Stores don’t sell your favorite product anymore. That’s on purpose

Started by ZLoth, November 10, 2024, 11:26:45 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Scott5114

Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 07:01:58 PMA further item that is on my radar screen, In light of the USSupremes' 'Chevron' ruling from earlier this year, What if some little guy or gal similarly makes a federal case out of the imposition of the income tax, claiming that the feds have to cover all of his or her costs of complying with the law, and the Supremes side with the plaintiff, rendering 16A unenforceable?

Mike

In every other country, the government calculates your tax return themselves and then sends you the bill or refund without you having to do anything. We still have to file 1040s and junk because Intuit bribes the government to make us keep doing it, since otherwise TurboTax wouldn't be needed. If you think about it, it's really stupid, because of course the government is calculating the tax return on their end already, because how else would they know if you were trying to cheat? We're basically putting in the time, effort, and money to duplicate effort just so Robert W. Intuit-TurboTax IV, Esq. can buy his ninety-sixth yacht.

As usual.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef


J N Winkler

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 13, 2024, 07:08:37 PMWe're basically putting in the time, effort, and money to duplicate effort just so Robert W. Intuit-TurboTax IV, Esq. can buy his ninety-sixth yacht.

AIUI, that is actually the Bloch family, which stands behind H.R. Block and Intuit.

They do donate generously to the Nelson-Atkins in Kansas City, though I agree with the general point that tax preparation should not be encumbered by rent-seeking behavior.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Scott5114

Quote from: J N Winkler on November 13, 2024, 07:15:44 PMAIUI, that is actually the Bloch family, which stands behind H.R. Block and Intuit.

How dare you derail my lazy attempt at a joke with facts. :P
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

thspfc

"Corporation with goal of making profit attempts to make profit"

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 13, 2024, 07:08:37 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 07:01:58 PMA further item that is on my radar screen, In light of the USSupremes' 'Chevron' ruling from earlier this year, What if some little guy or gal similarly makes a federal case out of the imposition of the income tax, claiming that the feds have to cover all of his or her costs of complying with the law, and the Supremes side with the plaintiff, rendering 16A unenforceable?

Mike

In every other country, the government calculates your tax return themselves and then sends you the bill or refund without you having to do anything. We still have to file 1040s and junk because Intuit bribes the government to make us keep doing it, since otherwise TurboTax wouldn't be needed. If you think about it, it's really stupid, because of course the government is calculating the tax return on their end already, because how else would they know if you were trying to cheat? We're basically putting in the time, effort, and money to duplicate effort just so Robert W. Intuit-TurboTax IV, Esq. can buy his ninety-sixth yacht.

As usual.

The complicated tax code was around well before TurboTax.  People have been crying for simplified tax returns well before TurboTax.  The government could care less about TurboTax.  They have their own job positions to fulfill.

Scott5114

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 13, 2024, 07:47:28 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 13, 2024, 07:08:37 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 07:01:58 PMA further item that is on my radar screen, In light of the USSupremes' 'Chevron' ruling from earlier this year, What if some little guy or gal similarly makes a federal case out of the imposition of the income tax, claiming that the feds have to cover all of his or her costs of complying with the law, and the Supremes side with the plaintiff, rendering 16A unenforceable?

Mike

In every other country, the government calculates your tax return themselves and then sends you the bill or refund without you having to do anything. We still have to file 1040s and junk because Intuit bribes the government to make us keep doing it, since otherwise TurboTax wouldn't be needed. If you think about it, it's really stupid, because of course the government is calculating the tax return on their end already, because how else would they know if you were trying to cheat? We're basically putting in the time, effort, and money to duplicate effort just so Robert W. Intuit-TurboTax IV, Esq. can buy his ninety-sixth yacht.

As usual.

The complicated tax code was around well before TurboTax.  People have been crying for simplified tax returns well before TurboTax.  The government could care less about TurboTax.  They have their own job positions to fulfill.

https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-turbotax-20-year-fight-to-stop-americans-from-filing-their-taxes-for-free

QuoteBut the success of TurboTax rests on a shaky foundation, one that could collapse overnight if the U.S. government did what most wealthy countries did long ago and made tax filing simple and free for most citizens.

