Posted on 09/06/2010 7:27:32 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
True that...Why do they constantly talk of “targeted” tax cuts?? Almost every Congress person has never held a private sector job yet they are attempting to micromanage society by picking winners and losers in the business game. Sheer geniuses...they got the stimulus wrong, unemployment wrong. They are the party of WRONG!!!
True that...Why do they constantly talk of “targeted” tax cuts?? Almost every Congress person has never held a private sector job yet they are attempting to micromanage society by picking winners and losers in the business game. Sheer geniuses...they got the stimulus wrong, unemployment wrong. They are the party of WRONG!!!
Obama Proposes New Tax Loopholes
If it is not permanent and not across the board, it is a loophole, not a tax cut.
“President Obama, in one of his most dramatic gestures to business, will propose that companies be allowed to write off 100 percent of their new investment in plant and equipment through 2011...”
This must be for the Green Factories of the Green Future...still stuck on stupid.
It’s funny that for as long as I can remember Democrats have argued that tax cuts don’t stimulate the economy, yet suddenly their new leader has seen the light.
I am not buying it.
If a business doesn’t need a new plant or new equipment, this won’t help. It also won’t help until the next time income tax is filed. And we’re not even talking about the restrictions and regulations that go with this tax credit. However, if payroll taxes are cut, both employer and employee benefit as soon as the new IRS ciruclar goes into effect. It’s that simple.
Great! Now we can invest in more infrastructure and stuff to produce more things that no one is willing to buy. Our customers are scared because their tax rates may (ha ha ha) or may not go up, their energy costs may or may not go up (ha ha ha), or the economy may double dip and our customers won’t be able to sell what they have. I feel so much better.
I agree, an across-the-board cut would be even better.
However, allowing ALL capital investment to be deductible in 2010 and 2011 is the next best thing. Well, as long as it comes with no strings attached.
The general rule requires you to take the deductions through depreciation. Depreciation means that each year, you can only deduct part of the cost of property. Usually this is no more than one-third of the cost each year. For example, if you purchase a $3,000 photocopier for your business, the general rule will allow you to deduct $1,000 per year for three years.
Section 179 of the Code contains an exception to the general depreciation rule. Under certain limitations, discussed below, you may be able to deduct up to the full cost of property you purchase for your business in one year rather than in three or more years. This increased deduction can save you a lot of income taxes.
Although Section 179 has been around for awhile, Congress recently liberalized it by increasing the amount of the deduction. For example, in 1992, the deduction was $10,000 per year. Starting in 1993, the deduction jumped to $17,500. In 1999, the deduction is $19,000. The deduction will increase to $20,000 in 2000, $24,000 between 2001-2002, and $25,000 in 2003 and thereafter (unless Congress tinkers with it again). In other words, provided that you otherwise meet the requirements of Section 179, during 1999, you can spend $19,000 on property for your business and receive a $19,000 federal income tax deduction.
The Section 179 deduction is limited in two ways. Because Congress geared the Section 179 for small businesses, the deduction is reduced dollar-for-dollar to the extent that you spend more than $200,000 on business property during any year. For example, if you spend $210,000 on business property during 1999, your Section 179 deduction will be reduced by $10,000, and so would be $9,000, not $19,000.
The Section 179 deduction is also limited by your income. You cannot take the deduction to the extent that it exceeds your taxable business income. For example, if in 1999, you spend $15,000 on business property, but your taxable business income is only $10,000, your Section 179 deduction will be limited to $10,000.
So, you see, the code already exists for businesses, if they meet the requirements, to deduct 100% for equipment.
And, he’s a graduate of Hawvard?
It will most likely be like the Obama Making Homes Affordable refinance plan that no one has yet qualified for....but just like the MHA plan, that tax break will be there for ya
odumbass is a day late and a dollar short. And I just loved the phrase, “President Obama, in one of his most dramatic gestures to business....”, lol! WHAT dramatic gestures is this moron at Fox talking about?
And, wow, he’s going to do it for a whole year. This is no different nor any more beneficial to the economy than cash for clunkers was. In fact, it’s similar - feast creating famine. Nobody is going to hire en masse until zerocare blows up. zerocare has been the biggest jobkiller in our nation’s history and nobody is going to make capital investments until people have money to buy stuff which they don’t and won’t have because there are no jobs and the banks aren’t lending anyway.
The problem with this is that it will just create another boom and bust. Business will buy products they think they will need in 2012, 2013, 2014, etc in 2011 to take advantage of the tax cuts, creating a temporary boom. But when the cuts expire, and the businesses have all products they need, they won’t buy anything, creating a bust.
Think of this as cash for clunkers II
“Companies do not need new plants and equipment.”
Actually...I think this country would do well with a few more manufacturing plants.
“...a plan that White House economists say would cut business taxes by nearly $200 billion over two years.”
Two years.......yeah, that’ll do it.
How long did it take for us to get into this mess?
