Give Oil Company profits to the people

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote:
$9 is roughly $18K per year. Please tell me how much FIT is due all said and done….



13% ..while housing will probably be in the tune of 50-65% of that ...utilities 15-20%..etc...etc.. Add all the unaccounted for taxes ...
21.gif



...and you get to deduct your property taxes. If not for the housing bust ....
21.gif


Who pays more of every $$ that they make to pay the bills?? Does one $$ in the economy "buy more" in terms of services or maintenance than another??? If so, how so??
 
Go to the tax tables. An 18k earner pays:

If taxable income is over-- But not over-- The tax is:
$0 $7,825 10% of the amount over $0
$7,825 $31,850 $782.50 plus 15% of the amount over 7,825

or effectively 12.8%

Add local EIT ..medicare...SS (gone forever) and all the other stuff that is JUST on the paycheck filter
21.gif


In our (b)racket

$77,100 $160,850 $15,698.75 plus 28% of the amount over 77,100

I paid around 9.9% due to the Hollywood accounting that I'm afforded.
 
Don't those tables mean the figures after the standard deduction and personal exemption are figured.

When I got to taxbrain.com, put in a Single person, only their personal exemption, no kids, making 18K/year, the FIT is $960. The standard deduction and personal exemption for that person is $8950, leaving only $9050 as taxable income.

So while they made $18K, they are only taxed on $9050 of it, and most of that is at 10%.

The effective FIT is in the 5-6% range, not 13%
 
And yes, if they qualify for EITC or have just a couple of kids, while being dirt poor, will pay NOTHING in taxes.

Each deduction is about $3500, so a single mom with 2 kids making only 18K/year not only will qualify for HoH, which is a greater Standard Deduction, but will have $10,500 in exemptions, and will probably get the EITC.

And if she's getting any child support from the "Baby Daddy" that's income that's not taxed.

Any resemblance to my ex-wife's tax circumstance is purely coincidental, LOL.
 
Quote:
The effective FIT is in the 5-6% range, not 13%


Make it net and change the earnings accordingly.
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Originally Posted By: XS650


Pablo, as much as a money chaser as you are do you really believe that income tax is the only tax people pay? If you do, you haven't been paying attention to the world around you.


Money chaser? What?

When did I say income tax is the only tax? Please find that quote. I would be very interested if I said or even implied that.


Quoting you
Quote:
Huh? Under $30K or so, you get money. Under $50K or so, the rates are quite low. The [censored] kicking doesn't really start until the $85k-$100K barrier is broken and deductions don't help THAT much. As usual it's the people just fighting to break free, or gumption to do so, who get killed.


I must have misread that, you were obviously taking about sales tax, SSI, etc
crackmeup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
The effective FIT is in the 5-6% range, not 13%


Make it net and change the earnings accordingly.
21.gif




If I recall, you said $9/hour.

At 40hrs/week and 52 weeks/year that's $18720, or like you said, about 18K/year.

Why change to net now? Let's stick with your original point, which I believe has been effectively shown that in the worst case, single, no kids, pays under $1000 in income taxes on $18K income, and if there are any dependents, probably pay zero if not getting an EITC.

Can't change the scenario to fit what you are trying to prove just because it's shown that the FIT was not 13%, but only 5-6%

Now, if you add FIT and payroll taxes, it does approach 13%

But then again, one can't add that to the employee, without considering what employers pay, which is a match, so that portion cancels out since both employer and employee pay that tax.

Since the topic is about taxes paid by oil companies, and how much one pays compared to 50% of the tax base, one has to compare apples to apples. Which is income tax to income tax, or payroll tax to payroll tax.

The one thing is clear. Regardless how much anyone pays, they will almost always say they pay too much, and some other group pays too little.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour


The one thing is clear. Regardless how much anyone pays, they will almost always say they pay too much, and some other group pays too little.


Over the years, I have noticed a certain amount of constancy in that area.
 
moe in wichita ks
IF the government took money from the oil co would you trust them to spend it the way you want? allso what has the government ever done that shows that they could run a health care system right? now that i think about it. what have they EVER done right? be sides ww2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
The effective FIT is in the 5-6% range, not 13%


Make it net and change the earnings accordingly.



If I recall, you said $9/hour.


So, reconfigure it so that it works on your terms ..if you want to see the point. If you don't ..then leave it the way I stated it and continue tofocus on it ..instead of the point that it was trying to depict.

