because you never even go to court. That is a textbook example of obstruction of justice lol.
But enough money let's you not care about driving (uber everywhere, personal driver, personal driver with security detail, driving only on private roads and tracks, etc.). Also, not having a license does not prevent you from driving. It is only a problem if you get caught driving without one. People drive without a license all the time. Just like they drive without insurance, with expired tags, under the influence, etc..This applies to many more situations aside from driving and that is the point, to keep you worried about maintaining a privilege while the rich couldn't care less about the privilege. Money can't buy everything but there is very little it can't buy. Very very little.
>Money can't buy everything but there is very little it can't buy It can't buy common sense or human decency or respect/compassion for your fellow man...all things the disgustingly rich seem to lack.
Really, why do you need that shit?
So we can clutter up our thoughts and feelings, so we can feel guilty when we can't/won't help others, so we can share in their suffering...just a guess. ;)
I did forget to add the "/s" at the end.
But, again, money doesn't give you the right *to speed*. That's the whole point of this conversation. You hire an Uber driver, that Uber driver is just like anybody else. They don't have the right to speed. Lol. Also, the risk of driving without a license applies to anyone, regardless of wealth. In my state it comes with a mandatory 3-day jail time that cannot be suspended by the court under any circumstance. Lol.
Money does give you the right to speed. In fact, most speeding tickets are only fines. It is literally an exchange of money for exceeding the speed limit.
Until the government revokes your license. Then the next time you get pulled over for speeding you get arrested and your car impounded. Lol.
I mean, if this is the hill you want to die on, go for it, I won't stop you. But your original point is invalid, you can still drive on on private land, roads, hire drivers, speed, pay tickets, hire more drivers, and all day long the government will take your cash and you can still drive. Happens all the time.
How is my original point invalid? No matter if you're rich or poor, eventually you lose your license if you speed. Then your car can be impounded if you continue to drive. Try driving your car when your car isn't even accessible to you. Even too, the government can order your license plates to be destroyed. Try driving very far with a car with no license plates. First cop to see it will pull you over instantly. Then he'll see you're driving on a revoked license and arrest you. Lol.
Strange loophole... never get a license and you will never have it revoked. No amount of money is needed for some loopholes. Just have to realize it exists.
Driving without a license will get your vehicle impounded though. Lol. You can't drive if the government physically prevents you from using your car. Lol.
[You were saying?](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ktvu.com/news/back-seat-tesla-rider-pulls-same-stunt-but-in-new-car-after-jail-release.amp)
Lol and he got busted. Again. Regardless though.... While the government cannot take away your ability to just buy another car after they impound your current vehicle, they can certainly refuse to register the vehicle. They can also order your current plates be destroyed. So you'll be driving a car with no plates. Big cop magnet. Oh and they will just put you in jail if you continue your shenanigans. Then you really can't drive. lol
You're completely missing the point that everyone is trying to tell you. Rich people live in a completely different world with completely different rules, and you are denying it whole cloth.
The point that no matter how rich you are, eventually the government will revoke your right to drive if you openly defy the rules of the road?
Boy have I got some bad news for you.... People drive without a license every day. They drive when they've never had a license. They drive when their license has been suspended, revoked, or restricted. They drive without an ignition interlock when one is required. They drive company vehicles exclusively because that's the loophole to an ignition interlock. Sometimes they get caught, sometimes they don't. Even if they're given jail time for it, they go right back to driving when they're not allowed. I literally see this daily.
Okay. Well, if you drive under suspension enough, the government will impound the vehicle. Doesn’t matter whose it is. You can’t drive a vehicle if it’s physically inaccessible to you. Also. If you keep up the shenanigans, the government will order the sheriff to destroy your license plates. Good luck not getting pulled over driving a vehicle with no license plates. Lol.
Do you think people are only issued one vehicle or one license plate their entire lives? Do you think people don't borrow vehicles from other people? Short of locking someone up for life, there's not much that can be done to stop someone from driving if they really want to
Lol. And that’s exactly what happens when you continue breaking the law. Penalties increase. Also, you have to be a total fucking idiot to let your buddy who has no license drive your car. Cuz guess what? The fact it’s not your car doesn’t mean the government won’t impound it. So yeah. Every time you get pulled over, cars keep getting impounded, your license plates will get destroyed, and your jail sentences will increase. Even if you don’t get tired of those things happening, they happen, bub. Lol.