“Ah...this is the part where Dem candidates paint the GOP as the “party of no” that doesn’t want to help business!”
Other than the fact that for the better part of two years they have had the congressional power to do whatever they please...the party of “no” is looking mighty attractive right now. ;o)
This is the old liberal trick of tax CREDITs. Nothing new in this. This is the same as telling businesses the oBastard will give them $3000 in tax CREDIT for hiring new employees. A tax credit is simply the govt throwing crumbs toward businesses temporarily and trying to get them to act in a manner the govt wants them to act.
And how will businesses grow if people don’t have the money to buy their stuff because they don’t have jobs?
Huh? How?
How about cutting taxes for regular taxpayers so regular taxpayers who buy stuff will have more money to buy stuff, thereby increasing demand on businesses to make more stuff, whereupon those businesses hire people to make more stuff resulting in new hires who now themselves have money to buy stuff...?
/banging head against wall
We’re not supposed to be working so we can be consumers; we’re supposed to be working simply for room & board, providing services to the foreigners (tourists and permanent “guests”) that own our debt. We’re only supposed to consume lead-painted, slave-made cheap sh!t from China.
Agreed,
The POS will not come across with tax cuts, which we need desperately.
He knows that thax cuts, and a moratorium on Capital Gains would work, but the problem is, that would take him away from his socialist Utopia with bog goernment control of the economy , and the people, that he will not do it.
We need to de-elect Obama, demand his resignation, attacj=k him , and not only destroy Obama, but we need to destroy the Obamaenentire. Obama is a retrograde throwback to Mussolini , and he has NO place in modern America.There are enough Zimbabwes on this earth without adding America to the list.
RESIGN OBAMA, RESIGN NOW!!!!!!
You’ve all got it right by the boss;
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_080210/content/01125108.guest.html
RUSH: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Wait just a second. Except none of that happened. The automobile business did not get jumpstarted with Cash for Clunkers, and home sales as an industry did not get jumpstarted with the tax credits. There’s a big difference in tax rate reductions and tax credits. Tax credits... Let’s see if the Volt takes off. Let’s see if a tax credit of $7500 on the Volt causes the auto industry to rebound. The housing industry has not rebounded. All that happened with Cash for Clunkers or the tax credit for home buying is it just shifted auto sales earlier into a quarter than they would normally have taken place. But the auto industry did not take off with tax credits. Tax credits are a much, much different thing than tax rate reductions.
Tax rate reductions do stimulate the economy. They most certainly do. Tax credits, by their very definition, aren’t permanent and they don’t equal any additional disposable income. They just lower the price artificially, and for a temporary period of time. Now, the Obama administration — and I guess some liberals — would love to say that tax rates don’t stimulate but tax credits do. But I don’t see any stimulation of anything. Cash for Clunkers caused some car sales to take place but just earlier than they would have, and the last I looked, housing, there’s nothing to write home about in terms of price values. Home values are still falling, foreclosures are going up, and yet Obama’s offered all kinds of tax credits.
You know, a tax credit is a one-time shot. A tax rate reduction is a policy, a policy change. I don’t think there’s any comparison of the two — and this is a trick that liberal Democrats try to use. “Oh, yeah, we’re for tax cuts! Uh, tax credits.” This is nothing more than an attempt to beguile and to fool people and to make them think that government action moves the economy, that government policy moves activity in the economy. It doesn’t increase it. It might shift it. But tax credits do not stimulate. They simply shift. So it’s not hard to understand. If you understand that liberals lie, if you understand that liberals realize tax rate cuts are the best thing that could happen to an economy and they don’t support them, they want to get in on the notion that they are cutting taxes when they offer tax credits, but they’re not cutting anybody’s taxes. They’re just artificially inserting themselves in the market temporarily and really screwing it up.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: No, it’s simple. A tax credit doesn’t put any more money in your pocket. A tax credit doesn’t add any more disposable income. A tax credit doesn’t expand your buying power. It’s just crazy. All a tax credit does is artificially interrupt the normal flow of economic activity, like Cash for Clunkers. Okay, three grand to go out and trade your old clunker for a new car, right? So you go do that sooner than you would buy a car. The people that are interested in it do it in the third quarter. In the fourth quarter, the program ends and nobody goes and buys a car. The car industry is not stimulated, and then you create the notion among other people, “Eh, I’ll wait ‘til the next tax credit before I go buy one. If the government is going to be passing out tax credits I’ll wait ‘til they do it again.” Now, if the credit were permanent then we’d be talking a different thing, but this is all these people trying to say what Obama’s doing is working. But you can’t fool El Rushbo. Not after 22 years in the Golden EIB Microphone. Not after 22 years running the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies. Frankly, I’m somewhat disappointed in the effort to fool me. Well, everybody knows that tax cuts don’t stimulate an economy, but we can see Obama’s tax credits do? Right. Do you people think I’m a fool? Do you think that I see economic activity burgeoning out there? We have economic activity? I would be the only one who does, and I don’t.
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.