Essentially... any lower income earner is going to pay a higher % of there subsistence in supporting the machinery. They'll have little or no deductions and absolutely no (false or otherwise) accumulation of wealth (with assistance). Meanwhile, upper earners will have investments, real estate, and other deductions to shelter more money. Remember, higher earners need help.

It's a very simple concept
21.gif
 
Warren Buffet doesn't lie when he points out that in total federal taxes, his effective avg. tax rate is less than his secretary.

The top 1% pay little if no social security or medicare (which is fair, they don't need nor use it) because the vast majority of their income is preferred dividends and capital gains, taxed at 15%.

It's REALLY insane when you get into the taxation of big time whole life insurance coupled with reverse mortgages, in which most plans are set up as loans and the income from them is totally sheltered from federal taxation.
 
Drew,

I don't think that higher earners "need help" as you say it. But what is required is to ensure the laws are not a dis-incentive for them to spend and invest those funds.

If you take 90% of what they make, the incentive is gone.

Like others have said, they don't really trust the government to use that money wisely. I'm in that camp. I would rather the person who earns a dollar, get to spend that dollar, regardless of if he makes 18K/year or 18Billion/year.

The one who does the work should be the one who spends the dollar, period.

I suspect that the social security phase out will go away someday, as the Federal Government tries to keep Social Security solvent.

That tax IS a regressive tax, since it phases out, and there is no relief at low incomes.

But I don't think that just because someone makes more money, the government should be able to take a bigger percentage of those earnings.

If the laws are written to favor investments, such as lower taxes on capital gains, deductions for mortgage interest, etc, then instead of complaining about what others get for deductions, buy stock, buy a home, and put those laws to work.

I grew up in a home where it would have been like today's single mom making $18K/year with two kids. So there is no reason folks who find themselves in that circumstance have to stay there. My sister and I both worked and paid for or earned scholarships for our college educations. I went to a top 25 university, paid for thanks to the US Army, my sister worked her tail off and attended a state school.

But I watched my classmates around me who were in similar circumstances. There were skipping school, drinking, thinking it was cool to barely pass classes, getting pregnant, or getting their classmates pregnant.

It occurred to me that most of the "drama" in their circumstance was self-inflicted.

Not always, as tragedy can strike.

I think we are called to help all, but not perpetual assistance for those who fail to change their self-destructive ways.

So if one doesn't change, and finds himself stuck in that zone, is it really the fault of "the wealthy" that he doesn't stop drinking, doesn't go back to school, doesn't stop fathering children (or she doesn't stop getting pregnant) and so forth?

I say no.
 
Originally Posted By: javacontour
Drew,



But I don't think that just because someone makes more money, the government should be able to take a bigger percentage of those earnings.




I just pointed out to you that the in general millionaires don't. What are you complaining about!

I do taxes for a living. In general, people that make 500K and over have their own businesses that are set up as corporations and they take their money out in the 15% bracket as salary and the rest preferred dividends at 15%.
 
Actually, now that I think about it, I know of a guy with a construction company that pulls salary out at 10% so he's can pull dividends out at 5%. Hardly pays a dime into social security. the ultimate play by the rules tax skipper.

Joe average making 50K a year could never do that!
 
Last edited:
I'd hardly say he's not paying SSI, if he has folks working for the company, he's paying the company 1/2 of their SSI. Joe Average doesn't have to pick up an extra approx 7% FICA for his employees. A business owner does. So to suggest that anyone who owns a business is not paying FICA is missing the big picture. They are likely paying more than us, if they have a few employees.

Also, even if he's only taking a small salary to stay in the 10% FIT bracket, he's really paying approx 14-15% FICA since his business picks up the other half of the FICA tab.

He's taking a risk. He's banking on the value of the company rather than taking the money now.

If it folds up, he has nothing to show for that labor.

There are two sides to that coin.

Most businesses fail. So for every success, how many failed?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

dogememe
  • Locked
Affordable vehicles unavailable but dealership lots are full!
2 3
Replies
49
Views
3K
Leo99
M
How much difference does oil really make?
4 5 6
Replies
106
Views
4K
cheesepuffs2
0
Long Term Fuel Trim at 20% 04 Mazda 3 2.3L
2
Replies
27
Views
772
00scrub
97K15004WD
The cycle continues. Prices are now dropping as companies have pushed as much as they could.
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
5K
TimeFlies
M
I read 4-6 Post about Oil Pressure , Oil Filters , Oil By Pass Valves ? _ ? _ ?
Replies
13
Views
672
MolaKule
Back
Top Bottom