Page 1 of 2
Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2009 12:28 pm
by Malcolm
Come the fuck on, don't you fuckers have something better to do?
The debate stems from a 1989 law that requires workers who use company cellphones for personal calls to count the value of those calls as income and pay federal income taxes for the minutes used. Employees are supposed to keep detailed records of their calls. Now that sending e-mails on mobile devices is more prevalent, data charges could also be subject to scrutiny.
...
Under several proposals put forth this week, the IRS would more strictly enforce an existing law that classifies company-issued cellphones as a taxable benefit -- an idea decried by employers and wireless companies who argue that mobile phones are now essential tools in the workplace that shouldn't be considered income.
Yep. Nothing spurs the economy like MORE TAXES. Cos otherwise owners might use that cash to, hell, I dunno, put it back into their biz, making it grow bigger. Got to stop that obviously. If the companies get too big, they approach the magic gov't bailout amount.
Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2009 4:08 pm
by GORDON
Trust me... this government is going to go after every last dollar in your pocket that they can. This does not shock me.
Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:09 pm
by TheCatt
With the constant increase in entitlement programs (old ones like Social Security, and new ones like the Medicare drug benefit passed under the Bush administration), I was reading last night that in a couple of years it will take a 50% tax increase (across the board) to balance the budget.
Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2009 11:43 pm
by Mommy Dearest
Malcolm wrote:Come the fuck on, don't you fuckers have something better to do?
The debate stems from a 1989 law that requires workers who use company cellphones for personal calls to count the value of those calls as income and pay federal income taxes for the minutes used. Employees are supposed to keep detailed records of their calls. Now that sending e-mails on mobile devices is more prevalent, data charges could also be subject to scrutiny.
...
Under several proposals put forth this week, the IRS would more strictly enforce an existing law that classifies company-issued cellphones as a taxable benefit -- an idea decried by employers and wireless companies who argue that mobile phones are now essential tools in the workplace that shouldn't be considered income.
Yep. Nothing spurs the economy like MORE TAXES. Cos otherwise owners might use that cash to, hell, I dunno, put it back into their biz, making it grow bigger. Got to stop that obviously. If the companies get too big, they approach the magic gov't bailout amount.
Tax Reform act of 1987. Would not call that new. That was Ronald Reagan's tax simplification that was supposed to put me out of work. I know some one does not like it when Isay so but lol. lol.
Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2009 11:47 pm
by GORDON
Why do corporations get taxed, when it is consumers that pay those taxes, and there is already sales tax everywhere?
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 12:45 am
by Malcolm
GORDON wrote:Why do corporations get taxed, when it is consumers that pay those taxes, and there is already sales tax everywhere?
Because corporations are faceless, evil entities that secretly maintain a super-mega-global monopoly designed to fuck consumers.
& since certain corporations are immortal now, there's no risk of them going under. The gov't will pay their taxes for them.
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:25 pm
by Mommy Dearest
GORDON wrote:Why do corporations get taxed, when it is consumers that pay those taxes, and there is already sales tax everywhere?
circle of life
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:31 pm
by GORDON
Why do military people pay federal tax when their pay is already federal taxes?
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:45 am
by Leisher
Why do military people pay federal tax when their pay is already federal taxes?
That's a question I asked a lot when I was in the service.
Military pay in the civilian world would be below the poverty level, so why screw them over even further by taxing that money?
I was thinking about this some more and I'd love someone to explain how a company paid cell phone is a benefit that should be taxed.
How does it differ from a landline phone in your office? How does it differ from a company car? A uniform? Company provided office space? Company provided office supplies like pens, paper, staples, etc.? Company provided internet access?
Are we going to be taxed for all that too?
Edited By Leisher on 1245159747
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 9:48 am
by TheCatt
The basic premise is that anything your company provides you that has a personal benefit is taxable as income. I'm sure Mommy D can expound further.
If you read the excerpt above, it specifically mentions the taxable portion being personal use on a company-provided asset.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:27 am
by TPRJones
My question would be: who's responsible for records? If no records are maintained, does the IRS tax you for 100% of the phone?
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:58 am
by Mommy Dearest
TPRJones wrote:My question would be: who's responsible for records? If no records are maintained, does the IRS tax you for 100% of the phone?
IRS requires the employee to submit personal use records for automobiles, and also has a formula if it is needed. Cell phones can be determined by the call records. As I said before these things are not new. They have been required since 1986 TRA.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:16 am
by GORDON
Why is it that all of the money I make is taxed, then if I die and leave it to my son it is taxed, then if he spends it it is taxed?
Anyone think this country has a tax problem?
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:17 am
by TPRJones
Yes, but can someone just say "0%" and be believed? If they have no proof of 0% personal use, then what is the default position of the IRS?
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:41 am
by Leisher
What about shared cell phones? You know the ones that get passed around from person to person depending on who is on call? How the hell do you track who made personal call son that thing and when?
How does the government prove a call was for personal reasons? Example:
IRS: Mr. Smith, your records show you calling your home during the work day from your cell phone on June 4th of last year. We need to tax you for that.
Mr. Smith: I was calling the house to ask my wife if I had left a flash drive sitting in my home office. That was completely work related. We spoke about nothing else. So you can't tax me for that.
They can't prove a single call is personal unless they have transcripts of the calls too.
And my argument about taxing us for company provided pens, paper, internet access, laptops, PCs, etc. is valid if this ignorant shit gets pushed.
Why is it that all of the money I make is taxed, then if I die and leave it to my son it is taxed, then if he spends it it is taxed?
I've always wondered how that shit is even legal. Whatever happened to money not being taxed twice?
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:54 am
by TheCatt
Leisher wrote:I've always wondered how that shit is even legal. Whatever happened to money not being taxed twice?
There's no law about that.
Estate taxes have been around since the Civil War, iirc. And corporate dividends (which are profits, which are thus already taxed) are double-taxed as well.
But, yeah, I agree that neither estates nor dividends should be double-taxed.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:54 am
by GORDON
You buy a car, there is sales tax. You are taxed when you register for tags to make owning it legal, even if it never leaves your garage, ever. You buy fuel for it, you get taxed. You get taxed for the roads on which to drive it whether you own a car or not.
I wonder if people would be shocked at how much of their money actually goes to taxes, and how little goes into the actual economy.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:56 am
by TheCatt
Leisher wrote:And my argument about taxing us for company provided pens, paper, internet access, laptops, PCs, etc. is valid if this ignorant shit gets pushed.
The debate stems from a 1989 law that requires workers who use company cellphones for personal calls to count the value of those calls as income and pay federal income taxes for the minutes used. Employees are supposed to keep detailed records of their calls. Now that sending e-mails on mobile devices is more prevalent, data charges could also be subject to scrutiny.
The law was passed at a time when cellphones were considered a luxury, such as a corporate car or jet, and only used by the wealthiest professionals. Brick-sized phones typically cost $2,000 and $3 per minute. But BlackBerrys, iPhones, PDAs, cellphones and laptops are now common fixtures for workers, and few companies have enforced the tedious record-keeping rule.
Is the legal counter-argument.
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 3:06 pm
by TPRJones
Each day I hope we are finally getting closer to the Second American Revolution.
No taxation without rectification!
Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2009 3:25 pm
by Malcolm
TPRJones wrote:Each day I hope we are finally getting closer to the Second American Revolution.
No taxation without rectification!
If the British army had possessed tactical nukes, then the founding fathers might've thought twice before throwing a tea party.
"Revolution" means something quite different today than 200+ years ago.