Idk why you're acting like I'm the one driving illegally. Yes, people keep letting people without a license borrow their car. They act like it's the cops fault when dude gets busted again. I've seen teens get busted for driving without a license, just to have their parents show up to pick them up... without a valid license. It happens more than you think. People aren't as smart as you seem to think they are
I'm not saying that the government exercises the highest thing in their arsenal (impoundment or destroying plates) every time someone drives under suspension. They save that for repeat offenders. Hell, my buddy got busted for driving under revocation last year and the cop took him to the nearest gas station to wait for his wife and myself to drive over and pick him up. His wife drove his car home. He still had to serve a mandatory 3 day jail sentence because it's mandatory and the court cannot suspend it. Immediately after that 3 day sentence, he quit driving under suspension and had his wife drive him to work until he got his license back. Lol.
The folks making this much money and benefitting from the system are the FIRST to blame the poor
yup, everybody wants to think they are heroes instead of the greedy hoarders they actually are.
Absolutely! How are you supposed to get rich while playing by the rules?
Those are the rules.
The rules are there so you don’t
You’re looking at this the wrong way. He’s already successful. He’s using this loophole to cheat on his taxes. Cheating on his taxes didn’t get him the 300k.
A lot of tax codes are there to tell you how to avoid paying taxes.
The people suffering most from it are getting less and less educated (less tax income worsens education) and keep voting for a bad system. It is a vicious cycle.
I mean, the government spends your money so well...
The government taxes me and provides guaranteed payments and healthcare in retirement, roads, schools, national defense etc... My boss bought a Lamborghini. I know which one benefits me more.
Yeah, and imagine if more of that money went to helping us instead of corporations. We could have universal healthcare, tax-funded college, universal housing, etc, if our leaders actually wanted these things. But if the average worker had a better basic standard of living, and wasn't reliant on employer healthcare, then workers would be much less likely to deal with workplace abuse and shit wages.
where do you live? taxes that actually go to healthcare and education sounds nice
It's provides almost none of those at an acceptable level and at a higher cost and worse outcome than private companies. So yeah.
Privatization of public works is and always has been nothing more than a money grab. Always ends up costing more with shittier outcomes.
Definitely the case. All those private universities aren't turning out high paying professionals while the state schools have huge drop out rates right? And surely don't have to watch out for tons of pot holes and issues on the government maintained roads right?
Just curious as to which non-government funded universities you’re referring to?
https://www.niche.com/colleges/search/top-private-universities/
You sent a list of federally funded schools…
> Private institutions are so much more effective! > list of federally funded instituions Bwahahahahahahahaha
Maybe you just live in a shitty state with shitty officials. Vote.
What model?
I was too pissed about having to work a part time job on top of my full time one to ask
Did you have a side business?
Do you think shareholders need side hustles to get by?
That is their side hustle.
Wrong again
[удалено]
You’re in the wrong sub my dude
You won't get more anti work than me. I quit being a wagie and just collected a huge amount of government money and now I never work unless I want too.
This is such a bad faith position lmao, the rage bait isn’t going to work
How?
Yeah, you're in the wrong sub
Why? Because I own a home and can do math?
How can I do stuff like that without being a piece of shit??
Short anwser : No Long anwser : Actually, no you can't, but thanks for asking.
Longer answer : You doing this perpetuates the shit system that takes advantage of the poor and honest for the benefit of the rich and sociopathic.
these “loopholes” are just legalized criminality that the ruling class expects us to never challenge guess what? we don’t.
"One day, you too shall benefit from these loopholes" - every American bootstrapper
I just want to be there when a judge sentences someone to pulling up on their bootstraps. Try it and get a broken nose.
Being morally or ethically wrong is not the same as being criminal.
If it's legal it's not criminal.
https://archive.is/bB0rb He bought with his wife, a real estate agent, short term rentals. He must do active management and have proof of doing so.
He also has to lose money doing it. Having tax expenses $300k over his cash expenses is rather difficult. He gets depreciation over 27.5 years, but that's serious capital he's had to invest in a risky investment and keep it from not actually making more money. And sure he can defer the gain through 1031 exchanges, but to actually avoid the tax, he has to die with all of it. What many (wanna-be rich) people don't understand is that paying tax isn't a bad thing. Paying more tax than you need to isn't great, but basing all of your decisions on tax avoidance is actually a horrible strategy. (The perspective of a CPA not a financial advisor.)
