TexasCHLforum.com

Liberty wrote:What they really need to do is come up with a Tax Plan so simple that Turbo Tax and Tax preparers will be put out of business.

Some kind of Fair / Flat Tax is the direction we need to go (in my opinion)

pbwalker wrote:

Liberty wrote:What they really need to do is come up with a Tax Plan so simple that Turbo Tax and Tax preparers will be put out of business.

Some kind of Fair / Flat Tax is the direction we need to go (in my opinion)

I read today that 50% of workers pay no tax.

There is just something basically wrong with that.

Anygunanywhere said

I read today that 50% of workers pay no tax.

There is just something basically wrong with that.

You mean like then 50% of the people could vote for all sorts of free stuff and know they wouldn't have to pay for it?
What could possibly go wrong with that?

Liberty wrote:What they really need to do is come up with a Tax Plan so simple that Turbo Tax and Tax preparers will be put out of business.

And the IRS as well. Simple flat tax that everyone pays the same percentage of their income whether they make $10,000, $100,000, $1,000,000 or more.

bblhd672 wrote:

Liberty wrote:What they really need to do is come up with a Tax Plan so simple that Turbo Tax and Tax preparers will be put out of business.

And the IRS as well. Simple flat tax that everyone pays the same percentage of their income whether they make $10,000, $100,000, $1,000,000 or more.

Home owners or renters. Married or single. Five children or none. Tax the income not the lifestyle choices.

anygunanywhere wrote:

pbwalker wrote:

Liberty wrote:What they really need to do is come up with a Tax Plan so simple that Turbo Tax and Tax preparers will be put out of business.

Some kind of Fair / Flat Tax is the direction we need to go (in my opinion)

I read today that 50% of workers pay no tax.

There is just something basically wrong with that.

I know some people who have almost nothing withheld and get a refund for any they do have withheld. And I know several others who get back more than they put in. I agree with the earlier comment, the US government should not be GIVING you everything you had withheld and THEN some. That is a blatant redistribution of wealth.

Lots of good comments on taxes. I agree a flat tax of 10 to 20% on income only. No other taxes or deductions of any kind. I see lots of elderly people who fret and worry over their taxes. That should not be the case.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nfl-t ... le/2635955

NFL ticket sales down 17%.

There is a belief that in the last Raiders game, where the Caucasian quarterback stood for the national anthem, while everyone else on the team sat, that the offensive line, and the receivers did not play their best. Essentially they threw the game.

Redneck_Buddha wrote:

philip964 wrote:http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-t ... story.html

Yesterday Trump gave a speech about his new federal tax overhaul, to make the tax code simpler, more fair, to stimulate the economy, make America great again and to give everyone a reduction in taxes. Sounds great.

With every change in the tax code, there will be winners and losers. Someone will pay more taxes. Someone will pay less taxes.

He proposed eliminating the death tax. So if you have an estate greater than 5 million dollars you would be a winner. I would assume if you earn income you would be a loser as someone has to make up the difference. That is unless the government just plans to borrow more.

He proposed eliminating the property tax deduction. So if you own a home, you will be a loser.

In the illustration in the news article above, if you pay State income tax or pay sales taxes like in Texas, you will be a loser.

Supposedly the middle class per his speech will pay less. I'm in the middle class, but it looks like, since I itemize my deductions, I will be a loser.

As it normally is, when someone talks about reforming the tax code, it means my taxes will go up.

So I take it you wouldn't benefit from the doubling of the standard deduction? Or are you just leaving out pieces of the picture "because Trump"?

I will be a loser in the new tax plan. When someone buys a house it is normally a lifetime decision. You usually count on tax laws that have been in place for your lifetime when you make that decision. It messes up with your plan when the President decides to change the rules.

By eliminating the local and state income, property tax and sales tax deductions, but keeping the interest deduction, while at the same time doubling the itemized deduction, the President will make owning a home less attractive. Especially for starter homes. It will make renting a home more attractive. Home prices should then decline as less people will buy a home as a tax avoidance plan. It will however be a good thing for investors to buy homes to rent. I should be a big help to landlords, which is what Trump did before he became President.

Don't we really want a country of renters rather than country of home owners.

What I think would be interesting would be if we applied the same rules to businesses and corporations. Do not allow businesses and corporations to deduct their local and state taxes.

After all wouldn't that be fair.

Or we can continue with the trend of allowing businesses and corporations to have deductions that individuals do not get, all in the name of simplification of the tax code.

pbwalker wrote:

Liberty wrote:What they really need to do is come up with a Tax Plan so simple that Turbo Tax and Tax preparers will be put out of business.

Some kind of Fair / Flat Tax is the direction we need to go (in my opinion)

Again winners and losers. High income persons would win, low income persons (who currently pay no tax at all) would lose.

philip964 wrote:

pbwalker wrote:

Liberty wrote:What they really need to do is come up with a Tax Plan so simple that Turbo Tax and Tax preparers will be put out of business.

Some kind of Fair / Flat Tax is the direction we need to go (in my opinion)

Again winners and losers. High income persons would win, low income persons (who currently pay no tax at all) would lose.

Why shouldn't "low income" persons not pay a fair share of taxes? Who decides the definition of low income?

A flat/fair tax will never happen because it makes too much sense.

Whatever the tax rates are changed to, there will never be enough money for the feds until they stop funding programs that don't work or should be in the private sector, cut the spending and reduce the federal workforce, starting with the IRS.

GeekwithaGun wrote:Whatever the tax rates are changed to, there will never be enough money for the feds until they stop funding programs that don't work or should be in the private sector, cut the spending and reduce the federal workforce, starting with the IRS.

This right here is the problem. At least the last 2 quarters record taxes have been collected. There is not a problem with the amount of money going to the government, there is a problem with government spending.

jason812 wrote:

GeekwithaGun wrote:Whatever the tax rates are changed to, there will never be enough money for the feds until they stop funding programs that don't work or should be in the private sector, cut the spending and reduce the federal workforce, starting with the IRS.

This right here is the problem. At least the last 2 quarters record taxes have been collected. There is not a problem with the amount of money going to the government, there is a problem with government spending.