Log in

View Full Version : FUCK the IRS.



Pages : 1 [2]

shasta
04-04-2007, 12:19 AM
I paid this year and last year's taxes today. I go to an accountant that is known as the "tax ninga." He was so surprised I actually wanted to pay something. Well, I was audited once. He told me that most of the money I paid went into SS. I feel a lot better about that then giving money to the military.

Bella21
04-04-2007, 12:24 AM
I wish MINE all went to education. :(

miabella
04-04-2007, 01:05 AM
there's a lot of stuff that needs to be paid for that nobody would check off. that would be why they don't let taxpayers individually elect where their taxes will go. it would be a total disaster.

AlexxaHex
04-04-2007, 01:20 AM
like what? the war? :P

Melonie
04-04-2007, 08:11 AM
^^^ or social welfare program benefits to illegal aliens, or tax credits for millionaires on wind farms, or tax credits to Prius buyers ...

T-10
04-04-2007, 11:16 PM
^^^ or social welfare program benefits to illegal aliens, or tax credits for millionaires on wind farms, or tax credits to Prius buyers ...

^ or tax credits for Exxon who has yet to pay the $4.5 billion in punitive damages awarded in the Exxon Valdez case 17 years ago despite the fact that they earned the largest profits ever of ANY public company in US history.

Melonie
04-05-2007, 03:36 AM
^^^ or a 56 cent per gallon tax 'refund' to US Ethanol refiners i.e. a 5.6 cent per gallon stealth tax on E90 blended gasoline that gets transferred straight to the pockets of US Ethanol companies thus providing them with a profit MARGIN much higher than Exxon's !

T-10
04-05-2007, 09:27 AM
thus providing them with a profit MARGIN much higher than Exxon's !

I call bullshit on that unless you can provide data that shows that any single ethanol company made more than Exxon in 2006.
Remember that Exxon pulled in over 10 billion in the 3rd quarter of 2006 alone.

Melonie
04-05-2007, 11:11 AM
^^^ I said profit MARGIN. Even though the major oil companies all made record huge profits in terms of dollar amounts last year, their profit MARGINS were actually in the 7 to 12% range (Exxon's margin has been running at 9.something percent)- which admittedly added up to big piles of dollars based on huge numbers of gallons of gasoline being sold considering that five major oil companies (Exxon among them) control the majority of the world's oil and gasoline market. In contrast, ethanol refiners earned far fewer dollars based on far fewer gallons being sold, but their profit MARGINS were typically in the 12% and up range (PEIX's margin has been running at 12.something percent).

The mainstream media's choice to publicize dollar amount of profits rather than profit MARGINS tends to foster a misleading conclusion that oil companies are hugely profitable. In point of fact, ethanol companies are more profitable than oil companies, and companies involved in other businesses are typically even more profitable (example Microsoft's margin was 26% !).

My point about the 56 cents per gallon stealth tax kickback to US ethanol refiners was to point out that, were US taxpayers / gasoline buyers not required to finance stealth taxes and subsidies (as well as legally prevented from buying more than a certain quota of offshore ethanol via a US import quota law), US ethanol producers would NOT BE PROFITABLE compared to Brazilian and other offshore sources of ethanol. Put another way, ALL of the profits of US ethanol refiners are financed by the US taxpayer / ethanol blend gasoline buyer and not by any inherent profitability in the business of refining corn based ethanol in the US. Why the US gov't chose to enact import quotas and stealth taxes in amounts that actually result in a higher profit margin for US ethanol companies than are typical for the major oil companies is, of course, a subject for a different thread.

(snip)"Without tariff protection, competition from Brazil and other parts of Latin America—where lower-priced land and labor, and higher yielding [sugar cane - sic] feedstocks would allow producers to undercut US ethanol prices—would cause corn prices to fall. US policymakers apparently believe that it is important to foment an indigenous US ethanol industry, but such a policy runs headlong into the broader goal of encouraging free trade."(snip) from

~

T-10
04-05-2007, 11:15 AM
The mainstream media's choice to publicize dollar amount of profits rather than profit MARGINS tends to foster a misleading conclusion that oil companies are hugely profitable. In point of fact, ethanol companies are more profitable than oil companies





Exxon posted the highest annual profits of ANY US public company in history and yet you are still trying to make people believe an ethanol company made more money in 2006 than Exxon.

Oh brother!

