W. Buffet says "I need to pay more income tax"
morgansforever
Posts: 8,461 ✭✭✭✭✭
He claims he paid 17.4% of his taxable income.
35.8% of my income was taxed last year, more than double what Buffet paid.
Guess I don't have the connections like he does, sucks for me.
Would a flat tax be best? Say 15%
Or should the filthy rich pay more?
Buffet
35.8% of my income was taxed last year, more than double what Buffet paid.
Guess I don't have the connections like he does, sucks for me.
Would a flat tax be best? Say 15%
Or should the filthy rich pay more?
Buffet
World coins FSHO Hundreds of successful BST transactions U.S. coins FSHO
0
Comments
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Fred, Las Vegas, NV
<< <i>He didn't pay 'income' tax. Capital/corporate tax, minus the deductions. He's using his wealth pulpit to shpeel his leftist agenda support. >>
Yup---liberal guilt just like Soros.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>He didn't pay 'income' tax. Capital/corporate tax, minus the deductions. He's using his wealth pulpit to shpeel his leftist agenda support. >>
Yup---liberal guilt just like Soros. >>
More like arrogance
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
<< <i>so what's stopping him, he has a pen and a check book. He can go for it any time he wants. >>
Well, that's not even close to the point is it? He also doesn't mention that if a hedge fund manager rips off his clients for a billion dollars, excuse me, earns a billion by wisely investing his clients money, then he pays a maximum of 18%. They don't have to count their income as income, they get to call it "carried interest". I'm all for a flat tax, somewhere around 18-25% should cover us pretty well, and the tax forms would be really easy:
How much did you make last year?
Please enclose 18-25%
The answers are really simple, everyone has to pay their share. I paid more in income tax last year than the "average" income in the US, about 24% of my salary and bonus. The chairman, who made about 4x what I made claims he paid less than I did in dollar terms, so a huge reduction from what I paid as a percentage. One of the ways he made such a big bonus was laying off practically a whole fabrication division (several hunderd people) of the company and moving it all to Mexico. Anyone who tells you that lower tax rates increase jobs is simply making things up.
And by the way, a really simple way to fix social security is to take away the maximum income that pays social security tax, I finished paying the max in May or June this year and that extra few hundred dollars I get is not creating any new jobs for anyone.
World Collection
British Collection
German States Collection
I used to think Buffet was quite wise, but now believe him to be a nothing more than a spokesperson for the powers that be. I do not pay much attention to what he says nowadays.
If he believes the rich need to pay more taxes.... no reason he can't voluntarily pay more out of his own pocket. Wonder why he doesn't do so. Oh wait... people who say things like this really just mean the other guy should pay more....
Precisely...IE super rich John Kerry docks his 7 million dollar yacht in Rhode Island to avoid paying Massachusetts taxes in a state in which he is a US Senator...and shouldn't he be setting a good example of what he preaches about the rich should pay more taxes? LOL
Hypocrisy almost beyond belief from the elite left..."Do as I say, not as I do" should be their motto.
The sad reality is that you could tax every family that makes over $75,000 a year at 100% and the government would not collect enough to meet this year's budget. Politicians and guys like Buffet are trying to fool the average guy into thinking that all we need to do is tax the wealthy more (those earning over $200,000 per year) and our problems would go away.
Same thing with corporate taxes. Yes, close the loopholes but do not make US corporations less competitive with foreign competitors. There is not tax rate on corporations that will make a serious dent in the deficits without hurting those corporations. Put too much of a hurt on them and it will affect their hiring.
Cutting spending drastically is the most significant way to reduce our annual budget and at the same time reduce our overall debt. As many have noted, politicians simply do not have the backbone to tell the truth and make those cuts. The pain that present and future Medicare recipients would receive would be great as will those who will see less social security payments in the future.
Politicians always seem to wait until there is a full blown crisis to happen so they can blame the crisis itself on taking the drastic measures that need to be taken. Of course by then, those drastic measures are greater than what they would have been if they had done the right thing years before.
Instagram - numismatistkenny
My Numismatics with Kenny Blog Page Best viewed on a laptop or monitor.
ANA Life Member & Volunteer District Representative
2019 ANA Young Numismatist of the Year
Doing my best to introduce Young Numismatists and Young Adults into the hobby.
He also says he pay more property tax on his Nebraska home than his Malibu home.
<< <i>Buffett has said that his Exec. Asst. pays more income tax than he does. >>
I don't think he is refering to total dollar amount---he's saying his Exec. Asst. is paying a higher percentage of his income in income tax.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>
<< <i>Buffett has said that his Exec. Asst. pays more income tax than he does. >>
I don't think he is refering to total dollar amount---he's saying his Exec. Asst. is paying a higher percentage of his income in income tax. >>
Yup, higher percent of an actual paycheck is what he said. When you don't actually get a 'paycheck', you don't really pay 'payroll income tax' now do you.
<< <i>
<< <i>so what's stopping him, he has a pen and a check book. He can go for it any time he wants. >>
Well, that's not even close to the point is it? He also doesn't mention that if a hedge fund manager rips off his clients for a billion dollars, excuse me, earns a billion by wisely investing his clients money, then he pays a maximum of 18%. They don't have to count their income as income, they get to call it "carried interest". I'm all for a flat tax, somewhere around 18-25% should cover us pretty well, and the tax forms would be really easy:
How much did you make last year?
Please enclose 18-25%
The answers are really simple, everyone has to pay their share. I paid more in income tax last year than the "average" income in the US, about 24% of my salary and bonus. The chairman, who made about 4x what I made claims he paid less than I did in dollar terms, so a huge reduction from what I paid as a percentage. One of the ways he made such a big bonus was laying off practically a whole fabrication division (several hunderd people) of the company and moving it all to Mexico. Anyone who tells you that lower tax rates increase jobs is simply making things up.
And by the way, a really simple way to fix social security is to take away the maximum income that pays social security tax, I finished paying the max in May or June this year and that extra few hundred dollars I get is not creating any new jobs for anyone. >>
I love the concept of a flat tax. But would the numbers work? The avg household income in this country is $46,000. There are about 110,000,000 households in the country. At 18% flat tax, thats just under $1 trillion in collected taxes. At 25% we get about $1.25 trillion. The federal budget this year was $3.8 trillion.......so even at a 25% tax rate, we come up about $2.5 trillion short. Is enough corporate tax collected to make up such a shortfall? I dont know.
Heres an exceprt from wiki:
"During FY 2010, the federal government collected approximately $2.16 trillion in tax revenue. Primary receipt categories included individual income taxes (42%), Social Security/Social Insurance taxes (40%), and corporate taxes (9%).[8] Other types included excise, estate and gift taxes."
So for all non-personal tax (income tax), we collected just about $1.25 trillion.
My conclusion is that even at a flat income tax of 25%, in addition to all other taxes collected, total revenues would still fall well short of current expenditures. $2.5 tril collected, $3.8 tril spent = $1.3 trillion defecit.
For me, its clearly a spending problem and not a tax problem. I think many people feel the same. Exactly where to remove the fat is the question though. Everyone wants spending cuts, but few want cuts that directly affect them.
Source for the data on household incomes and number of households.
Absolutely right. Where the left doesn't get it, is that first and foremost, we should institute an immediate massive energy exploration program in our country - this will create millions of new jobs and lots of new tax revenue. And that should include nuclear power as well. This is so blatantly obvious...then we can better evaluate how much to cut. Yes, this will take some time, but the markets will see this so positively, that many other industries will benefit from this as well, creating growth and much new tax revenue there as well...and then the spending cuts won't have to be as painful as we may think.
We need to stop the "green" nonsense fantasy world of Obama's thinking, him believing this is going to sooner rather than later transform the world into a healthier environment...but the green technology simply isn't there yet to satisfy our energy needs and it's not even close. The marketplace should dictate exactly how much and when green energy becomes viable...until then, the Republicans are right..."Drill Baby Drill"...and we will. And then we won't have to send our hard earned money to tyrants and dictators overseas to purchase oil.
And yes, doing all this will dramatically decrease gold and silver prices in the long run.