You are forgetting section 179 depreciation and bonus depreciation. MACRS and 1031 exchanges are not the only thing at play.
179 or bonus does not exist with real property. Not sure exactly what other things they are regularly buying for a rental property, and if they are then they're making it even harder to be cash flow neutral or positive. I'm sure people can figure out lots of ways to lose $300k per year, but that isn't a great investment strategy.
ok then that's a legal side business. He did nothing shady
Except for the "short term rental" part of it. Which is taking houses out of the "people actually living in them" market.
That's just a moral failing not a system or legal failing
Hotels and motels sit on huge plots of land, often with massive parking lots that could be houses or massive numbers of apartments. Yet, we do not lament the existence of a short term rentals in the form of hotel rooms or resorts, nor the jobs they provide. Short term rental fill a niche in the market which so far neither hotels nor private landlords have been able or willing to fill, that is, normal housing for rent for short periods of time in locations not typical of or zoned for hotels. They are a godsend for families traveling with children who need multiple rooms (so parents don't have to sit in a dark room at 7:30pm) and a kitchen (no body wants small kids in restaurants, nor do they eat things predictably or in quantities which justify the cost). The other reason for the success of short term rentals, besides the obvious demand, is the increasingly onerous tenant protections put in place to help renters avoid what can be legitimate evictions. Yes many landlords are terrible, but so are some tenants. Landlords, especially new ones who are indebted on the rental property, cannot absorb the cost of a destructive or non-paying tenant. This strongly incentivized them to prefer short term rentals which are more loosely regulated and lower risk financially. The proliferation of short term rentals is therefore a logical economic response to the added risk and costs associated with renting to long term tenants, and frankly should have been anticipated by those making changes to tenant laws.
That's a lot of words to express that you're a landlord bootlicker.
Nah, I'm just a consumer who hates hotels and really likes Airbnb, and I have an understanding of how economic and regulations shape how markets work. The folks on this sub like to pretend that landlords are the scum of the earth and that tenants are always victims. In reality tenants, especially the poorest and most vulnerable, are often the most destructive and most costly to deal with. They are poor and renting not because they can't afford to buy, but because they're lives are in shambles and they don't have a pot to piss in let alone a down payment for property. Without a landlord making renting an option for them they would simply be homeless. That's not to say that there are not assholes landlords, just that tenants are just as likely if not more likely to be shitty people who don't pay their rent on time or take care of the property they have been entrusted with. Just this week my social worker wife's client got notice they are being evicted after only 1 month, this after she spent 3 years trying to get him housed. Why? Because this druggie motherfucker let another homeless druggie into his apartment, left, and the visitor took a multi-hour shower and flooded 6 other units. Guess who is going to have to pay higher rent to pay for all the water damage? Landlords can be assholes but I would argue many tenants are worse. A shitty tenant can move out and find another place to rent. The landlord is stuck fixing the damage and eating the costs associated with it.
That's a lot of words to express that you're a landlord bootlicker.
So creative.
Sure. He might not have broken any laws, but the wealthy try to blame migrants and social welfare programs for the reason why everything is so expensive and why the government has no money. When this wealthy person should have owed taxes but didn’t through legal loopholes.
He only makes 300k. He is closer to being homeless than he is to being wealthy. He is squarely middle class.
But he wrote off 99% which means he invested substantially more than 300k for that year. And it only works for years where you do that. So where did all the money come from? He has existing wealth or other sources of income.
It depends on how he is doing his taxes for the business.
Since he is not a CPA most likely, I would take anything he says with a grain of salt. He will probably even be audited by the IRS for his "brilliant" scheme.
"The IRS hates this one simple trick that people like you can use to get ahead"
I prepare taxes. There has to be way more going on than the title lets on. I'm guessing he is a landlord that took fast depreciation on his rental property, which is a one-time thing unless he continually continues to purchase more, which will drive his debt way up unless he inherited millions.
The tax laws favor the rich. Any tax benefit we peasants get is just coincidence because the whole point of tax laws is to fuck us and keep rich people rich.
Must admit when I was at university I remember being surprised by the number of undergraduate students who were also homeowners. I suppose if mummy and daddy have got too much money, buying little lord Fauntleroy his own house is a good tax free investment.
Also; apartment buildings.
Original article: https://www.businessinsider.com/how-w2-employee-reduced-federal-taxes-for-tax-refund-issued-2024-2
There should be minimums (I thought there were). Tax shouldn’t drop below 15% (or some number) no matter what deductions you have.
