DanG 1
Recommended Posts
Quote
During the time that President Obama has been in office, he has earned some $2,711,340 from foreign sources. That’s 30.1 percent of Obama’s total income during that time. During that period, Obama forked over $87,429 to foreign countries. Most of that cash comes from book sales.
That’s an inordinately large amount of money coming from overseas – far more than the typical American, certainly. And the question becomes whether President Obama is outsourcing his book sales. After all, why not pay American tax rates on that income? Why not ship from the United States, rather than printing abroad?
I see nothing wrong with it except that Obama is railing against this.
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteThe one item I want to comment on is the 250k+ bit.... if you own an LLC or any business not incorporated and the business makes 250k+ that trickles down to the individual meaning that even if I was going to keep 200k of that in the business I would be taxed at the "new obama rate" bc of the business structure. That profit becomes the owners profit regardless of his plans for it.
Okay, I understand that, but we're still talking about profit, not gross revenue. I understand it sucks that more profit will be taken in the form of taxes. What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire. If you're making $250k+ in profit, and the rate goes from 30% to 35%, is that $12.5k difference going to change your decision to hire a new person? I'm assuming you're planning on hiring because you think that new hire will increase profit? I suppose it could affect the decision in some limited circumstances, but it doesn't seem to me like it should be a real driver of the decision to hire.
I've never run my own business, but I'm sure it's tough as hell. On the other hand, if your business is established to the point that you are bringing home $250k+ in profit, it doesn't seem like your'e on the verge of failure just yet.
Many if not most small business do not incorperate therefor the business and the owner are the same. I think the term individual contributor is what they are called (I dont remember for sure)
The business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
QuoteQuoteThe one item I want to comment on is the 250k+ bit.... if you own an LLC or any business not incorporated and the business makes 250k+ that trickles down to the individual meaning that even if I was going to keep 200k of that in the business I would be taxed at the "new obama rate" bc of the business structure. That profit becomes the owners profit regardless of his plans for it.
Okay, I understand that, but we're still talking about profit, not gross revenue. I understand it sucks that more profit will be taken in the form of taxes. What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire. If you're making $250k+ in profit, and the rate goes from 30% to 35%, is that $12.5k difference going to change your decision to hire a new person? I'm assuming you're planning on hiring because you think that new hire will increase profit? I suppose it could affect the decision in some limited circumstances, but it doesn't seem to me like it should be a real driver of the decision to hire.
I've never run my own business, but I'm sure it's tough as hell. On the other hand, if your business is established to the point that you are bringing home $250k+ in profit, it doesn't seem like your'e on the verge of failure just yet.
The difference is most small businesses are not incorporated so they are paying a higher tax than their big brothers. Because small business is a huge part of the US it is not right to make their taxes the higher of the two or to put the burden on them. Hiring employees as a small business is a bit more involved because every little position matters more. It matter with big companies as well but with more capital not as much. When I hire someone I am doing so in the "hopes" it helps my bottom line but it may not and it may set me back so with less reserves it makes me stop and think a lot more before I hire someone new. 5% of 250k + is a lot of money and could very easily make a business owner decide to take on more themselves or delegate to his/her already existing employees. That's all I am saying. It will not crush my business it will just slow down my growth and we as a country do not want to slow small business growth.
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
QuoteQuoteQuoteThe one item I want to comment on is the 250k+ bit.... if you own an LLC or any business not incorporated and the business makes 250k+ that trickles down to the individual meaning that even if I was going to keep 200k of that in the business I would be taxed at the "new obama rate" bc of the business structure. That profit becomes the owners profit regardless of his plans for it.
Okay, I understand that, but we're still talking about profit, not gross revenue. I understand it sucks that more profit will be taken in the form of taxes. What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire. If you're making $250k+ in profit, and the rate goes from 30% to 35%, is that $12.5k difference going to change your decision to hire a new person? I'm assuming you're planning on hiring because you think that new hire will increase profit? I suppose it could affect the decision in some limited circumstances, but it doesn't seem to me like it should be a real driver of the decision to hire.
I've never run my own business, but I'm sure it's tough as hell. On the other hand, if your business is established to the point that you are bringing home $250k+ in profit, it doesn't seem like your'e on the verge of failure just yet.
Many if not most small business do not incorperate therefor the business and the owner are the same. I think the term individual contributor is what they are called (I dont remember for sure)
The business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
Nail on head.
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
[Reply]What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire.
Part of the problem is not knowing the real effect. Even the decision to be an S-Corp or a C-Corp is going to play a role. Hiring is also implicated because if the business makes a $250k profit, if the profit is at 5%, that's a business with $5 million in revenues. Meaning $4.75 milliom in costs and expenditures. (Ask any businessperson and employees are by far the greatest expense).
If it's a $500k profit, then it's a $10 million business with $9.5 million in expenses. By running an economic analysis with a marginal utility/marginal cost analysis, the cost of growing the operation by two people may exceed the marginal utility of those new employees. (Employee cost is more than payroll - there are many levels of insurance, etc., that go with it.)
