Posted on 07/04/2016 7:48:30 PM PDT by Kaslin
Yes
bkmk
The aren’t capable of honoring the Constitution either.
Hartmann thinks he’s a genius. Of course, his stuff is about as credible as a bunch of RT’s stuff.
Hartmann is a well-known Marxist sympathizer and Democrat Party propagandist so take what he says with 2 cyanide capsules and call me in the morning.
In which case, she won’t get much in Social Security since the pay-out is based on the amount of taxed income earned. There’s a welfare-like component for the very poor, so that’d probably provide her with the minimum benefit, which would mostly likely be taxed.
The reason they won’t raise it (the max SS taxable income) is because they will have to (according to their own formulas) pay out larger SS payments when these people do retire. They simply can’t afford it so they’ll find other ways to tax not involved like SS. Example, they get away with no limit on 1.45% accompanying Medicare tax is because Medicare payouts are for ‘procedures’ not payments into the system.
When I had no-pretax income tax on retirement contributions because I worked for a teachers system, it was STILL taxed by SS....in fact, SS and Medicare. The federal tax was deferred until retirement.
Generally, OF COURSE!
So, theoretically at least, some very wealthy people pay no FICA or medicare taxes. Someone like John Kerry's wife, whose income comes from investments may not have paid much FICA or medicare taxes.
In which case, she won’t get much in Social Security since the pay-out is based on the amount of taxed income earned. There’s a welfare-like component for the very poor, so that’d probably provide her with the minimum benefit, which would mostly likely be taxed.
Someone (John Kerry’s wife for an example) who may not have ever earned any “wages” or any self-employment income subject to SS tax - who’s only source of income during their lifetime was solely from investment income, they will not receive any SS benefits unless his or her spouse received eligible wages, but then the benefits are limited – half of whatever the spouse was entitled to and the full amount if widowed or divorced, subject to some limitations. But if in retirement, the person has annual income (from any source including investment earnings) of more than $34,000 (if you file taxes individually) or $44,000 if married and filing jointly, they will owe taxes on 85 percent of their provisional income, which includes also income from tax-free municipal bonds.
And one (or one’s spouse) also has to have worked for at least 10 years to receive SS benefits.
https://www.ssa.gov/planners/credits.html#&a0=0
The maximum (monthly) benefit depends on the age you retire. For example, if you retire at full retirement age in 2016, your maximum benefit would be $2,639. However, if you retire at age 62 in 2016, your maximum benefit would be $2,102. If you retire at age 70 in 2016, your maximum benefit would be $3,576.
So yes, in theory wealthy people like John Kerry’s wife could receive SS benefits but she will pay tax on those benefits.
Trump has said he thinks wealthy people like his millionaire friends and himself should voluntarily forgo their SS benefits.
But if they paid into the system, why shouldn’t they collect at least some benefits even if those benefits are taxed? The problem as I see it is how one determines who is “wealthy”. That bar seems to get lowered all the time.
Don’t forget, the wealthy pay a smaller percentage of their income to ss.
They, like everyone else, make the best deal they can with the government - paying as little in taxes, and according to many people, getting as much as they can in return. This is of course the problem with a large and intrusive government.
Maximizing one's return on taxes paid turns into a very expensive proposition. It is the root of crony capitalism, every growing entitlements, and ultimately a bankrupt nation.
Because at some level more and more people realize that they do need to both minimize their taxes and maximize their benefits.
I wouldn't be surprised if there is already software running in accountants offices that tells you how to maximize your social security returns by earning enough income subject to FICA - speaking fees, consulting fees, directorship fees, etc. so that you get the maximum payout, but not paying more than needed. The rest of the money moves into dividends, rents, etc.
So the idea that the wealthy are not in effect exempt from many taxes is wrong, because the tax code treats types of income quite differently.
Attempts to raise money by increasing the FICA limit ultimately just burden people trying to move up using earned income. The increased limits won't tax people who are already rich whose income can be re-allocated to avoid the tax.
Between Hubby’s Military Pension and both our SS we come no where near that quoted figure, but still pay Federal Income taxes on all 3.
Which means when all 3 are combined hubby does NOT qualify for VA Care as it exceeds the $38K cap. We are trapped in the gutted and DOD MANDATED Medicare and Tricare Life health care.
Step daughter owns her own IT business and pays into both SS and Medicare quarterly.
The only part of hubby’s Military Pension that is NOT subject to Federal Income tax is the 10% DISABILITY portion. The rest along with both our SS we pay Federal Income tax on. We live in Tennessee where there is no state income tax.
The ones I mentioned aren’t deferred but exempt altogether. I don’t know what percentage overall of tax-payers that would be.
I didn’t take that into consideration. So true.
Of course, but the earned income that was used to create the interest, capital gains, etc. was. Unless you are talking about using gains to create more gains which is certainly doable.
But businesses and employees pay a share each, thought it was half. Think of people like farmers who file Schedule F have to pay the whole load in self-employment taxes every single year. And they don't usually retire so, theoretically at least, pay almost their entire working lives.
I guess what seems really unfair to me is that the lowest paid people in the country pay SS and Medicare at the same rate as the wealthy and it is proportional to income, but it's still a pretty big bite. Some qualify for the full range of government benefits though which can leave them better off than some middle class families.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.