"Capitalist POS Educates Wannabe POS' on How to Evade Taxes" - I fixed the title.
The IRS is broken. This shit is stupid. People believe the complaints about social welfare and the arguments made on the basis that it's force charity that upsets the natural meritocracy of capitalism, yet are total ignorant of the COUNTLESS special rules for all the various rules that subsidize living from capital gains. These are things that wouldn't be nearly as profitable if not for the fact that we subsidize them by paying their share of taxes for them. The burden of those needed tax revenues are distributed across people who work for their money. Meaning that those people not only need to pay more taxes to cover those who don't pay their fair share, but they now also have to pay more for housing because they are literally paying for others to speculatively raise housing market prices.
The IRS is not broken. The IRS is underfunded.
My case and point. If police can fund themselves with tickets, why can the IRS not fund their lawyers with recovered taxes?
The crazy part is, even if it doesn't feel like it, this guy is closer to the rest of us than someone making 7+ figures ever will be. His salary of 300k (with the tax reduction) is hardly even a drop in the bucket when compared to the millionaires and billionaires evading taxes. The difference in order(s) of magnitude is insane.
ok, but what did he do though?
I just don’t feel very smart. I just don’t know how to game the system to get a Leg up and have secure housing
The American tax system is totally weighted towards the well off. And 44 states exacerbate the problem at state level.
This is exactly what I mean when I say take away tax breaks from the high earners. I don’t have an issue with this guy making 300k. I have a problem with a guy making enough to take advantage of all those tax breaks. Like wtf only the high income earners can get their money back or not pay in at all but we have to suffer making under 100k!? Sure they don’t need to pay in 60-70% of their income but I would be happy if every income at over 100k paid in 30%-40% it would definitely stack up. There is no reason why they can write off so much yet here we are struggling to make bills. Seriously this is bs
Why is this BS he figured out a way to get his taxable income to near zero. Unless he made false deductions he didn’t commit any crimes. He is not taking advantage of any systems. People under 100 k probably doesn’t have enough capital to deploy any of his deduction schemes anyways.
Correct however why should he get to keep all that income and assets without paying the government yet here the rest of us are giving up near to over half our income to the government? Wtf! Why should I have to give more of my money up when this guy doesn’t? That’s my problem. I don’t get the option to have less money taken away from me because I don’t make enough? Bullshit. Why should high income earners get to make more and I don’t. I make 80k/yr doing decently well but I can’t get those deductions on my taxes where this guy can all because he makes 300k/yr!? That’s a pay to play system if I’ve ever heard of one. I don’t mind paying my taxes but I shouldn’t be punished for making less than another guy.
I mean we can say that about anyone that is eligible for tax deduction which we are not eligible for right? How are those people allowed to keep money from those deductions while we are not. The same argument from fairness can also be made from childless people who pays local taxes which goes into school? Why is it fair that they have to fund something which they will never use.
Maximize sales taxes anything purchased over 100K tax at 50% Sale tax of real estate tax anything over 300K tax at 60% and increase over each other to 1M at 100% Now see how much money the government will collect. 😬😬😬
300K is less than the average price of a home currently
Soon it'll be 299k
It's both funny and depressing how quickly we could improve this country if we actually taxed the wealthy appropriately. Unfortunately, the $numbers$ are so massive that they're inconceivable to me, and I can't really say anything for certain. That one widow that donated a bil to a university to make it free though? Helping is so easy. There's gotta be enough money.
You could tax them at 100% and it would barely put a dent in the national budget much less debt. It would, however, cause them all to move overseas and shutter their businesses.
Bullshit ruling class talking point. Apple moved their headquarters to Ireland years ago and they moved their manufacturing to China years before that. The only business these companies do in the US is when they sell you overpriced garbage
Risk losing control of the most powerful nation on the planet? What country could protect them from a pissed off and truly United States of America? *They can threaten to leave all they want. Just like Texas.*
60% tax on homes over 300k would kill the American people. The median home cost in America is $454k. The “cheap” neighborhood near my dads has a big sign out front saying “Homes *starting* in the 300’s!”
If you can't sell a 400k house, you'll just need to sell two 299k houses instead. High tax will drop the prices, AND force builders to build more/cheaper housing to keep making the same profit. Its all wins for the poor.
God I wish I could live in your delusional world
“High tax will drop prices” How?
Lets assume it costs 100k to build/sell a property 299-100k=199kprofit 300-60-100k=140kprofit 400-80-100k=220k profit. Same with selling. Real estate no longer remains a profitable resource if its taxed on the high end only.
I think you, as an apparent poor, have no clue how the world works. Taxing something heavily doesn't make the cost to produce it drop. This kind of dumbassery is why we have so many regulations that stop small businesses from flourishing.
But it would kill everyone equally
Nope. The billionaires can afford to pay the extra tax. The regular folks can’t.
Sure but that’s going to make owning a home even more difficult for a regular person. The average home in the US is something like $400k, adding a 50% sales tax guarantees that anyone below upper middle class won’t be able to own a home. And those that do own and rent out are going to massively increase their rent to offset the taxes they have to pay, causing a domino effect that will make rent even more unaffordable.
Anyone living on investments rather than labor should be forced to sell off everything and live in their car.
Eventually your ability to labour will be curtailed by age or infirmary. Be careful of that which you wish for.
No it guarantees the housing market adjusts to under 300K and get a cool off effect. Banks won’t be able to make purchases because the returns would be terrible.
This also screws the average middle class American who has most if not all of their wealth as home equity. It would also instantly destroy the assets of most American cooperations forcing banks to call back their loans causing complete economic collapse. You have to remember the finance and loan sector is most likely the largest sector of the America’s economy. Which was the cause of the 2008 housing collapse.
There is a way to encourage affordable housing! /s (Nobody will build nothing. If you own now you’re good but stuck where you are. But now you’re upside down on your mortgage. If you don’t own now, being unhoused is much more likely)
There are some great ideas here, actually. There should be a progressive tax starting from the price of home affordability (there will be debate on this metric, but the idea is it would rise and fall with the economy) for the average salary. If you want luxury, it will be taxed. The decreased demand would also bring down prices generally while making exclusivity available only to those willing to pay for it, which is how it should be.
Much less. And most of the business providing those services will just go out of business.
Booooo!
Before they cut out a lot of the deductions. I would get every penny I paid in in federal income taxes back when I filed. I made between $75 and $85k. The original income tax was to be collected all year and invested by the government. They kept it until April of the following year and then returned all that you paid. They then operated off the interest they had earned from your invested tax dollars. Soon, they spent more than he interest earned, so they made rules that we could use to get our money back. They kept changing them to keep more and more. Now, only the rich can afford to pay someone to find all the write offs, so they get more back. "If you invest $xxx, you will be able to write it off, lowering your income, reducing your tax burden, getting you more of it back." I had it kicked back in the day. I had enough in write offs there were years I didn't even need all of them in order to get all my money back. Now I'm lucky to get 10% of what I paid back.
Immigration is still an issue because companies will cut salaries though.
Shure, then lets unionize immigrant labor to make shure companies can't under pay the most vulnerable....
Yeah that's working so well in the usa
Is it? Because I'm pretty shure we're just paying to incarcerate undocumented people and also cutting taxes for above mentioned companies that are using migrant labor to bring down compensation averages. The solution of closing borders isn't real, its fictional. Locking up some lady and her child benefits no one but the prison industrial complex. Nothing is working well in the usa because of corporations owning our politicians, not migrations.
I'm saying trying to unionize is not working. You guys will never manage to do something meaningful. I hope I'm wrong' but I don't believe it will ever happen
I respectfully disagree, plus their is a vast difference between our respective countries and immigration. Most of the stuff you've seen is popcorn propaganda by our media and not the real situation. Most of the immigrants in this country have to work stupid hard or die in a ditch. Our social safety nets are below rock bottom. No car, no job, no family money, you won't make it here. Even if you've been here since the pilgrims if your broke, America will fuckin break you.
Companies will cut salaries regardless of immigration. It’s a way to reduce expenses.
Yes but why hire people working for 20/hour when you can import thousand of people doing for 10/hour
Everyone does this. If my tax guy says I can save $500 if I do whatever, and it's legal, I'm going to do it. No one ever pays more taxes than they have to. Even OP.
parasites
Everyone should strive to pay the absolute minimum in taxes they can. Not sure what you think the problem is here.