So hiring another employee at $50k per year total expense may make me $53k per year. If that's eaten up in new taxes, then I won't hire that person. These are the margins we're speaking of.
Look at the glut in the employment market right now. Making conditions more difficult for prospective employers - or even more uncertain - does not lead to a rebound.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuoteQuoteThe one item I want to comment on is the 250k+ bit.... if you own an LLC or any business not incorporated and the business makes 250k+ that trickles down to the individual meaning that even if I was going to keep 200k of that in the business I would be taxed at the "new obama rate" bc of the business structure. That profit becomes the owners profit regardless of his plans for it.
Okay, I understand that, but we're still talking about profit, not gross revenue. I understand it sucks that more profit will be taken in the form of taxes. What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire. If you're making $250k+ in profit, and the rate goes from 30% to 35%, is that $12.5k difference going to change your decision to hire a new person? I'm assuming you're planning on hiring because you think that new hire will increase profit? I suppose it could affect the decision in some limited circumstances, but it doesn't seem to me like it should be a real driver of the decision to hire.
I've never run my own business, but I'm sure it's tough as hell. On the other hand, if your business is established to the point that you are bringing home $250k+ in profit, it doesn't seem like your'e on the verge of failure just yet.
Many if not most small business do not incorperate therefor the business and the owner are the same. I think the term individual contributor is what they are called (I dont remember for sure)
The business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
Really? Then they need better accountants.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe one item I want to comment on is the 250k+ bit.... if you own an LLC or any business not incorporated and the business makes 250k+ that trickles down to the individual meaning that even if I was going to keep 200k of that in the business I would be taxed at the "new obama rate" bc of the business structure. That profit becomes the owners profit regardless of his plans for it.
Okay, I understand that, but we're still talking about profit, not gross revenue. I understand it sucks that more profit will be taken in the form of taxes. What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire. If you're making $250k+ in profit, and the rate goes from 30% to 35%, is that $12.5k difference going to change your decision to hire a new person? I'm assuming you're planning on hiring because you think that new hire will increase profit? I suppose it could affect the decision in some limited circumstances, but it doesn't seem to me like it should be a real driver of the decision to hire.
I've never run my own business, but I'm sure it's tough as hell. On the other hand, if your business is established to the point that you are bringing home $250k+ in profit, it doesn't seem like your'e on the verge of failure just yet.
Many if not most small business do not incorperate therefor the business and the owner are the same. I think the term individual contributor is what they are called (I dont remember for sure)
The business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
Really? Then they need better accountants.
What? That is a statement that shows an utter lack of understanding. There are several pros and cons to incorporating. Most of the time it is not beneficial to incorporate a small business in the early years and may not be later either. It has nothing to do with ones accountant. You just cannot admit the truth that raising taxes like Obama proposed will hurt small business. Not to mention it is just class warfare....
Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com
Worth watching. Incredibly sobering, and frightening.
United States Budget Dilemma
United States Budget Dilemma
We are all engines of karma
jcd11235 0
QuoteSure they pay 90% of all income taxes - those wealthiest.
Define "wealthiest," please. To what percentile are you referring?
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
jcd11235 0
QuoteThe ONLY reason the President wants wealthy money here is so that he can tax it.
Income from abroad is already taxable, so that clearly isn't the reason.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
The last stat I had was "top 1% pays more than bottom 90%." It was from the TaxProf blog a few years ago.
With regard to taxable income from abroad it is controlled by treaty. Also, read into "transfer pricing." It'll take a while. Just one Tax Code section but extremely complex in its application and circumstances.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
With regard to taxable income from abroad it is controlled by treaty. Also, read into "transfer pricing." It'll take a while. Just one Tax Code section but extremely complex in its application and circumstances.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
jcd11235 0
QuoteThe last stat I had was "top 1% pays more than bottom 90%." It was from the TaxProf blog a few years ago.
According to this [url"http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html"]site[/url], the top 1% accounted for ~34-40%. That same 1% also accounts for about 24% of the income and about 35% of the national wealth.
Further, the top 1% has benefited disproportionately from economic expansion over the last decade. For example, "Even including 2007—a good year for ordinary US families-the top percentile captured 65 percent of total real income growth per family from 2002 to 2007."
You'll forgive me for not buying into the rhetoric that the richest one percent are being unfairly burdened. The data don't support such an assertion.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThe one item I want to comment on is the 250k+ bit.... if you own an LLC or any business not incorporated and the business makes 250k+ that trickles down to the individual meaning that even if I was going to keep 200k of that in the business I would be taxed at the "new obama rate" bc of the business structure. That profit becomes the owners profit regardless of his plans for it.
Okay, I understand that, but we're still talking about profit, not gross revenue. I understand it sucks that more profit will be taken in the form of taxes. What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire. If you're making $250k+ in profit, and the rate goes from 30% to 35%, is that $12.5k difference going to change your decision to hire a new person? I'm assuming you're planning on hiring because you think that new hire will increase profit? I suppose it could affect the decision in some limited circumstances, but it doesn't seem to me like it should be a real driver of the decision to hire.
