Thread View: alt.consumers
19 messages
19 total messages
Started by bearclaw
Wed, 25 Oct 2006 20:30
By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: bearclaw
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 20:30
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 20:30
144 lines
6863 bytes
6863 bytes
(URL for sources of this information at the end of article) By Clara Jeffery, Mother Jones� May/June 2006 Issue IN 1985, THE FORBES 400 were worth $221 billion combined. Today, they�re worth $1.13 trillion�more than the GDP of Canada. THERE�VE BEEN FEW new additions to the Forbes 400. The median household income has also stagnated�at around $44,000. AMONG THE FORBES 400 who gave to a 2004 presidential campaign, 72% gave to Bush. IN 2005, there were 9 million American millionaires, a 62% increase since 2002. IN 2005, 25.7 million Americans received food stamps, a 49% increase since 2000. ONLY ESTATES worth more than $1.5 million are taxed. That�s less than 1% of all estates. Still, repealing the estate tax will cost the government at least $55 billion a year. ONLY 3% OF STUDENTS at the top 146 colleges come from families in the bottom income quartile; only 10% come from the bottom half. BUSH�S TAX CUTS GIVE a 2-child family earning $1 million an extra $86,722�or Harvard tuition, room, board, and an iMac G5 for both kids. A 2-CHILD family earning $50,000 gets $2,050�or 1/5 the cost of public college for one kid. THIS YEAR, Donald Trump will earn $1.5 million an hour to speak at Learning Annex seminars. ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION, the federal minimum wage has fallen 42% since its peak in 1968. IF THE $5.15 HOURLY minimum wage had risen at the same rate as CEO compensation since 1990, it would now stand at $23.03. A MINIMUM WAGE employee who works 40 hours a week for 51 weeks a year goes home with $10,506 before taxes. SUCH A WORKER would take 7,000 years to earn Oracle CEO Larry Ellison�s yearly compensation. ELLISON RECENTLY posed in Vanity Fair with his $300 million, 454-foot yacht, which he noted is �really only the size of a very large house.� ONLY THE WEALTHIEST 20% of Americans spend more on entertainment than on health care. THE $17,530 EARNED by the average Wal-Mart employee last year was $1,820 below the poverty line for a family of 4. 5 OF AMERICA�S 10 richest people are Wal-Mart heirs. PUBLIC COMPANIES spend 10% of their earnings compensating their top 5 executives. 1,730 BOARD MEMBERS of the nation�s 1,000 leading companies sit on the boards of 4 or more other corporations�including half of Coca-Cola�s 14-person board. THE BIDDER who won a round of golf with Tiger Woods for $30,100 at a 2004 Buick charity auction could deduct all but about $200. TIGER MADE $87 million in 2005, all but $12 million from endorsements and appearance fees. THE 5TH LEADING philanthropist last year was Boone Pickens, in part due to his $165 million gift to Oklahoma State University�s golf program. WITHIN AN HOUR, OSU invested it in a hedge fund Pickens controls. Thanks to a Katrina relief provision, his �gift� was also 100% deductible. LAST YEAR 250 COMPANIES gave top execs between $50,000 and $1 million worth of wholly personal flights on corporate jets. THIS PERK is 66% more costly to companies whose CEO belongs to out-of-state golf clubs. THE U.S. GOVERNMENT spends $500,000 on 8 security screeners who speed execs from a Wall Street helipad to American�s JFK terminal. UNITED HAS CUT the pensions and salaries of most employees but promised 400 top executives 8% of the shares it expects to issue upon emerging from bankruptcy. UNITED�S TOP 8 execs will also get a bonus of between 55% and 100% of their salaries. IN 2002, �turnaround artist� Robert Miller dumped Bethlehem Steel�s pension obligation, allowing �vulture investor� Wilbur L. Ross to buy steel stock and sell it at a 1,000% profit. IN 2005, DELPHI HIRED Miller for $4.5 million. After Ross said he might buy Delphi if its labor costs fell, Miller demanded wage cuts of up to 63% and dumped the pension obligation. 10 FORMER ENRON directors agreed to pay shareholders a $13 million settlement�which is 10% of what they made by dumping stock while lying about the company�s health. POOR AMERICANS spend 1/4 of their income on residential energy costs. EXXON�S 2005 PROFIT of $36.13 billion is more than the GDP of 2/3 of the world�s nations. CEO PAY AMONG military contractors has tripled since 2001. For David Brooks, the CEO of bulletproof vest maker DHB, it�s risen 13,233%. AT THE $10 MILLION bat mitzvah party Brooks threw his daughter last year, guests got $1,000 gift bags and listened to Aerosmith, Kenny G., Tom Petty, Stevie Nicks, and 50 Cent�who reportedly sang, �Go shorty, it�s your bat mitzvah, we gonna party like it�s your bat mitzvah.� FOR PERFORMING IN the Live 8 concerts to �make poverty history,� musicians each got gift bags worth up to $12,000. OSCAR PERFORMERS and presenters collectively owe the IRS $1,250,000 on the gift bags they got at the 2006 Academy Awards ceremony. A DOG FOOD COMPANY provided �pawdicures� and other spa treatments to pets of celebrities attending the 2006 Sundance Film Festival. ONE OF MADONNA�S recent freebies: $10,000 mink and diamond-tipped false eyelashes. PARIS HILTON, who charges clubs $200,000 to appear for 20 minutes, stiffed Elton John�s AIDS benefit the $2,500-per-plate fee she owed. CCORDING TO Radar magazine, Owen Wilson was paid $100,000 to attend a Mercedes-Benz-sponsored Hamptons polo match. When other guests tried to speak with him, he reportedly said, �That�s not my job.� Sources: <http://www.motherjones.com/news/exhibit/2006/05/sources.html> -- "I wear boots when I play that ol' squeezebox Stompin' out rhythms 'till the headstones dance on their graves"
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: Larry Bud
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 13:11
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 13:11
14 lines
2167 bytes
2167 bytes
> BUSH¹S TAX CUTS GIVE a 2-child family earning $1 million an extra > $86,722‹or Harvard tuition, room, board, and an iMac G5 for both kids. > > A 2-CHILD family earning $50,000 gets $2,050‹or 1/5 the cost of public > college for one kid. Obviously those who pay the majority of the taxes get the majority of the benefit. If you pay zero in taxes, a tax cut won't affect you. The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the taxes. Half of this country is living off the backs of the other half. See row 170: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: MJ
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:30
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 21:30
38 lines
2849 bytes
2849 bytes
Larry Bud wrote: >>BUSH�S TAX CUTS GIVE a 2-child family earning $1 million an extra >>$86,722�or Harvard tuition, room, board, and an iMac G5 for both kids. >> >>A 2-CHILD family earning $50,000 gets $2,050�or 1/5 the cost of public >>college for one kid. > > > Obviously those who pay the majority of the taxes get the majority of > the benefit. If you pay zero in taxes, a tax cut won't affect you. > > The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the > taxes. Half of this country is living off the backs of the other half. > > See row 170: > http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls > This is pure fiction. Firstly, there is hardly none that pay NO taxes. Secondly, I'm guessing you are referring to Federal income taxes - but in reality, that's only a portion (perhaps 1/3) of all taxes. In reality, the sweet spot in the US is between 100-150K salary - they tend to pay the least percentage of overall taxes. For a start, they enjoy the benefit of capping their social security taxes, they tend to have the most advantages with respect to mortgage deductions against homes that appreciate in value with little to no taxes on that gain and most will have at least 10k in tax free medical benefits which those <50K generally must pay for using pre tax dollars. Next time, get your facts straight before making such ridiculous claims.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: The Real Bev
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 02:40
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 02:40
31 lines
2514 bytes
2514 bytes
MJ wrote: > Larry Bud wrote: > >>> BUSH�S TAX CUTS GIVE a 2-child family earning $1 million an extra >>> $86,722�or Harvard tuition, room, board, and an iMac G5 for both kids. >>> >>> A 2-CHILD family earning $50,000 gets $2,050�or 1/5 the cost of public >>> college for one kid. >> >> Obviously those who pay the majority of the taxes get the majority of >> the benefit. If you pay zero in taxes, a tax cut won't affect you. >> >> The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the >> taxes. Half of this country is living off the backs of the other half. >> >> See row 170: >> http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls > > This is pure fiction. > > Firstly, there is hardly none that pay NO taxes. None at all if you consider Social Security a tax paid by people who follow the rules. A legal self-employed handyman making less than $10K/year contributes 16% of his salary to SS and has no medical, state disability or workers' compensation coverage at all. -- Cheers, Bev =================================== New sig on order, watch this space.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: The Real Bev
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 03:05
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 03:05
19 lines
2113 bytes
2113 bytes
nospam@nospam.com wrote: > > <bashley101+xp@gmail.com> wrote: > >> None at all if you consider Social Security a tax paid by people who >> follow the rules. A legal self-employed handyman making less than >> $10K/year contributes 16% of his salary to SS and has no medical, state >> disability or workers' compensation coverage at all. > > Has it gone up? I thought it was 15%. Could be either. I just let TurboTax tell me what to send. I used to figure out percentages, but I finally decided it was too depressing and I didn't really need to know that stuff. -- Cheers, Bev =================================== New sig on order, watch this space.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: Larry Bud
