Posted on 08/09/2023 11:47:18 PM PDT by RandFan
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear one of the most important tax cases in history, which could either greenlight the constitutionality of an economically disastrous wealth tax, or destroy critical parts of the U.S. tax system.
Unless the justices take a middle road and define the 16th Amendment according to the history and traditions of the U.S. tax system, the case will result in bad law and worse outcomes.
The case (Moore v. United States) concerns the constitutionality of the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act (TCJA). The act imposed a mandatory repatriation tax on pre-2018 profits that companies and some U.S. shareholders stored abroad. Previously, foreign business profits went untaxed until they returned to U.S. shareholders. But under mandatory repatriation tax, passed as part of Republicans’ comprehensive international tax reform, profits were taxed even if shareholders never received the income.
The revenue from the mandatory tax helped raise an estimated $339 billion that contributed to offsetting other individual and corporate tax cuts, as well as broader international tax reform in the 2017 tax cuts.
The court faces a difficult question: Is this mandatory tax on foreign profits that shareholders never actually received constitutional under the 16th Amendment? The Supreme Court has maintained since 1920 that income must be “clearly realized” for it to be taxable. Yet the U.S. tax code is riddled with taxes on unrealized income.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
How is a mutual fund capital gain any different than a capital gain from the sale of (for example) real estate?
Advocacy journalism.
"income must be “clearly realized” for it to be taxable"
Sounds like they are mixing apples and oranges and will lose this case if that's the fundamental basis of it.
Corporations receive profits and shareholders receive dividends. Two different things. Two different entities (corp vs individual). Two different sets of tax laws.
The fundamental question as to whether the US can tax overseas income is another story and may be the angle they're actually taking, but that's not apparent in the article.
You are the S corp. S corp can’t make profit without you “seeing” it. Either profits are taxed or they are not. S corp is not a tax shelter. C corp pay taxes and individuals pay taxes. S corp is to avoid double taxation of corp profits by not taxing corp AND profits paid to shareholders.
If the fed can print $trillions at will, why do we pay any tax at all?
I think you are right.
I believe the Quartering Act changes in 1774 were made as a form of punishment in response to the rebellious Colonials. (Note: Those changes in 1774 were part of the “Coercive Acts” meant as punishment to the colonies, Boston in particular)
The original Quartering Act in 1765 (Really an amendment to the Mutiny Act) was nothing like what was implemented after 1774. From what I understand, the original one prohibited troops from being quartered, but did make provisions to pay colonials if they DID have to quarter soldiers out of necessity.
The 1774 Quartering Act was completly, totally, 100% punitive, meant that way, and there was no compensation (that I am aware of)
If nothing is done, taxes will go up to the highest ever (percentage) in history in 2026. I’m hoping politicians wake up to this mess coming.
Worst amendment ever. As had been warned, “The power to tax is the power to destroy.” and the tax code has been used for that since 1913.
If the hill is upset about it, it must be good.
Was it ever properly ratified? There are allegations it wasn’t or fraudulently so...
Amendment 16
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
In what galaxy does “taxes on incomes” mean taxes on corporate profits? Obviously “incomes” means personal incomes. Corporate income taxes followed by personal income taxes, taxes the same money twice, and that’s obviously NOT what the 16th authorizes.
Upstate NY guy, Bob Schultz said the same for years, also had a court case at SCOTUS. https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2001/bob-schulz%E2%80%99s-we-people-group-don-quixote-queensbury https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/20/20-1626/179849/20210521173412421_20210521-173153-95753755-00002139.pdf
I have heard arguments about that, which are fairly persuasive. However, the income tax was primarily sold as a 'tax the rich' scheme. The first $20k of "income" wasn't taxed at all. In a time when an automobile cost much less than $1k, that was a lot of money.
Next time you have to do your taxes, you can download the original 1913 tax forms here: here. The entire thing is a 4-page PDF, including instructions. Even with the insane cumulative inflation we've had since that time, you'll be surprised at how low your tax bill would be.
It gets assigned to you to pay taxes on even though you don’t get the cash to pay the taxes.
The mutual fund price may not even go up. You just have to pay the taxes with money from somewhere else.
That's because you are reinvesting dividends and capital gains back into the mutual fund. You have the option of having those paid to you as cash. In fact, one of my action items for the 4th quarter of 2023 is to set up my mutual funds so they all do exactly that.
Show me any communist regime in history that has reduced taxation of its serfs...
Were the Capital gains reinvested?
.
Now do away with property taxes.
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.