header pic

Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' CFN/Scout Crowd- Enjoy Civil discussion, game analytics, in depth player and coaching 'takes' and discussing topics surrounding the game. You can even have your own free board, all you have to do is ask!!!

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Should there be billionaires? A test.

 (Read 673 times)

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 32157
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #42 on: Today at 07:39:23 AM »
I still can't fathom that we just passed a bill that gave the richest 20% a larger % tax break than the lowest 20%. 
THAT is unethical, no matter what you sprinkle in your word salad.
The bill did not lower any tax rates. It only extended the existing tax rates established in 2017. Nobody got raised, nobody got lowered.

Read the bill.

Then comment.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Honestbuckeye

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Posts: 6997
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #43 on: Today at 07:48:35 AM »
The bill did not lower any tax rates. It only extended the existing tax rates established in 2017. Nobody got raised, nobody got lowered.

Read the bill.

Then comment.
Exactly.  Except taxes on tips and OT, which certainly isn’t helping the wealthy.  
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.
-Mark Twain

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 32157
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #44 on: Today at 07:52:19 AM »
Exactly.  Except taxes on tips and OT, which certainly isn’t helping the wealthy. 
And no tax on SS for the most in need.

The child tax credit went up.

The SALT limits went up.

People refuse to accept reality.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

FearlessF

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 47162
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #45 on: Today at 07:54:07 AM »
Cincy's SS checks aren't going to be taxed?
"Courage; Generosity; Fairness; Honor; In these are the true awards of manly sport."

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 85147
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #46 on: Today at 07:54:42 AM »
The increase in SALT limits favors higher income folks living in high tax states like NY and CA.  The elimination of the EV tax credit tends to disfavor higher income folks.  The change in SS taxation (credits) tends to favor higher income folks to some degree.  It phases out at high incomes.

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 32157
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #47 on: Today at 07:55:48 AM »
Cincy's SS checks aren't going to be taxed?
His will. My wife's will. Mine will.

But yeah, only people with money got a break.


U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 20426
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #48 on: Today at 07:56:28 AM »
Exactly.  Except taxes on tips and OT, which certainly isn’t helping the wealthy. 
Just because it's not helping the wealthy it's siphoning off from those of us that aren't
"An ignorant person is one who doesn't know what you have just found out" Will Rogers

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 85147
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #49 on: Today at 07:57:35 AM »
Cincy's SS checks aren't going to be taxed?
I'll still get taxed on SS, there is a tax deduction for part of it that goes away at higher income levels.


The new social security tax break, introduced under the sweeping tax legislation signed on July 3, 2025, provides a generous deduction of up to $6,000 per individual or $12,000 per couple for seniors aged 65 and above. This deduction applies directly to taxable income, significantly reducing — or in many cases, eliminating — taxes on Social Security checks.
Before this reform, nearly 40% of Social Security recipients had to pay federal income taxes on their benefits. That number is now expected to drop to just 12%. The result is more money in the pockets of retirees, many of whom are living on fixed incomes.
Key Point Summary:
  • Deduction: $6,000 for individuals, $12,000 for couples.
  • Eligibility: Age 65+.
  • Impact: 88% of retirees will now owe no federal tax on their Social Security income.
  • Effective: Starting with the 2025 tax year.

    • Married couples filing jointly with combined income under $150,000 also qualify for the full benefit.


847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 32157
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #50 on: Today at 08:02:07 AM »
The increase in SALT limits favors higher income folks living in high tax states like NY and CA.  The elimination of the EV tax credit tends to disfavor higher income folks.  The change in SS taxation (credits) tends to favor higher income folks to some degree.  It phases out at high incomes.
The SALT increase favors anyone who lives in the high tax areas. It's up to the individual to make it work in their favor.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 85147
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #51 on: Today at 08:03:30 AM »
A lower income person in CA will use the standard deduction, they won't pay enough SALT to merit itemizing.

Cincydawg

  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 85147
  • Oracle of Piedmont Park
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #52 on: Today at 08:07:35 AM »
An odd thing about corporate taxes in the US, they account for around 11% of total Federal tax revenue.   So, one could double it or cut it to zero with only a modest impact on revenue.  I'd guess doubling it might end up reducing revenue if nothing else changed.

What Kinds of Revenue Does the Government Collect? | Bipartisan Policy Center

My way of thinking about it is corporations don't pay taxes, their consumers pay it.

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 32157
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #53 on: Today at 08:19:28 AM »
A lower income person in CA will use the standard deduction, they won't pay enough SALT to merit itemizing.
It's up to the individual to make it work in their favor.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

MrNubbz

  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 20426
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #54 on: Today at 08:45:59 AM »
Hard to make it work in one's favor when the provisions and tax laws aren't slanted in you're favor
"An ignorant person is one who doesn't know what you have just found out" Will Rogers

847badgerfan

  • Administrator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 32157
  • Liked:
Re: Should there be billionaires? A test.
« Reply #55 on: Today at 08:52:12 AM »
Everything is in your favor in the Land of the Free.

Gotta take advantage.
U RAH RAH! WIS CON SIN!

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.