<< <i>
<< <i>Buffett has said that his Exec. Asst. pays more income tax than he does. >>
I don't think he is refering to total dollar amount---he's saying his Exec. Asst. is paying a higher percentage of his income in income tax. >>
His tax obligation of $6,938,744 at 17.4% would suggest a taxable income of nearly $40 million. If I had a lump sum lottery jackpot of $40 million, I think my tax obligation might be higher. So what did he do with the $33 million in after tax income? Assuming he paid $3 mil to the state of Nebraska, he has about $30 mil to spend. A lot of people probably naively think that he has $30 mil in a shopping bag in a closet in his office. What is sad is that even if the super rich paid 10 times the taxes that they pay now, it wouldn't even make a dent in the amount of money that our Government wastes every year.
Our current system is a travesty.
<< <i>I'm a proponent of Ross Perot's postcard tax form, line 1 is what you earned, line two is your tax. Everyone pays something, the more you make, the more you pay, but not to confiscatory percentages.
Our current system is a travesty.
Agree. Something is wrong when the average wage earner has to hire someone to figure his taxes.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Nothing against lawyers and accountants, they are smart people and a percentage of them are needed in society, but there's way too many of them...and too many of them usually create nothing but more problems because the more problems they create, the more money they make...and a healthy growing society doesn't need that and certainly doesn't want that.
Instead of lawyers and accountants and other forms of white collar types who overall when grouped together are parasitic to our country...we need these smart people to become engineers, doctors, scientists, businesspeople, and everything else needed in our country in order to compete in a global marketplace. We need to retrain and rethink the way our schools and colleges teach...for example they should also teach good blue collar skills such as auto mechanics, computer repair, construction courses, and a wide variety of needed skills in a healthy growing society.
Frankly, we've got way too many white collar types out there who can't hardly do anything useful except go on job interviews and demand a big salary or they don't want to work. And for those who want to work at any wage rather than sit home and do nothing, we need to eliminate the minimum wage which does nothing but stiffle opportunity for those who want to get involved in the workplace, and possibly move up the corporate ladder...and at the very least gain the pride and satisfaction of taking home a paycheck rather than waiting in the mail for a welfare check.
It's not just the politicians we need to change, it's the attitude in America...something to the effect of ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
<< <i>He claims he paid 17.4% of his taxable income.
35.8% of my income was taxed last year, more than double what Buffet paid.
Guess I don't have the connections like he does, sucks for me.
Would a flat tax be best? Say 15%
Or should the filthy rich pay more?
Buffet >>
What he doesn't tell you is that his income was $100,000.
He doesn't tell you about his write-offs.
He doesn't tell you Berkshire Hath pays corporate taxes as well.
He doesn't tell you he hides is wealth in the co stock that doesn't pay dividends.
He's completely disingenuous.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>so what's stopping him, he has a pen and a check book. He can go for it any time he wants. >>
Well, that's not even close to the point is it? He also doesn't mention that if a hedge fund manager rips off his clients for a billion dollars, excuse me, earns a billion by wisely investing his clients money, then he pays a maximum of 18%. They don't have to count their income as income, they get to call it "carried interest". I'm all for a flat tax, somewhere around 18-25% should cover us pretty well, and the tax forms would be really easy:
How much did you make last year?
Please enclose 18-25%
The answers are really simple, everyone has to pay their share. I paid more in income tax last year than the "average" income in the US, about 24% of my salary and bonus. The chairman, who made about 4x what I made claims he paid less than I did in dollar terms, so a huge reduction from what I paid as a percentage. One of the ways he made such a big bonus was laying off practically a whole fabrication division (several hunderd people) of the company and moving it all to Mexico. Anyone who tells you that lower tax rates increase jobs is simply making things up.
And by the way, a really simple way to fix social security is to take away the maximum income that pays social security tax, I finished paying the max in May or June this year and that extra few hundred dollars I get is not creating any new jobs for anyone. >>
I love the concept of a flat tax. But would the numbers work? The avg household income in this country is $46,000. There are about 110,000,000 households in the country. At 18% flat tax, thats just under $1 trillion in collected taxes. At 25% we get about $1.25 trillion. The federal budget this year was $3.8 trillion.......so even at a 25% tax rate, we come up about $2.5 trillion short. Is enough corporate tax collected to make up such a shortfall? I dont know.
Heres an exceprt from wiki:
"During FY 2010, the federal government collected approximately $2.16 trillion in tax revenue. Primary receipt categories included individual income taxes (42%), Social Security/Social Insurance taxes (40%), and corporate taxes (9%).[8] Other types included excise, estate and gift taxes."
