#us tax code

[in4newz]

[ethereal-w0lf]

Things I learned from reading the USA tax code out loud on a Roblox game:

- people think reading all 52 titles with 3 chapters at least each title and at least 10 sections per chapter not including subsections is entertaining.

- Falsely putting someone as a dependent when they have a form of income that helps you and them is fraud

- the IRS won’t report any crimes as long as the money you got is filed correctly

- there has been 12 revisions of the revision of the tax laws and that’s not including the amendments.

- people will boo someone off the stage if they interrupt a speech about the US tax code

[spotlightstory]

The Heritage Foundation is a non-profit violating US tax code. Here is how to file a complaint anonymously with the IRS.

The Heritage Foundation

214 Massachusetts Avenue NE

Washington DC 20002-4999

EIN: 23-7327730

John P Backiel- Vice President, Finance and Accounting, and Treasurer

Violation: 503(c)(3) and falsely filed as 813990

link to the form on the IRS website

Email to [email protected]

Edit to add:

Dates: Various

Amount: Unknown

Description of Violation: 503(c) (3) and falsely filed as 813990. The Heritage Foundation has been widely revealed as the architects of Project 2025 Presidential Transition Project and in support of presidential candidate Donald J Trump. Direct violation of a non profit under the above.

Ty u/jaluce

Edit 2:

For the doubters, here is The Heritage Foundation’s 990 form from 2022

Page 3, #3 asks: “Did the organization engage in direct or indirect political campaign activities on behalf of or in opposition to candidates to public office?”

They answered no. I think it’s very hard to argue that they haven’t been extremely involved with the Trump campaign, even if Trump is now distancing himself from the organization specifically project 2025. Maybe this is the reason he is distancing himself as well as the public scrutiny.

[utilitymonstermash]

What’s the are the goals of the policy of excluding a small amount of commuter benefits from gross income? 

Surely folks who spend large percentage of their income on public transit are either are very low income or have very long commutes. The low income folks are already in pretty low tax-brackets and many of them might not have access to the liquidity to pre-purchase a month of transit (which seems to be how the program is implemented in practice). Extreme commute folks are probably already exceeding the cap on a pretty routine basis. 

It seems like most of the lost revenue of this program goes to yuppies like me, but saving 33% on what amounts to less than 2% of my total income doesn’t seem like a particularly strong lever over my behavior. 

[toshootforthestars]

Different versions of the bill passed the Senate and House with only Republicans’ votes, and the GOP can’t afford to lose too many supporters in the negotiations as they seek a compromise. The party can spare only 22 votes in the House and two in the Senate. There are some major differences that won’t be easy to resolve, and any changes could increase the bill’s cost or force painful tradeoffs. Here are the biggest sticking points -- and how they may be resolved.

From the report by Sahil Kapur, posted 2 Dec 2017:

In the first decade, a limit of $1.5 trillion in new deficits has also forced sunsets. The most they can do is monkey around with the expiration dates and perhaps sunset some provisions rather than others. Many Republicans have taken to arguing future congresses won’t let the tax breaks expire.

Pass-through businesses, including partnerships (LP’s), limited liability companies (LLC’s) and S corporations (”small business corporations”), don’t pay taxes themselves but pass their earnings to their owners, who then pay at their individual tax rate.  Many House Republicans have insisted the pass-through rate mustn’t be higher than 25%.  The initial Senate approach would have pushed it north of 30% for many of the highest-earning pass throughs. The Senate bill has since been amended to provide a more generous break, but it remains to be seen which will carry the day.

The (Alternative Minimum Tax) was established as a way to make sure taxpayers didn’t leverage enough tax breaks to avoid any meaningful tax payment.  Wiping it out is a high priority for conservatives, and the Senate’s last-minute decision to partially preserve it -- albeit in amended form for individuals -- may not sit well with many House Republicans.  Maintaining an AMT in the Senate bill was crucial to paying for changes aimed at winning holdouts, such as the enhanced higher pass-through break and a state and local tax deduction for property taxes.

(The Senate’s version of the bill)... (e)ffectively repeals the (ACA individual) mandate by zeroing out the tax penalty for individuals who don’t purchase health insurance

This is seen as a win-win for most Republicans -- smashing the Affordable Care Act, as they’ve promised to do for years, while raising some $300 billion to pay for tax cuts. The Congressional Budget Office has said the savings would result because the federal government would no longer have to provide subsidies for roughly 13 million people who would no longer be insured.

A last-minute add-on to the Senate bill -- which initially sought to kill (Individual State and Local Tax Deductions, or SALT) entirely -- mirrors the House (property tax exemption up to $10,000). That’s key to winning over Senator Susan Collins of Maine and holding on to a few-dozen House Republicans in high-tax states like New York and New Jersey that rely on the deduction.

Note: The preliminary text of the Senate Bill is here.

Some more analysis here, via Forbes.

[erebusvincent]

The U.S. tax code is way too complex. Here's how to fix it.

You can say what you want about Elon Musk, but he is able to pinpoint in a single tweet some of the most dysfunctional aspects of our federa

A shift to a consumption-based tax instead of Haig-Simons would solve most of this mess. Take one form: a flat tax. It would replace our entire complex tax system with just two simple postcard-sized forms: one for businesses and one for individuals.

Businesses would pay taxes on their total revenue minus wages paid and materials and investments purchased. Individuals would pay a tax on their wages minus a basic personal allowance. Both would use the same single tax rate, say 19 percent. No double taxation, no deductions, no credits, no alternative minimum tax, no special treatment of investment income. Just a simple calculation that takes minutes rather than hours—or days—to complete.

A family of four, for example, might get a $30,000 personal allowance and pay 19 percent on wages above that amount. This radical simplification eliminates most Internal Revenue Service (IRS) paperwork, removes opportunities to game the system through loopholes, treats all economic activity the same while removing double taxation of income, and encourages business investment through immediate expensing.

In this example, savings are treated similarly to today's Roth IRAs. The income is initially taxed, but later, when the savings plus the money they generate are consumed, no taxes are applied. Nor is any reporting needed, which means greater privacy from Uncle Sam.

That's why it's called a "flat" tax. It flattens both the rates and the complexity of the system into something anyone can understand.

The political challenges are formidable but worth it. The benefits from such a change—including increased saving and investment, reduced compliance costs, fewer economic distortions, and a simpler system for both individuals and businesses—are enormous.

[erebusvincent]

Congress continues to make the tax code ridiculously hard to understand

"I shouldn't have to spend so much money on an accountant every year. But I don't really have a choice."

[drag-tween]

With the Writers Guild of America strike still continuing to shut down talk/chat shows in the United States, I've been posting more clips from the UK's The Russell Howard Show, but even he is on a hiatus of sorts. Ah, whatever...