Whatever, Melonie, whatever ::)

PhaedrusZ
04-05-2007, 03:28 PM
...The 'distribution' of taxes is also set by the US congress and various state / local govt's i.e. what percentages of incomes versus tax percentages are set, what sort of loopholes to legally avoid taxes are provided, what types of earnings are classified as income vs capital gains etc. It is in the area of the 'distribution' of tax burden that I start to get angry, because 'middle class' taxpayers like us are being forced to shoulder a heavier and heavier percentage of tax burden relative to our incomes, while the 'rich' typically have the means to legally avoid paying such a heavy percentage in taxes on their own 'incomes'.Sorry for being "pooish" here, but one of the primary reasons I look askance at both the IRS and state franchise tax boards (or whatever they call themselves in states other than California) is because tax laws are enforced against those who are born citizens of the U.S., or who have immigrated here legally. Then they don't enforce tax laws against those who are here illegally, both because they can't (can't find them, false SSN or using someone else's SSN) and also because they apparently refuse to do so. Which to me represents a direct violation of the "equal protection under the law" portion of the 14th Amendment. Both the states and the federal government should only be allowed to enforce tax law exactly the same for everyone, or for no-one. None of this "two from column A" and "one from column B" crap. In fact, I wonder if a class-action lawsuit should be brought, both against state governments and the federal government when they still refuse to treat all people equally under the law. Perhaps by an organization such as JudicialWatch.



Reply to Susan Wayward,

"FYI, conservatives, the Bush administration presided over one of the largest expansions of Medicare benefits in history."
http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/images/themes/rising/statusicon/user_offline.gif http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/images/misc/Female.gif

Yes, I was already quite aware of this(primarily the Medicare Rx benefits, iirc), which is exactly why I have refused to vote for either side of the aisle's candidate for President (i.e., either the Democrat or Republican sections) of the "Let's see how much we can financially screw over the middle-class" political party for the last three or four Presidential elections now.

Reply to T-10,

I was born & raised in L.A. for the first 20-odd years of my life, all of 3.5 miles from "Hollyweird." The last stat I've seen about actors, which is over ten years old now, indicated 80% of actors earned under $6,000 of their annual income from acting in any given year. I doubt things have changed much now. I doubt the stat is much better for producers and directors, etc. The people you see in the magazines, papers, etc., are usually the wildly successful ones. You do have to be ready for your "big break," but you also have to understand this represents a very, very small minority of all those who are in showbiz.

I only have two friends who ever tried acting. One left it, discouraged, long ago. The other, in the last five years did two plays, for which he was not paid, and one 1.5 second appearance on an episode of "That 70's Show." He has his SAG card, which he had to have to for his guest spot, and I think scale was about $600.00 for his 1.5 second appearance. He had to be at the studio longer than that, of course, and that $600.00 represents all he has earned from acting for the last five years now. Jim Carrey, Julia Roberts, etc., have basically won the lottery re: their careers.

miabella
04-05-2007, 03:47 PM
back to the topic of where tax money would go if people could choose, a lot of people wouldn't think to pay for roads, or a court system or all kinds of infrastructure that is usually forgotten about in grumblings about where tax money goes.

FrustratedBunny
04-05-2007, 11:17 PM
In Florida an illegal alien can work as a confidential informant for the police, make $25k on a deal, and not pay taxes on it because, hey, he has no SSN.

My mom always told me life wasn't fair. Guess she was right.

miabella
04-05-2007, 11:41 PM
did your momma also teach you not to argue from the exception?

Katrine
04-06-2007, 10:46 AM
Exxon posted the highest annual profits of ANY US public company in history and yet you are still trying to make people believe an ethanol company made more money in 2006 than Exxon.

Oh brother!

Whatever, Melonie, whatever ::)

Welcome back honey! :-\

StrayStripper
04-09-2007, 02:15 PM
Well, without drifting into political poo, I agree that we should end corporate welfare. But it hasn't been my experience that liberals want me to pay less in taxes. It's Social Security and Medicare that killed me this year, and those are not conservative programs.

The wealthy are protected from SS taxes. If one earns more than $94,200, she only pays 2.9% for self-employment taxes instead of 15.3%.

The middle class self-employed is fucked over the most. According to my rough estimates, a person earning $50,000 pays about 37% in taxes (w/no deductions) while a person earning $100,000 pays about 31%.

Still want to vote conservative? I prefer the flat tax.

Yekhefah
04-09-2007, 02:16 PM
Yes, I do. I think this country would benefit greatly from a truly conservative administration (this administration is NOT conservative).