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 01:20
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 01:20
50 lines
3260 bytes
3260 bytes
> > Obviously those who pay the majority of the taxes get the majority of > > the benefit. If you pay zero in taxes, a tax cut won't affect you. > > > > The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the > > taxes. Half of this country is living off the backs of the other half. > > > > See row 170: > > http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls > This is pure fiction. LOL! Talk to the IRS, it's their data, right from their site. > Firstly, there is hardly none that pay NO taxes. http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/1410.html There were 43.4 million tax returns, representing approx 91 million individuals, face a zero or negative federal liability. > Secondly, I'm guessing you are referring to Federal income taxes - but > in reality, that's only a portion (perhaps 1/3) of all taxes. Of course I'm talking federal since that's what the OP is talking about. What's your source to believe that Federal Income tax only makes up of 1/3 of all taxes? > In reality, the sweet spot in the US is between 100-150K salary - they > tend to pay the least percentage of overall taxes. Clearly that statement doesn't jive with the IRS data: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls and here http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/1941.html or here (table 8) http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/250.html People making $100k-$200k pay 22.51% of the taxes. People who make <25k get income credit. In effect, they pay ZERO taxes (they "pay" less than zero!). >200K pay half the taxes in the US. But don't let me get in your way of arguing with IRS statistics!!!
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: gamer
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:48
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:48
45 lines
2799 bytes
2799 bytes
Larry Bud wrote: >>>Obviously those who pay the majority of the taxes get the majority of >>>the benefit. If you pay zero in taxes, a tax cut won't affect you. >>> >>>The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the >>>taxes. Half of this country is living off the backs of the other half. >>> >>>See row 170: >>>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls >>> >>> > > > >>This is pure fiction. >> >> > >LOL! Talk to the IRS, it's their data, right from their site. > > > I did - the facts are Total taxes = 25% GDP 8% Federal Income 6% FICA 5% State (income, sales & other sources) 3% local (primarily property) 2% federal corporate income 1% other federal (excise, etc) While some pay a higher percentage of their taxes via federal income tax, others pay a higher percentage via FICA, sales, etc. Federal income taxes are only about 1/3 of total tax revenue. To ignore FICA, sales, property, etc is pure ignorance. Another fact is those >$100k enjoy the highest (by far) percentage of tax free income (tax free medical expenses - amongst others - being a significant perk).
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: gamer
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:34
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:34
31 lines
2384 bytes
2384 bytes
Larry Bud wrote: >>>Obviously those who pay the majority of the taxes get the majority of >>>the benefit. If you pay zero in taxes, a tax cut won't affect you. >>> >>>The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the >>>taxes. Half of this country is living off the backs of the other half. >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > > >http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/1941.html > > > The obvious reason there are more returns showing NO federal come taxes during the Bush years is that there are significantly more families being pushed into poverty. Then again, these same families are paying FICA, sales & property taxes - typically at a much higher percentage of income vs the wealthy. Care again to quote just how many pay "NO" taxes? Hint - federal income taxes are only about 1/3 of total taxes.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: rick++
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:59
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:59
5 lines
1598 bytes
1598 bytes
> IN 2005, 25.7 million Americans received food stamps, a 49% increase > since 2000. About haf are residents, not citizens.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: rick++
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 14:02
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 14:02
10 lines
1840 bytes
1840 bytes
> Has it gone up? I thought it was 15%. Its 15.3%. At the top end SS taxes increase $428 in 2007. I dont believe there is a self-employeed handiman who pays self-employment taxes.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: Question Quigley
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 04:42