I've never run my own business, but I'm sure it's tough as hell. On the other hand, if your business is established to the point that you are bringing home $250k+ in profit, it doesn't seem like your'e on the verge of failure just yet.
Many if not most small business do not incorperate therefor the business and the owner are the same. I think the term individual contributor is what they are called (I dont remember for sure)
The business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
Really? Then they need better accountants.
What? That is a statement that shows an utter lack of understanding. There are several pros and cons to incorporating. Most of the time it is not beneficial to incorporate a small business in the early years and may not be later either. It has nothing to do with ones accountant. You just cannot admit the truth that raising taxes like Obama proposed will hurt small business. Not to mention it is just class warfare....
Nonsense. I ran a small business for a number of years. Pretty much everything I invested in it could be depreciated or taken as a one-time deduction.
There are all kinds of credits available to businesses that individuals can't take, too.
Running a small business is a great way to minimize your tax burden.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
1969912 0
"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG
airdvr 210
Awesome with the NPP!
Please don't dent the planet.
Destinations by Roxanne
Destinations by Roxanne
QuoteThe business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
"Re-investing" and "building the business" entail spending those dollars on deductible expenses, thereby reducing the taxable profits. Sure, some capital purchases will have to be scheduled out, but a significant chunk of such expenses can be Section 179'd out of a young company's ledger.
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
airdvr 210
QuoteQuoteThe business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
"Re-investing" and "building the business" entail spending those dollars on deductible expenses, thereby reducing the taxable profits. Sure, some capital purchases will have to be scheduled out, but a significant chunk of such expenses can be Section 179'd out of a young company's ledger.
Blues,
Dave
True, however if you are an accrual accounting customer sometimes you get a tax bill on money you haven't received yet, more pointedly if you sell goods and services on time. But that's not typical at all.
Please don't dent the planet.
Destinations by Roxanne
Destinations by Roxanne
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuoteQuoteThe business may make a million dollars but early in many new businesses those dollars go back into building the business.
The owners take little more money than what is needed to live and pay a mortgage or two but they are still taxed on those dollars they re-invest. They are not making a million but they are taxed on it.
"Re-investing" and "building the business" entail spending those dollars on deductible expenses, thereby reducing the taxable profits. Sure, some capital purchases will have to be scheduled out, but a significant chunk of such expenses can be Section 179'd out of a young company's ledger.
Blues,
Dave
True, however if you are an accrual accounting customer sometimes you get a tax bill on money you haven't received yet, more pointedly if you sell goods and services on time. But that's not typical at all.
Red herring.
Fact is, investments you make in your business are tax deductible one way or another. Add to that various business credits, and small business owners actually make out pretty well compared to employees.
Big business owners, of course, make out like gangbusters (like a 13.9% tax rate for a guy making over $21M).
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
normiss 897
The whole mindset of "if I spend $3000 to better my business, the gooberment will let me take 30% of those costs off my taxes" isn't always an attractive plan to a business.
It reminds me of the shopping cause it's on sale mentality.
It STILL takes money out of their pockets.
No matter what color the fish is.
It reminds me of the shopping cause it's on sale mentality.
It STILL takes money out of their pockets.
No matter what color the fish is.
kallend 2,148
QuoteThe whole mindset of "if I spend $3000 to better my business, the gooberment will let me take 30% of those costs off my taxes" isn't always an attractive plan to a business.
It reminds me of the shopping cause it's on sale mentality.
It STILL takes money out of their pockets.
No matter what color the fish is.
\
Another red herring.
Investments in your business are deductible. Period. It's up to the owner if s/he wants to invest or not. They have the option of blowing the $3000 on a trip to Vegas and not getting a deduction. Oh, wait, they can probably deduct that too, if they spend 10 minutes in a convention or trade show.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteThe whole mindset of "if I spend $3000 to better my business, the gooberment will let me take 30% of those costs off my taxes" isn't always an attractive plan to a business.
It reminds me of the shopping cause it's on sale mentality.
It STILL takes money out of their pockets.
No matter what color the fish is.
That's fine. So they keep the profits and pay taxes on it as income. The alternative is they take tax deductions for costs they chose not to incur. I mean, I'd really like to put on my income tax return a $20k deduction for just thinking about spending that $20k and deciding against it, but I suspect the IRS would find a flaw in my argument.
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
Okay, I understand that, but we're still talking about profit, not gross revenue. I understand it sucks that more profit will be taken in the form of taxes. What I don't understand is why people are saying this will affect business decisions to hire. If you're making $250k+ in profit, and the rate goes from 30% to 35%, is that $12.5k difference going to change your decision to hire a new person? I'm assuming you're planning on hiring because you think that new hire will increase profit? I suppose it could affect the decision in some limited circumstances, but it doesn't seem to me like it should be a real driver of the decision to hire.
I've never run my own business, but I'm sure it's tough as hell. On the other hand, if your business is established to the point that you are bringing home $250k+ in profit, it doesn't seem like your'e on the verge of failure just yet.
- Dan G
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites