Wrong transition business credit covering the embedded income/payroll taxes in that inventory is provided to the business on sale of the property to cover that condition.And whose going to pay for the credit? We are. This credit is not accounted for in their "revenue neutral" rate. We are talking several hundred billion dollars. The 23% (actually 29.87%) rate is not realistic and is the result of a lot of accounting gimmickry. It just a marketing tool to get the suckers on board, and it's worked well on FR.
>
> The 23% (actually 29.87%) rate is not realistic and is the
> result of a lot of accounting gimmickry. It just a marketing
> tool to get the suckers on board, and it's worked well
> on FR.
>
i'll buy that.
And whose going to pay for the credit?
It is a return of taxes already paid under the current income/payroll tax system, in answer to the initial concern of untrained skeptic Duhh.
This credit is not accounted for in their "revenue neutral" rate.
Pick your favorite federal tax rate, I prefer making the Bush tax cuts permanent myself:
refer Tax Freedom Day 2004 PDF http://www.taxfoundation.org/sr129.pdf
|
Total Effective Tax Rates by Level of Government |
|||
| Year | Federal | State | Total |
| 1998 | 22.4% | 10.4% | 32.8% |
| 1999 | 22.5% | 10.4% | 32.9% |
| 2000 | 23.1% | 10.4% | 33.5% |
| 2001 | 22.2% | 10.5% | 32.7% |
| 2002 1 | 19.7% | 10.2% | 29.2% |
| 2003 2 | 18.5% | 10.1% | 28.6% |
| 2004 3 | 17.9% | 10.0% | 27.9% |
| Notes: Leap day is omitted to make dates comparable over time. Positive and negative percentages in parentheses after legislation indicate the first-year fiscal impact of the bill,measured as a percentage of NNP. Since depreciation is not available to pay taxes, GDP is an overstatement of spendable income for the purpose of measuring tax burdens. Depreciation is netted out of NNP. 1 Economic Growth and Tax Reform Reconciliation Act of 2001 Sources: Office of Management and Budget; Internal Revenue Service; Congressional Research Service; National Bureau of Economic Research; Treasury Department; and Tax Foundation calculations. |
|||
"It just a marketing tool to get the suckers on board, and it's worked well on FR."
Do I sense some frustration there, YN? All your bashing and cartwheels in logic haven't slowed down the proposal's momentum a bit, have they?
You know what they say, YN, if you can't beat em, join em. As much as you have studied the issue, you would make a great advocate. You would just have to let your brother in law fend for himself, or stop investing in real estate for artificial tax reasons or abandon whatever the hell your hidden agenda is.