For more than 20 years, Intuit has waged a sophisticated, sometimes covert war to prevent the government from doing just that, according to internal company and IRS documents and interviews with insiders. The company unleashed a battalion of lobbyists and hired top officials from the agency that regulates it. From the beginning, Intuit recognized that its success depended on two parallel missions: stoking innovation in Silicon Valley while stifling it in Washington.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Duke87

Quote from: hbelkins on November 13, 2024, 05:40:49 PMYou're forgetting state inheritance and estate taxes. I've mentioned this before, but nearly 25 years ago, I was the executor of the estate of my mom's first cousin. He was not married, had no children, and his will split his estate among three relatives, with a couple of items going to my dad.

He had retired, lived frugally, and had a modest amount of savings. I had to write a check to the Commonwealth of Kentucky for $45,000 before his heirs received a dime.

That's beyond highway robbery if you ask me.

I don't know if the law has changed in the last 25 years but it looks like the issue here is that Kentucky has a particularly annoying inheritance tax where if you're a spouse, sibling, parent, child, or grandchild of the deceased you can inherit unlimited assets from them without triggering any state taxes. However, anyone not in that club has to start paying taxes to inherit any more than $1000 worth of assets, which is not a high bar. This... yeah, for someone who dies unmarried and childless means the state is basically guaranteed to be taking a cut of their estate. It's a lousy structure.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: LilianaUwU on November 13, 2024, 07:08:20 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 09:28:51 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2024, 08:46:48 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 02:27:49 PMTaxing inherited wealth is most definitely a good thing in this country. And if that means small business are snapped up by larger ones, so be it.

Why should the government get a cut of something just because you have the misfortune of dying?

Because it's good for society at large.

I disagree. As Max said, that income was already taxed to hell and back.

Nope. Mostly unrealized gains that weren't taxed. The rest being mostly realized gains and dividends taxed at a lower rate than earned income.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 06:51:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 09:28:51 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2024, 08:46:48 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 02:27:49 PMTaxing inherited wealth is most definitely a good thing in this country. And if that means small business are snapped up by larger ones, so be it.

Why should the government get a cut of something just because you have the misfortune of dying?

Because it's good for society at large.

How so?


Because we should reward those that earn their income. Not inherit it.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: Duke87 on November 13, 2024, 08:34:21 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 13, 2024, 05:40:49 PMYou're forgetting state inheritance and estate taxes. I've mentioned this before, but nearly 25 years ago, I was the executor of the estate of my mom's first cousin. He was not married, had no children, and his will split his estate among three relatives, with a couple of items going to my dad.

He had retired, lived frugally, and had a modest amount of savings. I had to write a check to the Commonwealth of Kentucky for $45,000 before his heirs received a dime.

That's beyond highway robbery if you ask me.

I don't know if the law has changed in the last 25 years but it looks like the issue here is that Kentucky has a particularly annoying inheritance tax where if you're a spouse, sibling, parent, child, or grandchild of the deceased you can inherit unlimited assets from them without triggering any state taxes. However, anyone not in that club has to start paying taxes to inherit any more than $1000 worth of assets, which is not a high bar. This... yeah, for someone who dies unmarried and childless means the state is basically guaranteed to be taking a cut of their estate. It's a lousy structure.

Yeah that is hardly the norm for most states.

vdeane

Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 06:51:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 09:28:51 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2024, 08:46:48 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 02:27:49 PMTaxing inherited wealth is most definitely a good thing in this country. And if that means small business are snapped up by larger ones, so be it.

Why should the government get a cut of something just because you have the misfortune of dying?

Because it's good for society at large.

How so?

Mike
Not having an entrenched aristocracy?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

mgk920

Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 13, 2024, 09:28:09 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 06:51:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 09:28:51 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2024, 08:46:48 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 02:27:49 PMTaxing inherited wealth is most definitely a good thing in this country. And if that means small business are snapped up by larger ones, so be it.

Why should the government get a cut of something just because you have the misfortune of dying?

Because it's good for society at large.

How so?


Because we should reward those that earn their income. Not inherit it.

Why is that a problem?

Mike

mgk920

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 13, 2024, 08:27:40 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 13, 2024, 07:47:28 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 13, 2024, 07:08:37 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 07:01:58 PMA further item that is on my radar screen, In light of the USSupremes' 'Chevron' ruling from earlier this year, What if some little guy or gal similarly makes a federal case out of the imposition of the income tax, claiming that the feds have to cover all of his or her costs of complying with the law, and the Supremes side with the plaintiff, rendering 16A unenforceable?

Mike

In every other country, the government calculates your tax return themselves and then sends you the bill or refund without you having to do anything. We still have to file 1040s and junk because Intuit bribes the government to make us keep doing it, since otherwise TurboTax wouldn't be needed. If you think about it, it's really stupid, because of course the government is calculating the tax return on their end already, because how else would they know if you were trying to cheat? We're basically putting in the time, effort, and money to duplicate effort just so Robert W. Intuit-TurboTax IV, Esq. can buy his ninety-sixth yacht.

As usual.

The complicated tax code was around well before TurboTax.  People have been crying for simplified tax returns well before TurboTax.  The government could care less about TurboTax.  They have their own job positions to fulfill.

https://www.propublica.org/article/inside-turbotax-20-year-fight-to-stop-americans-from-filing-their-taxes-for-free

QuoteBut the success of TurboTax rests on a shaky foundation, one that could collapse overnight if the U.S. government did what most wealthy countries did long ago and made tax filing simple and free for most citizens.

For more than 20 years, Intuit has waged a sophisticated, sometimes covert war to prevent the government from doing just that, according to internal company and IRS documents and interviews with insiders. The company unleashed a battalion of lobbyists and hired top officials from the agency that regulates it. From the beginning, Intuit recognized that its success depended on two parallel missions: stoking innovation in Silicon Valley while stifling it in Washington.

Such a ruling would also apply to, for example, the costs realized by an employer's payroll department in complying with withholding rules.  EvERY cost of compliance to the law would be covered.

Mike

SEWIGuy

Quote from: mgk920 on November 14, 2024, 10:36:46 AM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 13, 2024, 09:28:09 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 06:51:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 09:28:51 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 12, 2024, 08:46:48 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 12, 2024, 02:27:49 PMTaxing inherited wealth is most definitely a good thing in this country. And if that means small business are snapped up by larger ones, so be it.

Why should the government get a cut of something just because you have the misfortune of dying?

Because it's good for society at large.

How so?


Because we should reward those that earn their income. Not inherit it.

Why is that a problem?



Because the whole point of giving any person or entity a tax break is because they provide a service that is deemed beneficial to society at large. We give tax deductions for mortgage interest to encourage home ownership. Ditto for parents raising children. We tax dividends less than earned income to encourage business owners to reinvest in their business and create jobs. There are countless examples of this.

Those who inherit wealth didn't do any of this. They just had wealthy ancestors.

mgk920

And your problem with that is (raw class envy?) ??

Mike

Scott5114

Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 07:01:58 PMA further item that is on my radar screen, In light of the USSupremes' 'Chevron' ruling from earlier this year, What if some little guy or gal similarly makes a federal case out of the imposition of the income tax, claiming that the feds have to cover all of his or her costs of complying with the law, and the Supremes side with the plaintiff, rendering 16A unenforceable?

Mike

Quote from: mgk920 on November 14, 2024, 10:41:36 AMSuch a ruling would also apply to, for example, the costs realized by an employer's payroll department in complying with withholding rules.  EvERY cost of compliance to the law would be covered.

Mike

"We rule part of the constitution unconstitutional because it's too expensive" would be a pretty fantastical interpretation by anyone who was interested in doing the job of SCOTUS competently.

"To provide and maintain a Navy" is also pretty damn expensive, but it's one of the enumerated powers in Article I Section 8, so it is generally agreed that the price isn't relevant to whether the government can or can't do it. What money should be spent by who is a political question, not a judicial one.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

mgk920

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 14, 2024, 11:03:12 AM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 13, 2024, 07:01:58 PMA further item that is on my radar screen, In light of the USSupremes' 'Chevron' ruling from earlier this year, What if some little guy or gal similarly makes a federal case out of the imposition of the income tax, claiming that the feds have to cover all of his or her costs of complying with the law, and the Supremes side with the plaintiff, rendering 16A unenforceable?

Mike

Quote from: mgk920 on November 14, 2024, 10:41:36 AMSuch a ruling would also apply to, for example, the costs realized by an employer's payroll department in complying with withholding rules.  EvERY cost of compliance to the law would be covered.

