[ucodegen]

[quote Eugene]The Nissan Leaf is EPA rated at 73 miles per charge and 34 kwh per 100 miles. (This last number may be battery-to-wheels, then wall-to-wheels would be about 10% worse, but let’s go with 34 kwh.)[/quote]
Wall to wheels efficiency is much worse than 90% (your 10%loss mentioned above translated to efficiency.).
Motor electro-mechanical efficiency = 80%(approx)
Battery Storage efficiency = 95%(battery slowly bleeds charge)
Battery charging efficiency = 70% (range is 60% – 80%. This is why batteries heat up when charging – if you discharge your cell phone or laptop and then start charging the battery, it will get warm or hot.. or even explode if its lithium)
DC power supply conversion from AC for the charger = 80%(range is 60% – 95%).
Multiply it out (0.8 * 0.95 * 0.7 * 0.8) = 0.4256 or 43% efficient. I am not including powerline and step-down transformer losses.

Gasoline engine efficiency goes from 23% for the old 1960’s tech to about 40% for current engines. Where electric cars have an advantage is in the regenerative braking. They convert the vehicle speed back to electricity and use it to re-accelerate. A traditional gasoline engine throws the energy out as heat from the brakes.

[quote CDMA Eng]
Suburban driving on a nice day: 105 milesSpeed: Average 24 mph

Temperature: 72 degrees

Climate control: Off

The average speed in this scenario is 24 mph; common when commuting and running errands. The ambient temperature is 72 degrees and the climate control is off. Not using the air conditioner and driving at slower speeds mean less energy use and a little extra range.[/quote]
Did you notice that this had a little bit less of a range from 38mph test listed before – range 138 miles? This is because of braking/accelerating. The conversion of energy in momentum back to electrical – charging batteries and then back out to electrical and momentum. More cycles through the system and each piece of inefficiency in it.

[quote Eugene]But that’s not the entire story. Your PV produces most power during the peak hours, and your EV is charged at night. Unless I’m misunderstanding something, you’d have one meter for the house and one meter for the car. Each kwh produced by the PV system knocks off $0.28 off your main electricity bill, but each kwh pumped into the EV battery during super off-peak hours (midnight to 5 a.m.) only costs you $0.145. So a PV system big enough to power the EV would not just make you energy-neutral, it would make money for you.[/quote]
Yes, no, maybe. The guy who has the website for solarwarrior (listed earlier) noted that the rate change he had for having the electric car also impacted the amount of money he got for selling the electricity back to the net. I guess it was sort of a discounted rate because of the electrical car, so the rate going back on the grid was also discounted. On needs to check with existing rate schedules on the smart meters to find out the reality of the situation.

[ucodegen]

[quote Eugene]The Nissan Leaf is EPA rated at 73 miles per charge and 34 kwh per 100 miles. (This last number may be battery-to-wheels, then wall-to-wheels would be about 10% worse, but let’s go with 34 kwh.)[/quote]
Wall to wheels efficiency is much worse than 90% (your 10%loss mentioned above translated to efficiency.).
Motor electro-mechanical efficiency = 80%(approx)
Battery Storage efficiency = 95%(battery slowly bleeds charge)
Battery charging efficiency = 70% (range is 60% – 80%. This is why batteries heat up when charging – if you discharge your cell phone or laptop and then start charging the battery, it will get warm or hot.. or even explode if its lithium)
DC power supply conversion from AC for the charger = 80%(range is 60% – 95%).
Multiply it out (0.8 * 0.95 * 0.7 * 0.8) = 0.4256 or 43% efficient. I am not including powerline and step-down transformer losses.

Gasoline engine efficiency goes from 23% for the old 1960’s tech to about 40% for current engines. Where electric cars have an advantage is in the regenerative braking. They convert the vehicle speed back to electricity and use it to re-accelerate. A traditional gasoline engine throws the energy out as heat from the brakes.

[quote CDMA Eng]
Suburban driving on a nice day: 105 milesSpeed: Average 24 mph

Temperature: 72 degrees

Climate control: Off

The average speed in this scenario is 24 mph; common when commuting and running errands. The ambient temperature is 72 degrees and the climate control is off. Not using the air conditioner and driving at slower speeds mean less energy use and a little extra range.[/quote]
Did you notice that this had a little bit less of a range from 38mph test listed before – range 138 miles? This is because of braking/accelerating. The conversion of energy in momentum back to electrical – charging batteries and then back out to electrical and momentum. More cycles through the system and each piece of inefficiency in it.

[quote Eugene]But that’s not the entire story. Your PV produces most power during the peak hours, and your EV is charged at night. Unless I’m misunderstanding something, you’d have one meter for the house and one meter for the car. Each kwh produced by the PV system knocks off $0.28 off your main electricity bill, but each kwh pumped into the EV battery during super off-peak hours (midnight to 5 a.m.) only costs you $0.145. So a PV system big enough to power the EV would not just make you energy-neutral, it would make money for you.[/quote]
Yes, no, maybe. The guy who has the website for solarwarrior (listed earlier) noted that the rate change he had for having the electric car also impacted the amount of money he got for selling the electricity back to the net. I guess it was sort of a discounted rate because of the electrical car, so the rate going back on the grid was also discounted. On needs to check with existing rate schedules on the smart meters to find out the reality of the situation.

