"the Mooch"

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
doc_rot said:
yes but typically taxing imports is done to help out a domestic industry, wheras this hurts the domestic solar industry which employs more people than coal and oil combined.
That's what the "experts" are saying. They said the market was going to plummet when Trump was elected too. It very well may hurt installers, in the short term.

Guess we shall find out.
 

doc_rot

Oh the usual... I bowl, I drive around...
DTT SUPPORTER
DTT BOTM WINNER
J-Rod10 said:
Nor am I. That was a genuine question.

It's not like me shipping rear sets all over the world. I'm here, they all leave from here. Apple, they have brick and mortar stores all over the world. Those products sold overseas, have never touched American soil. There's nothing American about them, besides the name on the device. I can 100% understand them not wanting to pay taxes on money a second time, at an even higher rate.
That would be true if they paid ANY taxes at all. Hell, as a small business owner you probably pay more in taxes than Apple does, and why this tax law is bullshit. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/05/20/how-to-make-30-billion-and-pay-no-corporate-income-tax-the-apple-way/?utm_term=.8c18fa4c717a

in 2017 The US was loosing 90 billion a year to corporate tax loopholes.
 

teazer

Well-Known Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
There's taxes and then there's loopholes and then there are tariffs.

Tariffs are an artificial "tax" to protect local industries. One example was Australia were they reduced the tariff protection on imported autos and managed to close down the whole Australian auto industry and related supply chains. Applying and reducing or eliminating tarriff protection should be done very carefully. Not the way this administration acts.

The tax situation is complicated as it relates to the value added in a country and taxes that country can charge on profits. Australian Tax Office ATO has a fairly aggressive approach to what is known as Transfer Pricing Policy to ensure that they get a fair share of the profits. Companies try all sorts of tricks to pretend the profit was earned elsewhere so that they pay little to no taxes.

In addition, large corporations have changed teir place of business to countries wit low or zero corporate taxes despite the fact that their real head offices stayed in the US. It's another way to pay minimal amounts of corporate tax. As individual tax payers or small business, we don't have that luxury.

There are millionaire tax accountants that advise large corporations about this stuff and the top guys are earning millions for their firms and for themselves. Who is missing out? That would be our government that is missing teh revenue it needs to cover expenses and teh interest bill on all teh trillions it has borrowed.

Anorher tax we tend to ignore is Sales Tax. Used to be we would go the local store or dealer to buy everything and we'd be charged sales tax in states that have it. Withe the rise in on line business, most states have lost that income stream which must put a sever bite on their ability to provide services.

Back to Apple again for a moment. The value in their product is not just the hardware but is in the design and software. Any Apple product sold anywhare in the world is generating income to cover that Apple head office R&D cost and should be correctly taxed as US generated income in its transfer pricing. I am not privy to either their transfer pricing model nor their tax returns so can't comment on how well their tax attorneys have done their lobbying let alone how much tax they pay or should pay.

What you can determine is that large corporations generally pay less tax (relatively) than small business or individual tax payers. What Congress just did was to tilt that further in favor of large corporations and also to help real Estate developers. There is no such thing as Coincidence. Trump just approved a large net cash bonus for himself and the rest of us will end up paying for it - one way or another.
 

teazer

Well-Known Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
J-Rod10 said:
That's what the "experts" are saying. They said the market was going to plummet when Trump was elected too. It very well may hurt installers, in the short term.

Guess we shall find out.
Different "experts". It does look like the pass through of those cost increase will end up hurting consumers and/or installers. It's a pity that the administartion didn't take teh time to work through the economic models that prior administrations did. As with any forecast, there are assumptions that may not turn out to be accurate, but prior administartions did try to evaluate teh overall impact of such tariffs before announcing them.

I am told that many of the economists that used to work for the administration have now left because their recommendations and reports are ignored by the Trump administration because the WH doesn't want to be constrained by facts or opinions other that the Chump in Chief got from watching Fox and Friends.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
I don't know about you, but I haven't talked to a business owner, small or large, that's displeased with it.

What the government needs to do, is curb their spending.
 

SONICJK

Reminds me of...me No, I'm sure of it. I hate him
It's important to realize that the tax cut was not only for huge corporations. I'm not for tax cuts to huge industry any more than the next guy, but this bill also applies to all small business owners. I personally will get to write off 20% of my income and take larger standard deductions. My accountant included a page in my tax preparation this year that shows me how it will effect me. Through the deduction difference, the 20% pass through write-off and the rate changes (and associated income tax rate drop from showing less income) it will save me 38% next year.
That's HUGE for my small business. Game changing really. That's 38% more revenue I can take home to my family or reinvest or pay to my employees.

I am not a trump fan but I'm good with this one :)
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
SONIC. said:
It's important to realize that the tax cut was not only for huge corporations. I'm not for tax cuts to huge industry any more than the next guy, but this bill also applies to all small business owners. I personally will get to write off 20% of my income and take larger standard deductions. My accountant included a page in my tax preparation this year that shows me how it will effect me. Through the deduction difference, the 20% pass through write-off and the rate changes (and associated income tax rate drop from showing less income) it will save me 38% next year.
That's HUGE for my small business. Game changing really. That's 38% more revenue I can take home to my family or reinvest or pay to my employees.

I am not a trump fan but I'm good with this one :)
Exactly.

All you see is rich people this, rich people that. Big corporation this, big corporation that.

Sure the big boys get a cut. But so do the millions and millions of small businesses, that employ over half of the work force.