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 04:42
20 lines
1844 bytes
1844 bytes
Thanks for reminding us of another achievement by Bush, Cheney, Rove, Santorum. You want food stamps!?! We'll get your ass over to Iraq and Afghanistan. What a great way to solve domestic poverty. Is it one in eight Americans that are below the poverty line? Isn't that 12.4%? It gives new meaning to the "Mendoza Line." "rick++" <rick303@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1162216795.109020.77640@e64g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... > > > IN 2005, 25.7 million Americans received food stamps, a 49% increase > > since 2000. > > About haf are residents, not citizens. >
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: Bob Ward
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 05:53
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 05:53
16 lines
1821 bytes
1821 bytes
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 04:42:13 GMT, "Question Quigley" <Quigley@limerick.ie> wrote: >Thanks for reminding us of another achievement by Bush, Cheney, Rove, >Santorum. > >You want food stamps!?! We'll get your ass over to Iraq and Afghanistan. > >What a great way to solve domestic poverty. > >Is it one in eight Americans that are below the poverty line? Isn't that >12.4%? > >It gives new meaning to the "Mendoza Line." You give new meaning to basic math.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: Larry Bud
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:47
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:47
59 lines
3758 bytes
3758 bytes
gamer wrote: > Larry Bud wrote: > > >>>Obviously those who pay the majority of the taxes get the majority of > >>>the benefit. If you pay zero in taxes, a tax cut won't affect you. > >>> > >>>The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the > >>>taxes. Half of this country is living off the backs of the other half. > >>> > >>>See row 170: > >>>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in05tr.xls > > > >>This is pure fiction. > >> > >> > > > >LOL! Talk to the IRS, it's their data, right from their site. > > I did - the facts are > > Total taxes = 25% GDP > > 8% Federal Income > 6% FICA > 5% State (income, sales & other sources) > 3% local (primarily property) > 2% federal corporate income > 1% other federal (excise, etc) > > > While some pay a higher percentage of their taxes via federal income > tax, others pay a higher percentage via FICA, sales, etc. And? Nobody is arguing otherwise. The OP was claiming that my assertion that The top 1% pay 36.89% of the taxes. The top 50% pay 96.7% of the taxes is "pure fiction" to quote him. In the context of Federal taxes (which was the context), it obviously isn't. If you think it's "pure fiction" take it up with the IRS. It's not my data. > Federal income taxes are only about 1/3 of total tax revenue. To ignore > FICA, sales, property, etc is pure ignorance. The subject WAS federal taxes since the OP was bitching about the Bush tax cuts. I'm not ignoring anything. I'm all for cutting ALL taxes. BTW, "rich" people pay a much higher percentage of their income in sales and property tax because they buy more stuff and have more expensive homes. > Another fact is those >$100k enjoy the highest (by far) percentage of > tax free income (tax free medical expenses - amongst others - being a > significant perk). The IRS data doesn't jive with what you're claiming. I've shown you my source of data, please show me yours. What does making >100k have to do with "tax free medical expenses">
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: Question Quigley
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:38
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 04:38
23 lines
2180 bytes
2180 bytes
Hey, I've got arthritis. Or dyslexia. But to be honest, math was never my strong suit. "Bob Ward" <bobward@email.com> wrote in message news:h5pdk29acmse350dffavmtn8h1vqhar5dq@4ax.com... > On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 04:42:13 GMT, "Question Quigley" > <Quigley@limerick.ie> wrote: > > >Thanks for reminding us of another achievement by Bush, Cheney, Rove, > >Santorum. > > > >You want food stamps!?! We'll get your ass over to Iraq and Afghanistan. > > > >What a great way to solve domestic poverty. > > > >Is it one in eight Americans that are below the poverty line? Isn't that > >12.4%? > > > >It gives new meaning to the "Mendoza Line." > > You give new meaning to basic math. >
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: ChairMan
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 06:23
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 06:23
13 lines
1812 bytes
1812 bytes
In news:1162216979.504131.200330@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, rick++ <rick303@hotmail.com>spewed forth: >> Has it gone up? I thought it was 15%. > > Its 15.3%. > At the top end SS taxes increase $428 in 2007. > > > I dont believe there is a self-employeed handiman who > pays self-employment taxes. I'm not aware of any way of getting around self employment tax. Care to enlighten me?
