Article View: mi.misc
Article #438Re: Incidence of payroll-deducted taxes
From: George Greene
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 1996 00:00
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 1996 00:00
39 lines
2919 bytes
2919 bytes
: From: johne@mainelink.net (John E. Lavin) : In your rant, you made the folling statement: >ALL of the cost of ALL payroll-deducted taxes is paid by the >employEr. ALL of it. NONE of that money EVER goes to ANY employeE, >so since he never had it in the first place, how can he have paid it? : This is an absolutely false statement. The costs incured by an empolyer for : administration are fully tax deductible. So what?? The WHOLE cost of EVERY business expense, the WHOLE wages paid every employee, NOT just the administrative overhead portion, is fully tax-deductible. Corporations pay taxes on their Profits, not their Revenues. : Therefore the costs are borne by every American citizen, : every employee who pays taxes. Idiot. By that logic, every penny of wage paid to EVERYone has a cost borne by the taxpayer, since salaries are a tax-deductible expense of doing business. Therfore, the costs of himself getting paid are borne by every taxpayer. You are chasing your own tail. : I would suggest that you try, yes try, to get your facts straight BEFORE you : stick you foot in your mouth. What I would suggest for you is nowhere NEAR that polite. It is not just the administrative overhead that is deductible. The WHOLE wage is deductible. The mere fact that something is deductible doesn't mean that only the taxpayer pays for it. If the deductor is being taxed at a marginal rate of 20%, then he pays 80% and taxpayers pay the other 20. In theory. But in practice, when what is being deducted is precisely what taxpayers ARE GETTING PAID, in the first place, you can hardly claim that their pocket is being picked to pay themSELVES. NEXT!
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<GREENEG.96Jan5123033@jackson.cs.unc.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<490s4o$eku@nexus.coast.net> <499sg8$elm@villa.fc.net>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10dda6,51bcef2ffa437c30 X-Google-Attributes: gid10dda6,public X-Google-Thread: 105dfd,51bcef2ffa437c30 X-Google-Attributes: gid105dfd,public X-Google-Thread: 10d662,fe496bb546a1da4c X-Google-Attributes: gid10d662,public X-Google-Thread: 105ecf,51bcef2ffa437c30 X-Google-Attributes: gid105ecf,public X-Google-Thread: fa7f5,51bcef2ffa437c30 X-Google-Attributes: gidfa7f5,public X-Google-Thread: 104158,51bcef2ffa437c30 X-Google-Attributes: gid104158,public X-Google-Thread: ffe14,51bcef2ffa437c30 X-Google-Attributes: gidffe14,public X-Google-Thread: 104eff,51bcef2ffa437c30 X-Google-Attributes: gid104eff,public From: greeneg@jackson.cs.unc.edu (George Greene) Subject: Re: Incidence of payroll-deducted taxes Date: 1996/01/05 Message-ID: <GREENEG.96Jan5123033@jackson.cs.unc.edu> X-Deja-AN: 134060171 references: <490s4o$eku@nexus.coast.net> <499sg8$elm@villa.fc.net> organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill newsgroups: mi.misc,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.activism,talk.politics.misc,ca.politics,dc.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,pa.politics,triangle.politics,misc.taxes,ny.politics