So for all non-personal tax (income tax), we collected just about $1.25 trillion.
My conclusion is that even at a flat income tax of 25%, in addition to all other taxes collected, total revenues would still fall well short of current expenditures. $2.5 tril collected, $3.8 tril spent = $1.3 trillion defecit.
For me, its clearly a spending problem and not a tax problem. I think many people feel the same. Exactly where to remove the fat is the question though. Everyone wants spending cuts, but few want cuts that directly affect them.
Source for the data on household incomes and number of households. >>
That's jusdt personal income tax.
you have to count in corporate taxes, too.
Additionally, we are spending huge on the war(s). I would question the ability to pay and have a balanced budget at any time there is a war on. This is why I think a balanced budget amendment is a failure from the start. It could be said that a balanced budget amendment would compromise national security.
Obama says Warren Buffett is right about taxes
<< <i>
<< <i>He claims he paid 17.4% of his taxable income.
35.8% of my income was taxed last year, more than double what Buffet paid.
Guess I don't have the connections like he does, sucks for me.
Would a flat tax be best? Say 15%
Or should the filthy rich pay more?
Buffet >>
What he doesn't tell you is that his income was $100,000.
He doesn't tell you about his write-offs.
He doesn't tell you Berkshire Hath pays corporate taxes as well.
He doesn't tell you he hides is wealth in the co stock that doesn't pay dividends.
He's completely disingenuous. >>
Absolutely
Coin's for sale/trade.
Tom Pilitowski
US Rare Coin Investments
800-624-1870
Why Warren Buffett is wrong
Buffett is right: Raise taxes on the wealthy
"That's jusdt personal income tax.
you have to count in corporate taxes, too.
Additionally, we are spending huge on the war(s). I would question the ability to pay and have a balanced budget at any time there is a war on. This is why I think a balanced budget amendment is a failure from the start. It could be said that a balanced budget amendment would compromise national security."
<< <i>Morrisine......you did not read my post obviously.
"That's jusdt personal income tax.
you have to count in corporate taxes, too.
Additionally, we are spending huge on the war(s). I would question the ability to pay and have a balanced budget at any time there is a war on. This is why I think a balanced budget amendment is a failure from the start. It could be said that a balanced budget amendment would compromise national security." >>
Not really. If an unplanned event occurs [war, tsunami, MAJOR earthquake] they could simply add a surtax to offset the additional cost of dealing with the event.
<< <i>
<< <i>Morrisine......you did not read my post obviously.
"That's jusdt personal income tax.
you have to count in corporate taxes, too.
Additionally, we are spending huge on the war(s). I would question the ability to pay and have a balanced budget at any time there is a war on. This is why I think a balanced budget amendment is a failure from the start. It could be said that a balanced budget amendment would compromise national security." >>
Not really. If an unplanned event occurs [war, tsunami, MAJOR earthquake] they could simply add a surtax to offset the additional cost of dealing with the event. >>
No....the part where she says I didnt include corporate tax.
Home ownership-----To foster the growth in home ownership
Charity Deductions
Medical expenses
Gas milage for business driving
Small and mid size business tax breaks---These businesses are where the major portion of job growth
has and is occurring.
Tax breaks due strictly to lobbyists
Oils tax break for oil companies to seek new oils sources---I always thought that finding new oils sources
was the business oil companies were in.
Farm subsidies and tax breaks were originally intended to help the independent farmer. However, they have now been
expanded to include multi million and multi bullion dollar corporations
Charging far lower, then the going rate, for the mega cattle companies to graze on public land.
Selling offshore oil drilling rights to oil companies at lower then the raate they should be.
No need to tell you the scam being worked by the banks like BofA. They borrow money from the FED at neer 0 %
so they can turn around and charge use 20% or more on credit cards.
I could go on and on, but you have the idea. Some tax benefits were originally intended to help the little working person
and small and medium size businesses. Somehow, over the years, these were enlarged to benefit the big boys as well
as new tax breaks solely created for a specific business or industry. Thus, in addition to lowering tax rates on those
most able to pay, you add the special tax breaks while increasing spending and allowing more and more quality jobs
to go overseas and to S. America, we now have GE not only NOT PAYING taxes on billions of dollars earned in profits,
they even managed to get a tax refund.
I am not saying that all tax breaks from top to bottom be looked at for revenue, as Willie Sutton answered the question
of why he robbed banks, he said............................................................... "THAT"S WHERE THE MONEY IS, THAT"S WHY".
As to the question of a flat tax, yes, it is simple, but it tends to place the greatest economic burden upon those with the
least ability to pay. The middle class spends far more Percentage wise on food, transportation, medical and housing then
the very rich. If you strip out all the few tax benefits for the middle class on a flat tax, how long do you think that the big boys
will take to gain tax writeoffs that will not be available to the middle class.
Camelot
<< <i>He has donated more money to charity than everyone on the board has or will combined. >>
I think the above comment is disrespectful in its insinuation. Someone like super rich Buffet making a donation is fine...but frankly, I've got a lot more respect and admiration for hard working people who earn five figures a year, and that probably comprises many of us on the forum who support their families and donate money to their church or synagogue, and/or their favorite charities - that to me means a lot more than any donation Buffet would make...and the totality of these donations from working people is likely significantly more in total than the donations from the super rich.
who takes money from a budget already stretched too thin, to donate to charities for the less
fortunate.
Camelot
<< <i>I agree with your statement, about having more respect for the struggling working person
who takes money from a budget already stretched too thin, to donate to charities for the less
fortunate. >>
The problem is that folks who are 'stretched too thin but donate', and those who get this donation, include folks who are 'thin' yet have:
vehicles, plural for a family
1 person to a bedroom
multi-bedroom/bath situation
cable
flat screen
video games
heat/AC
phones- cell and home
etc
etc
etc
etc
Nobody with more than 1 or 2 on that list at minimum is thin, sorry. The idea of 'poor poor poor folks' in the US is ridiculous. 2 bedrooms, 1 bath, 8 people, cable....I don't know if I'd even call that poor after the life I lived, but good ol U.S.of nanny-A. sure thinks that's roughing it.
of reasons, for people on your list to be considered poor. In any event, we were not talking about
the recipients of charity, but rather the givers of charity.
Camelot
<< <i> Nothing against lawyers and accountants, they are smart people and a percentage of them are needed in society, but there's way too many of them...and too many of them usually create nothing but more problems because the more problems they create, the more money they make...and a healthy growing society doesn't need that and certainly doesn't want that.
Instead of lawyers and accountants and other forms of white collar types who overall when grouped together are parasitic to our country...we need these smart people to become engineers, doctors, scientists, businesspeople, and everything else needed in our country in order to compete in a global marketplace. We need to retrain and rethink the way our schools and colleges teach...for example they should also teach good blue collar skills such as auto mechanics, computer repair, construction courses, and a wide variety of needed skills in a healthy growing society. >>
Totally agreed.
<< <i>Morrisine......you did not read my post obviously.
"That's jusdt personal income tax.
you have to count in corporate taxes, too.
Additionally, we are spending huge on the war(s). I would question the ability to pay and have a balanced budget at any time there is a war on. This is why I think a balanced budget amendment is a failure from the start. It could be said that a balanced budget amendment would compromise national security." >>
and corporate taxes (9%).
oversight on my part!
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
BP only lost 3+ Bil in the year ended Dec 2010.
The years before they made over 16 bil and over 21 bil.
why does this very and consistently profitable industry need an exploration tax break?
<< <i>I still think some corporate tax breaks can go.
BP only lost 3+ Bil in the year ended Dec 2010.
The years before they made over 16 bil and over 21 bil.
why does this very and consistently profitable industry need an exploration tax break? >>
"They" get a tax break the old fashioned way, they donated to campaigns. BP was one of Obama's biggest campaign donors, along with Goldman Sachs, along with many big hedge funds. "They" are lined up for the next feeding in 2012. Do you think that billion dollars that the chief has to spend on the 2012 reelection campaign came from little people? Maybe in name, but that is a money laundering game used by the politicians, thousands of smaller donations funded by one huge donor. Gore used the scam (and it is a scam) at a Buddhist temple and was caught. Many others have used it and either the press looked the other way, or the campaign got a slap on the wrist like Gore and were told to do better next time. Bear's point about campaign financing has some merit, but I don't see any realistic way to clean it up. There is always a work around if someone smart is figuring out the puzzle. Same with taxes and tax breaks.