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: aemeijers
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 12:15
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 12:15
27 lines
2678 bytes
2678 bytes
"ChairMan" <why4@fu.com> wrote in message news:454d8378$0$2912$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com... > In news:1162216979.504131.200330@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, > rick++ <rick303@hotmail.com>spewed forth: >>> Has it gone up? I thought it was 15%. >> >> Its 15.3%. >> At the top end SS taxes increase $428 in 2007. >> >> >> I dont believe there is a self-employeed handiman who >> pays self-employment taxes. > > I'm not aware of any way of getting around self employment tax. > Care to enlighten me? Never hired a independent home-repair guy, huh? Many, if not most, offer a discount for being paid in cash. Think about it. No check, no paper trail, nothing to declare. The trick is to declare just enough to not set off the alarms in the IRS computer. IOW, make sure your tax liability is within some certain per centage of previous year. And yes, there are people living totally 'off the books', doing cash business only. Some have a day job and just do the moonlighting off the books. (common with specialized trades like electricians.) aem sends....
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: gamer
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 12:49
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 12:49
25 lines
2183 bytes
2183 bytes
ChairMan wrote: >In news:1162216979.504131.200330@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, >rick++ <rick303@hotmail.com>spewed forth: > > >>>Has it gone up? I thought it was 15%. >>> >>> >>Its 15.3%. >>At the top end SS taxes increase $428 in 2007. >> >> >>I dont believe there is a self-employeed handiman who >>pays self-employment taxes. >> >> > >I'm not aware of any way of getting around self employment tax. >Care to enlighten me? > > > > Just like most small businesses do - trim the reported income.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: ChairMan
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:26
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 21:26
33 lines
2956 bytes
2956 bytes
In news:xBk3h.19695$Fi1.16484@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, aemeijers@att.net <aemeijers@att.net>spewed forth: > "ChairMan" <why4@fu.com> wrote in message > news:454d8378$0$2912$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com... >> In news:1162216979.504131.200330@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, >> rick++ <rick303@hotmail.com>spewed forth: >>>> Has it gone up? I thought it was 15%. >>> >>> Its 15.3%. >>> At the top end SS taxes increase $428 in 2007. >>> >>> >>> I dont believe there is a self-employeed handiman who >>> pays self-employment taxes. >> >> I'm not aware of any way of getting around self employment tax. >> Care to enlighten me? > Never hired a independent home-repair guy, huh? Many, if not most, > offer a discount for being paid in cash. Think about it. No check, no > paper trail, nothing to declare. The trick is to declare just enough > to not set off the alarms in the IRS computer. IOW, make sure your > tax liability is within some certain per centage of previous year. > > And yes, there are people living totally 'off the books', doing cash > business only. Some have a day job and just do the moonlighting off > the books. (common with specialized trades like electricians.) > > aem sends.... he may not pay income tax, but if he shows any income, he pays self employment. I believe the IRS will only allow you to show no profit for 3 years before it starts getting picky.
Re: By the numbers: Who Wins, Who Loses
Author: gamer
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 23:51
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 23:51
56 lines
3556 bytes
3556 bytes
ChairMan wrote: >In news:xBk3h.19695$Fi1.16484@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net, >aemeijers@att.net <aemeijers@att.net>spewed forth: > > >>"ChairMan" <why4@fu.com> wrote in message >>news:454d8378$0$2912$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com... >> >> >>>In news:1162216979.504131.200330@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, >>>rick++ <rick303@hotmail.com>spewed forth: >>> >>> >>>>>Has it gone up? I thought it was 15%. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Its 15.3%. >>>>At the top end SS taxes increase $428 in 2007. >>>> >>>> >>>>I dont believe there is a self-employeed handiman who >>>>pays self-employment taxes. >>>> >>>> >>>I'm not aware of any way of getting around self employment tax. >>>Care to enlighten me? >>> >>> >>Never hired a independent home-repair guy, huh? Many, if not most, >>offer a discount for being paid in cash. Think about it. No check, no >>paper trail, nothing to declare. The trick is to declare just enough >>to not set off the alarms in the IRS computer. IOW, make sure your >>tax liability is within some certain per centage of previous year. >> >>And yes, there are people living totally 'off the books', doing cash >>business only. Some have a day job and just do the moonlighting off >>the books. (common with specialized trades like electricians.) >> >>aem sends.... >> >> > >he may not pay income tax, but if he shows any income, he pays self >employment. >I believe the IRS will only allow you to show no profit for 3 years before >it starts getting picky. > > > > That's only if you show losses for three years. It says nothing about anyone not filing. While I doubt many are living "totally" off the books, I suspect more than a few are trimming their reported income.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads