Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
SK in CV
Participant“Passive income” has a very specific meaning in the tax code. It generally refers to net rents, and other business activities where the taxpayer has no material participation. (not dividends, generally not capital transactions) Losses from passive activities (with some exceptions) are limited to net income from other passive activities. You are correct that capital gains are taxed at some of the lowest rates.
Participant“Passive income” has a very specific meaning in the tax code. It generally refers to net rents, and other business activities where the taxpayer has no material participation. (not dividends, generally not capital transactions) Losses from passive activities (with some exceptions) are limited to net income from other passive activities. You are correct that capital gains are taxed at some of the lowest rates.
Participant“Passive income” has a very specific meaning in the tax code. It generally refers to net rents, and other business activities where the taxpayer has no material participation. (not dividends, generally not capital transactions) Losses from passive activities (with some exceptions) are limited to net income from other passive activities. You are correct that capital gains are taxed at some of the lowest rates.
Participant[quote=AN]As you stated, most real wealthy people get their income passively, so, they won’t be affected by this. If they’re really trying to tax the wealthy people, they won’t tax it based on income, but on net worth instead. You can’t hide net worth.[/quote]
Passive income is taxed at the highest rates, as are wages, interest, taxable retirement plan distributions and net business income (among others). Additionally, I believe (I could be making this part up, but I don’t think so.) this surtax is based on AGI, not taxable income, so it would be on all income including capital gains.
Participant[quote=AN]As you stated, most real wealthy people get their income passively, so, they won’t be affected by this. If they’re really trying to tax the wealthy people, they won’t tax it based on income, but on net worth instead. You can’t hide net worth.[/quote]
Passive income is taxed at the highest rates, as are wages, interest, taxable retirement plan distributions and net business income (among others). Additionally, I believe (I could be making this part up, but I don’t think so.) this surtax is based on AGI, not taxable income, so it would be on all income including capital gains.
Participant[quote=AN]As you stated, most real wealthy people get their income passively, so, they won’t be affected by this. If they’re really trying to tax the wealthy people, they won’t tax it based on income, but on net worth instead. You can’t hide net worth.[/quote]
Passive income is taxed at the highest rates, as are wages, interest, taxable retirement plan distributions and net business income (among others). Additionally, I believe (I could be making this part up, but I don’t think so.) this surtax is based on AGI, not taxable income, so it would be on all income including capital gains.
Participant[quote=AN]As you stated, most real wealthy people get their income passively, so, they won’t be affected by this. If they’re really trying to tax the wealthy people, they won’t tax it based on income, but on net worth instead. You can’t hide net worth.[/quote]
Passive income is taxed at the highest rates, as are wages, interest, taxable retirement plan distributions and net business income (among others). Additionally, I believe (I could be making this part up, but I don’t think so.) this surtax is based on AGI, not taxable income, so it would be on all income including capital gains.
Participant[quote=AN]As you stated, most real wealthy people get their income passively, so, they won’t be affected by this. If they’re really trying to tax the wealthy people, they won’t tax it based on income, but on net worth instead. You can’t hide net worth.[/quote]
Passive income is taxed at the highest rates, as are wages, interest, taxable retirement plan distributions and net business income (among others). Additionally, I believe (I could be making this part up, but I don’t think so.) this surtax is based on AGI, not taxable income, so it would be on all income including capital gains.
ParticipantKarl Rove is a liar.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
“Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel says he’ll pay for the Obama health proposal by raising taxes on Americans making $280,000 a year ($350,000 for couples). Most of those stuck with higher taxes will be small business owners. [/quote]Most small business owners don’t earn $280,000 to $350,000 or more. Not even close to most. But Rove has never been one to let facts get in the way of his agenda. Just another Rove version of “terrorism”. This time insurance is “terrorism”. The guy has been wrong so many times, it’s amazing anyone still pays attention to him. Tough competition between him and Bill Kristol for the “least relevant person on the face of the earth”.
ParticipantKarl Rove is a liar.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
“Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel says he’ll pay for the Obama health proposal by raising taxes on Americans making $280,000 a year ($350,000 for couples). Most of those stuck with higher taxes will be small business owners. [/quote]Most small business owners don’t earn $280,000 to $350,000 or more. Not even close to most. But Rove has never been one to let facts get in the way of his agenda. Just another Rove version of “terrorism”. This time insurance is “terrorism”. The guy has been wrong so many times, it’s amazing anyone still pays attention to him. Tough competition between him and Bill Kristol for the “least relevant person on the face of the earth”.
ParticipantKarl Rove is a liar.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
“Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel says he’ll pay for the Obama health proposal by raising taxes on Americans making $280,000 a year ($350,000 for couples). Most of those stuck with higher taxes will be small business owners. [/quote]Most small business owners don’t earn $280,000 to $350,000 or more. Not even close to most. But Rove has never been one to let facts get in the way of his agenda. Just another Rove version of “terrorism”. This time insurance is “terrorism”. The guy has been wrong so many times, it’s amazing anyone still pays attention to him. Tough competition between him and Bill Kristol for the “least relevant person on the face of the earth”.
ParticipantKarl Rove is a liar.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
“Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel says he’ll pay for the Obama health proposal by raising taxes on Americans making $280,000 a year ($350,000 for couples). Most of those stuck with higher taxes will be small business owners. [/quote]Most small business owners don’t earn $280,000 to $350,000 or more. Not even close to most. But Rove has never been one to let facts get in the way of his agenda. Just another Rove version of “terrorism”. This time insurance is “terrorism”. The guy has been wrong so many times, it’s amazing anyone still pays attention to him. Tough competition between him and Bill Kristol for the “least relevant person on the face of the earth”.
ParticipantKarl Rove is a liar.
[quote=Zeitgeist]
“Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel says he’ll pay for the Obama health proposal by raising taxes on Americans making $280,000 a year ($350,000 for couples). Most of those stuck with higher taxes will be small business owners. [/quote]Most small business owners don’t earn $280,000 to $350,000 or more. Not even close to most. But Rove has never been one to let facts get in the way of his agenda. Just another Rove version of “terrorism”. This time insurance is “terrorism”. The guy has been wrong so many times, it’s amazing anyone still pays attention to him. Tough competition between him and Bill Kristol for the “least relevant person on the face of the earth”.
Participant[quote=GH]The most likely health bill to pass will include a fine for (the rich) – earners over $16K a year of around $750 each. This sounds like a BIG tax increase on wage earners between $25K and $50K who are barely meeting their current obligations or rent and car payments etc in more expensive areas of the country. I have not heard how much health insurance will cost these families, but a partially employed family of 4 could easily end up with a $3,000 fine each year in additional IRS taxes for failing to pay some undetermined amount in health insurance premiums. This does not sound constitutional to me, and most certainly is not the NO taxes we were promised for earners under $250K a year. I had this administration pegged as Bush 2 from the get go.[/quote]
It does sound like a pretty hefty bill for a family of 4 making between $25 and $50K a year. Except the likelihood of them being subject to that fine is pretty slim. If, by chance, their employer isn’t required to pick up part of their insurance bill, they would be eligible for assistance in paying the premiums. (Those making up to 4x the poverty level income will receive assistance.)
-
AuthorPosts