The First Biden Term

[TheCatt]

Remember when Trump had a tax cut, and business cut all their prices, a few years ago?

And now, the administration wants to raise taxes to lower than they were pre-Trump tax cut of 2018?

[Leisher]

Remember when Trump had a tax cut, and business cut all their prices, a few years ago?

And now, the administration wants to raise taxes to lower than they were pre-Trump tax cut of 2018?

You should replace Psaki. You would be far better at her job.

But I wish someone would show her this story so she could perhaps see how billionaires try and pass the buck.

[Leisher]

25% of our infrastructure is at risk to flooding.

[Leisher]

Biden admin wants new rules for banks and it's pissing people off.

The $600 trigger seems insanely low.

[TheCatt]

Biden admin wants new rules for banks and it's pissing people off.

The $600 trigger seems insanely low.

Trust but verify. Can't verify without this data.

Story time: Many years ago was wife was a CPA and worked for a tax firm as a tax accountant. She worked for a director, and one of their clients had their bookkeeper send some worksheets. The client was pretty rich (normal people don't need CPAs for their taxes), and they shared some wealth with their family members, etc. Turns out, the bookkeeper sent the wrong documents, and then resent the right ones. What was different? Well, the WRONG documents showed the ACTUAL transfers the client was making to family members, which violated the law because they were not claiming these payments as deductions against their lifetime exclusion (inheritance allowance), which would eventually trigger the gift/inheritance taxes. The "right" ones were COMPLETELY FAKE amounts that just existed to satisfy the government if they were ever audited.

Republicans protect the rich. And these people were rich enough that they had a bookkeeper keep FAKE BOOKS to avoid the taxes

[Leisher]

Republicans protect the rich.

I didn't realize CPAs were all Rs... (It was weird how you just dropped Rs in that random story.)

Back to the article, why $600? Are you saying that the uber rich are throwing $600 monthly payments at heirs to avoid taxes?

[TheCatt]

I didn't realize CPAs were all Rs... (It was weird how you just dropped Rs in that random story.)

The story repeatedly stated the Republicans were the ones upset and advocating against it.

Back to the article, why $600? Are you saying that the uber rich are throwing $600 monthly payments at heirs to avoid taxes?

They probably picked $600 because there's already a $600 limit for 1099s on misc income, so this would share the same limit. The uber rich are doing a ton of things to avoid taxes, and untracked money transfers are one.

[Leisher]

The story repeatedly stated the Republicans were the ones upset and advocating against it.

I know that, I just didn't get why you inserted it where you did in your story. Also, Rs aren't the only ones protecting the rich. No Ds leave office paupers either and they're not getting bribes from the homeless. We need to stop pretending either party serves the average American taxpayer.

As for people paying their fair share, I don't know what the solution is, but I not think more code is the solution.

I also think the government should be held more accountable for the money it does spend, but now I'm just talking crazy.

[TheCatt]

As for people paying their fair share, I don't know what the solution is, but I not think more code is the solution.

Ideally compliance would be easy. But, life is complicated. In theory, the more the government knows, the easier it is since they could just do your taxes for you

D's aren't exactly going after carried interest. But they are going after the rich more than Rs.

[GORDON]

A $600 threshold isn't about catching wealthy tax dodgers, it's about giving the IRS an excuse to investigate you if you make a mortgage or car payment. And the requirements in the bank will increase costs, and fees, to the lower and middle class.

*DO NOT RUN, WE ARE YOUR FRIENDS."
~The government, as they are about to cornhole you again.

[TheCatt]

A $600 threshold isn't about catching wealthy tax dodgers, it's about giving the IRS an excuse to investigate you if you make a mortgage or car payment. And the requirements in the bank will increase costs, and fees, to the lower and middle class.

Paranoia will destroy ya.

[Leisher]

Why am I remembering something about your pay or your bank accounts being accessed directly by the government? This would have been during Obama's years. Something was floated, which obviously did not take place, that would have given the government far more direct access to your money. Maybe it was a discussion about the elimination of banks and/or the government acting as a central bank? I don't know. We talk about so much around here.

All I know is that I think to have a strong society everyone needs to do their part, but to have a free society the government needs to keep their nose out of people's business.

Constantly giving the government more and more power over our lives is not going to end well. There is no magical line they will ever hit where they stop and say, "Ok, we have hit the perfect balance and will never take another ounce of your freedom!"

[TheCatt]

I think the important thing is that the rich people should always have ways to avoid laws that impact the poors and middles.