If I have more money for more equipment, I then have a need for more people to run them. If we're running at "full employment," I then have to pay them more to entice them to leave where ever they currently are. They then have more money to put in to the local economy. I have another machine running making me more money. The company I snagged whoever from, has to pay someone else more money to get them to leave their current gig, and on and on.
 

teazer

Well-Known Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
J-Rod10 said:
I don't know about you, but I haven't talked to a business owner, small or large, that's displeased with it.

What the government needs to do, is curb their spending.
That's not a bad point. Our US tax collections as percentage of GDP is roughy in line with most other developed countries but our cost structure is much different.

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/

A quick look at US budget suggests that the two largest costs are Military and Healthcare. Our military expenditure is something like the combined next 8-10 countries and we want to spend more. We don't need a weaker or less effective military but we could be a lot more efficient and cost effective. problem with that is that they are effective lobbyists and it's an emotional issue.

On healthcare we also spend twice as much as any other country per capita but our outcomes rate us somewhere around 24th. Again big pharma and "not for profit" health centers have effective lobbying. So it's clear that there could be some big cuts in those two areas, we may lack the political courage to address them. They are very emotional subjects, and yet we need to address them as you pointed out. Cutting welfare sounds like a great start but it doesn't save a lot and hurts people. How about we press government to stop paying more for drugs than any other civilized country. Service and safety do not need to suffer, but that is not going to be an easy task to cut costs. We need to do it though.

I'm with you on that. (not with her or him)....
 

doc_rot

Oh the usual... I bowl, I drive around...
DTT SUPPORTER
DTT BOTM WINNER
teazer said:
That's not a bad point. Our US tax collections as percentage of GDP is roughy in line with most other developed countries but our cost structure is much different.

https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/

A quick look at US budget suggests that the two largest costs are Military and Healthcare. Our military expenditure is something like the combined next 8-10 countries and we want to spend more. We don't need a weaker or less effective military but we could be a lot more efficient and cost effective. problem with that is that they are effective lobbyists and it's an emotional issue.

On healthcare we also spend twice as much as any other country per capita but our outcomes rate us somewhere around 24th. Again big pharma and "not for profit" health centers have effective lobbying. So it's clear that there could be some big cuts in those two areas, we may lack the political courage to address them. They are very emotional subjects, and yet we need to address them as you pointed out. Cutting welfare sounds like a great start but it doesn't save a lot and hurts people. How about we press government to stop paying more for drugs than any other civilized country. Service and safety do not need to suffer, but that is not going to be an easy task to cut costs. We need to do it though.

I'm with you on that. (not with her or him)....
Or we could make corporations pay there fair share. They're good for an addition 90 billion a year if they actually paid up. cutting public assistance programs will come nowhere near that. if you want to cut welfare cut corporate welfare. Politicians love to complain about the mythical "welfare queen" yet nobody is talking about the $60 billion fortune 500 companies collect every year in subsidies. Corporations are looting our country while simultaneously telling the middle class its the poor peoples fault.
 

J-Rod10

Active Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
NY, NJ, and Connecticut are about to sue the federal government saying the new tax is unfair to high earners, as their deductions on local, state, and property taxes have been reduced to $10K, and they'll be required to pay more in taxes.

Who's for the little guy, again?
 

datadavid

New Member
Re: "the Mooch"

J-Rod10 said:
NY, NJ, and Connecticut are about to sue the federal government saying the new tax is unfair to high earners, as their deductions on local, state, and property taxes have been reduced to $10K, and they'll be required to pay more in taxes.

Who's for the little guy, again?
Anything that upsets the rich and greedy is great news
 

teazer

Well-Known Member
DTT BOTM WINNER
J-Rod10 said:
NY, NJ, and Connecticut are about to sue the federal government saying the new tax is unfair to high earners, as their deductions on local, state, and property taxes have been reduced to $10K, and they'll be required to pay more in taxes.

Who's for the little guy, again?
Not so fast. The states that have higher state and local taxes tend to be more populous and have more programs to help the poor and elderly. They also happen to be states that voted overwhelmingly for HC. What better way to punish HC donors than to hit them with slightly higher taxes. The super rich people also see a rate drop that more than covers that SALT tax increase but not as much as if they were red state donors to DT.

It is completely consistent with the party that arranges to most egregious gerrymandering of voting districts and is outraged that Trump said he might be open to DACA path to citizenship because they might vote democrat. Anyone that says it's a middle class tax cut is kidding themselves. There's just enough scraps to keep us feeling good while he continues to redistribute wealth from the population to the super rich.

It has happened for years and is just accelerating.
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
Right... out of the goodness of his heart, and because they didn't have sex.

And Hannity today is parroting an alt-right/white nationalist post on 4chan that Obama's residential portrait contains images of sperm.

El que hambre tiene, en pan piensa.
 

Tune-A-Fish

BOTM LOSER Proudly Deplorable
I see you shills are still here sucking each others dicks and blaming Trump for your lack of parenting :eek:
 

carnivorous chicken

Active Member
Tune-A-Fish© said:
I see you shills are still here sucking each others dicks and blaming Trump for your lack of parenting :eek:
Tuna! So nice of you to drop by! Miss you buddy! I thought you might've been smart enough to be embarrassed at this shit show and your wholehearted support, but of course not! Nice of you to drop by and call us all gay! That's how arguments are won, amiright? Genius!
 
Top Bottom