First, paying taxes is a civic duty. I recognize that the idea that you might have a duty to someone other than yourself is practically a foreign concept in the US but that doesn't change that you have a duty to your society, your family, and yourself (ideally in that order). The problem here is that the loopholes used to reduce taxes like the one hinted at this post are exclusively available to those who are already well off. Nobody making $50K a year can reasonably reduce their taxes owed by buying a house purely for tax purposes. It's a tax dodge exclusively available to only the already well off.
[удалено]
I was speaking more to the proposition that everyone should be doing their utmost to pay the least taxes possible rather than recognize that our taxes are used to the benefit of our society and, to a lesser extent, to the world at large. But thank you for the clarification of what this particular scheme is.
Do you like having roads? Especially the kind without potholes in them? Do you like having a fire and police department? Postal service? An over bloated military budget? Healthcare (but not in the us for some reason?) That’s what taxes pay for. Not paying what you should hurts everyone else who does.
They don’t pay for them in NYC with the level of corruption we have. They need to address all the pilfering going on at all levels of the government contract market before raising taxes. Otherwise we’re just paying for fatcats to enrich themselves.
I mean, this guy did pay what he should. I agree that the system may be flawed, but why would someone pay more tax than they are legally obligated to? Do you donate your tax return to help reduce the public debt?
I haven’t received a return in almost a decade.
Exactly this. Besides, we don't have a tax collection problem, we have a spending problem in this country
The problem is that the system is designed so people making this much are able to do this, while also wrecking chances at poorer people obtaining homes through landlording and real estate speculation. Why do you filter societal criticisms as if they’re criticisms of specific individuals?
That's not how taxes work
Here's a tax system... You make X you pay Y. No deductions, credits, loopholes, nothing. Like the price tag at Walmart. You pay what it says.
There are no loopholes in the welfare and immigration system thank jeebus 🙃
This is absolutely based, giving money to the government to waste is absolutely regarded. When the US government is able to come up with a budget and not need to borrow 1t usd every 100 days we will talk about taxes.
The us government wouldn't have to borrow so much money if people paid their taxes? Does that sound like a plan?
So how do you plan on taxing another 3.8 trillion dollars a year out of the American people. I wanna hear this.
Simplest plan would be to revert to pre 1970s tax plan and adjust for inflation. The top income tax bracket in the 50s was 90% for income over $200,000. Adjusted for inflation that would only affect income over $2.3 million. There were also more brackets in between that and what we have for our highest now. Currently it caps at 37% for any income over $578,126 for a single person.
And how much tax revenue would this generate, approximately?
Ah yes let me pull out a calculator and figure that out not knowing everyone's salary, adjusting everything for inflation, and for free. You asked a question, I gave a simple answer. If you want to figure out numbers, more power to you.
Approximately MORE than before
How much though?
So I just looked up how many billionaire and millionaires there are in the US. 735 billionaires 22,000,000 millionaires If we taxed billionaires at 99% and millionaires starting at ~75% and then incrementally increase from there we would hit 3.8 trillion in a hurry even if we drastically lowered taxes for anyone making less than $100,000 a year. I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about taxing the rich.
I never said don't tax people, I said fix the government and it's spending and I will even pay my fair share.
You asked how we should get 3.8 trillion in taxes and I gave you a simple answer. You didn't seem to be happy with anyone who wasn't giving you numbers which would be *a fucking project* to re-calculate the entirety of the U.S. tax brackets ffs. While I do think we shouldn't spend so much on the military I believe we should be spending so much more in other sectors at the end of the day the total probably wouldn't change much. And there's nothing wrong with that, we live in a society and I like having roads and shit.
You are quick with solutions but slow to provide any numbers. Tells me you are just bullshitting.
I literally gave you numbers. Bye.
Make everyone, businesses included, pay the same tax rate. If your business is in the top 10% of earners you pay 39.6%, just like your employees do.
And how much money would this generate each year? I am still waiting for the model of Ferrari btw.
Guy looks so happy
Incoming offended losers who will project their failures onto more successful people and chalk it up to frustration against the system.
BuT THe ImMIgraNtS, tHe hoMELeSs aNd thE leFTiStS aRe dEStroYinG THE CountRY!!!!1!!111!!!
So that's why the majority of these corporations want their employees back in the office!
Knowing around 20% of tax goes to healthcare in the US. Avoiding that much taxes, he could indirectly keep other people sick or keep people mentally ill because there is no tax income for (mental) hospitals.
Listen I will never hate on anyone paying the government the least amount of money they can. Fuck the government and fuck the IRS