[GORDON]

And they'll avoid this proposal, and the poor and middle class will not. This is the exactly what you're snarking about. If it was about the wealthy, the threshold would have been $6000+ transactions, not $600. They already admitted it's easier to audit the poor, than the rich, because the poor can't afford lawyers. We discussed that here.

This shit is evil.

[TheCatt]

And they'll avoid this proposal, and the poor and middle class will not. This is the exactly what you're snarking about. If it was about the wealthy, the threshold would have been $6000+ transactions, not $600. They already admitted it's easier to audit the poor, than the rich, because the poor can't afford lawyers. We discussed that here.

This shit is evil.

"Crime is OK, compliance is not" Got it.

[Leisher]

I think the important thing is that the rich people should always have ways to avoid laws that impact the poors and middles.

C'mon, you know that's a BS response to what I said.

I specifically point out that I want everyone to pay. I just don't think constantly adding to the already ridiculously overcomplicated tax code and giving the government more access to people's private information is the solution. Why is it so wrong to suggest finding a better way to get people's tax money? If closing loopholes is a constant and never ending battle then why not explore some other options?

And while we're at it, when has giving a small group of people more and more control over other people's lives ever ended well?

And Gordon is right that the rich will simply find another way to get around this new law while the middle class and poor won't. The tax code getting more and more complicated is not doing poor people any favors. In fact, this might actually hurt poor people who already aren't paying taxes by making it harder for them to hide $700 they made on a sidejob.

[GORDON]

Exactly my point. But Judge Dredd up there is all THE LAW MUST BE OBEYED. Especially by the little people who don't have much to give but will be bled fir what little they have in an already lopsided "income not keeping up with cost of living" economy.

Yeah. Fuck em harder. We can sip IPAs and laugh.

[TheCatt]

I specifically point out that I want everyone to pay. I just don't think constantly adding to the already ridiculously overcomplicated tax code and giving the government more access to people's private information is the solution. Why is it so wrong to suggest finding a better way to get people's tax money? If closing loopholes is a constant and never ending battle then why not explore some other options?

Then find some. Because the entire rest of the world depends on auditing + verifying actual data.

The tax code getting more and more complicated is not doing poor people any favors

The tax code is not getting any more complicated. Data sharing with financial institutions is increasing.

In fact, this might actually hurt poor people who already aren't paying taxes by making it harder for them to hide $700 they made on a sidejob.

Again, people breaking the law is not an OK thing, I thought?

We can sip IPAs and laugh.

I'm not a psychopath

[Leisher]

Then find some. Because the entire rest of the world depends on auditing + verifying actual data.

1. It's not my job.
2. Anytime something else is brought up it's immediately slammed instead of discussed. Kind of like how I just said, "Maybe find a better system" and instead of discussion I'm getting "Why do you love crime!?"
3. The phrase "The rest of the world" is BS and should be "the civilized world". (Just nitpicking that one for fun.) And in what country are the rich unable to avoid loopholes?

The tax code is not getting any more complicated.

So no more words are being added?

Data sharing with financial institutions is increasing.

And so is government intrusion in our lives. A government that is exploring taxing us on how much we drive. A government that is constantly reducing services offered, yet somehow never reduces the amount of taxes we pay.

Again, people breaking the law is not an OK thing, I thought?

Again, I thought you cared about the poor? If you're making so little that you don't owe taxes I'm perfectly fine with you doing jobs on the side without Uncle Sam getting a cut. It's the little things like that which help people get ahead of the curve. You apparently want to further hamstring them and keep them oppressed by poverty while the rich are able to continue dodging loopholes.

I'm not a psychopath

IPAs are pretentious.

I just don't see why it's cool to keep fucking with the tax code for individual payers, but continuing to ignore the trillion dollar corporations that don't pay taxes? Isn't this the same logic going on with pollution? Going after those without power while ignoring the crimes of those with power.

The constant fight with taxes just seems to me to have a lot in common with the war on drugs. End of the day, none of the true power players are ever caught, but the American taxpayer is always expected to pay the bill.

Oh, and one more thing:

Including OCO funds, disaster relief, emergency requirements, and program integrity, FY 2021 spending measures provide $1.406 trillion in budget authority and $1.645 trillion in outlays.

Maybe, just maybe, we should be looking at reducing those numbers instead of just endlessly increasing them? (Yes, I know this is a giant other conversation, so I'll just leave it at that.)

[GORDON]

It won't hurt Jeff Bezos. He won't pay another penny.

An industrious 16 year old girl babysitting her ass off will now suddenly be paying "her fair share."

It's evil.