Mike

"We rule part of the constitution unconstitutional because it's too expensive" would be a pretty fantastical interpretation by anyone who was interested in doing the job of SCOTUS competently.

"To provide and maintain a Navy" is also pretty damn expensive, but it's one of the enumerated powers in Article I Section 8, so it is generally agreed that the price isn't relevant to whether the government can or can't do it. What money should be spent by who is a political question, not a judicial one.


How is my contention different from the Supremes putting the kibosh on the feds for requiring that a commercial fisherman bring a federal law enforcer on board his fishing boat at his own expense?

Mike

Scott5114

Quote from: mgk920 on November 14, 2024, 11:12:32 AMHow is my contention different from the Supremes putting the kibosh on the feds for requiring that a commercial fisherman bring a federal law enforcer on board his fishing boat at his own expense?

It's sillier.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

SEWIGuy

Quote from: mgk920 on November 14, 2024, 11:02:13 AMAnd your problem with that is (raw class envy?) ??

I think tax policies should be established to both fund the government, but also to further societal goals. Taxing estates advances such goals. I have laid that out as my premise...and your response is "class envy?" GMAFB.

hbelkins

Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 14, 2024, 02:35:11 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 14, 2024, 11:02:13 AMAnd your problem with that is (raw class envy?) ??

I think tax policies should be established to both fund the government, but also to further societal goals. Taxing estates advances such goals. I have laid that out as my premise...and your response is "class envy?" GMAFB.

Who is the arbiter of "societal goals?" I'm sure my goals for society are different than yours, or most anyone else's.
Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

SEWIGuy

Quote from: hbelkins on November 21, 2024, 12:53:12 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 14, 2024, 02:35:11 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on November 14, 2024, 11:02:13 AMAnd your problem with that is (raw class envy?) ??

I think tax policies should be established to both fund the government, but also to further societal goals. Taxing estates advances such goals. I have laid that out as my premise...and your response is "class envy?" GMAFB.

Who is the arbiter of "societal goals?" I'm sure my goals for society are different than yours, or most anyone else's.

Whatever the elected leaders determine them to be. As I said above...

Quote from: SEWIGuy on November 14, 2024, 10:49:02 AMWe give tax deductions for mortgage interest to encourage home ownership. Ditto for parents raising children. We tax dividends less than earned income to encourage business owners to reinvest in their business and create jobs. There are countless examples of this.

Scott5114

Yep. One of my House rep's goals is to reduce housing costs. He thinks housing costs are high due to corporate landlords buying up all the houses in Las Vegas. So to him a societal goal would be reducing the number of homes owned by corporate landlords, and he uses his position as House rep to advocate for that goal.

He probably isn't going to get anywhere for the next two years because the majority of people in Congress in the next term likely won't agree with him on that being a goal. Sort of a shame, since I do agree with him on this, but I can only vote for my own House rep, not anyone else's.

This is sort of the entire reason for having a democratic republic, that we can influence what goals the society is working toward by installing representatives that share our goals for society. If we had a monarchy, the king would be the arbiter of societal goals, full stop. If you don't agree with the king's societal goals, nobody cares.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Rothman

For whatever it's worth, the aggregate data shows that it's not corporate ownership of real estate that is causing higher prices, but a general lack of supply altogether.  Need to build more homes and make it easier to get rid of homes that are never going to sell and replace with ones that will.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

vdeane

Quote from: Rothman on November 21, 2024, 07:48:05 PMFor whatever it's worth, the aggregate data shows that it's not corporate ownership of real estate that is causing higher prices, but a general lack of supply altogether.  Need to build more homes and make it easier to get rid of homes that are never going to sell and replace with ones that will.
It would sure help if investors weren't paying cash for every single home that goes on the market.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Rothman

Quote from: vdeane on November 21, 2024, 08:48:10 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 21, 2024, 07:48:05 PMFor whatever it's worth, the aggregate data shows that it's not corporate ownership of real estate that is causing higher prices, but a general lack of supply altogether.  Need to build more homes and make it easier to get rid of homes that are never going to sell and replace with ones that will.
It would sure help if investors weren't paying cash for every single home that goes on the market.

This economist has a great series of TikToks that explore in-depth what is going on with housing prices.  The percentage of investors owning single-family homes has been exaggerated:

https://www.tiktok.com/@econchrisclarke/video/7111016093354822958
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.