[ucodegen]

[quote Eugene]The Nissan Leaf is EPA rated at 73 miles per charge and 34 kwh per 100 miles. (This last number may be battery-to-wheels, then wall-to-wheels would be about 10% worse, but let’s go with 34 kwh.)[/quote]
Wall to wheels efficiency is much worse than 90% (your 10%loss mentioned above translated to efficiency.).
Motor electro-mechanical efficiency = 80%(approx)
Battery Storage efficiency = 95%(battery slowly bleeds charge)
Battery charging efficiency = 70% (range is 60% – 80%. This is why batteries heat up when charging – if you discharge your cell phone or laptop and then start charging the battery, it will get warm or hot.. or even explode if its lithium)
DC power supply conversion from AC for the charger = 80%(range is 60% – 95%).
Multiply it out (0.8 * 0.95 * 0.7 * 0.8) = 0.4256 or 43% efficient. I am not including powerline and step-down transformer losses.

Gasoline engine efficiency goes from 23% for the old 1960’s tech to about 40% for current engines. Where electric cars have an advantage is in the regenerative braking. They convert the vehicle speed back to electricity and use it to re-accelerate. A traditional gasoline engine throws the energy out as heat from the brakes.

[quote CDMA Eng]
Suburban driving on a nice day: 105 milesSpeed: Average 24 mph

Temperature: 72 degrees

Climate control: Off

The average speed in this scenario is 24 mph; common when commuting and running errands. The ambient temperature is 72 degrees and the climate control is off. Not using the air conditioner and driving at slower speeds mean less energy use and a little extra range.[/quote]
Did you notice that this had a little bit less of a range from 38mph test listed before – range 138 miles? This is because of braking/accelerating. The conversion of energy in momentum back to electrical – charging batteries and then back out to electrical and momentum. More cycles through the system and each piece of inefficiency in it.

[quote Eugene]But that’s not the entire story. Your PV produces most power during the peak hours, and your EV is charged at night. Unless I’m misunderstanding something, you’d have one meter for the house and one meter for the car. Each kwh produced by the PV system knocks off $0.28 off your main electricity bill, but each kwh pumped into the EV battery during super off-peak hours (midnight to 5 a.m.) only costs you $0.145. So a PV system big enough to power the EV would not just make you energy-neutral, it would make money for you.[/quote]
Yes, no, maybe. The guy who has the website for solarwarrior (listed earlier) noted that the rate change he had for having the electric car also impacted the amount of money he got for selling the electricity back to the net. I guess it was sort of a discounted rate because of the electrical car, so the rate going back on the grid was also discounted. On needs to check with existing rate schedules on the smart meters to find out the reality of the situation.

[ucodegen]

[quote gandalf]In truth, I don’t know what the answer is. VAT? Flat?[/quote]

I would love a Flat/VAT tax (personally benefits me – though in reality, it would not be right.), but looking at that tax schedule above, people netting under $40-50k a year would pay quite a bit more in taxes. Those over $40-50k will pay less (the flat tax equivalent for the current in terms of government revenues was estimated at around 15% to 17%). VAT tax only taxes when someone spends. Basic survival costs are virtually the same for rich and poor – so VAT taxes are even more regressive than a flat tax. The percentage of income going to taxes will reduce with increasing income in a VAT tax system. – this is why Steve Forbes was proposing both of these. (snark)Britain has partial VAT tax .. and has a quasi landed ‘aristocracy’. I wonder why the VAT (/snark).

[quote gandalf]Definitely not a ‘fair system’ right now. Public finance is a mess, GOP is starving the beast, while billionaires and corporations within corps within corps play shell games with asset growth.[/quote]
First, it has to be realized that taxing is just like pressing down on a balloon. Push down on one area and another pops up. If you tax a company too much, they will offshore. If you also tax their offshore income, they will move completely out of the country. There are several foreign countries which have almost no corporate taxes. The trick is to balance the company’s desire to stay in-country with its desire to avoid taxes. Being within the United States has several advantages; educated workforce(generally), a workforce that tends to work instead of “mai phan rai”(sp) or mañana(generally), reliable power and water, low government graft-extortion(offset by being harder to bribe the gov), predictable environment(few revolutions, gov is not likely to seize assets just because). It is a tricky balance.

The rich don’t game it through the offshore/shell game, etc methods. If you want to see how they do it, take a look at how Spanos and McMillin do it.
Spanos: gets a ticket guarantee at the stadium – not tied to performance of the team. He can they just choose the cheapest and not the best players. It was estimated that the city was kicking in around $3mil/yr on the guarantee. He then tries twisting the city’s arm to get a stadium built for him (that he does not have to pay for, but gets the proceeds from) at the city’s cost.
McMillin: effectively gets the deed to the Naval Training Center property(prime real-estate/land) for a song and gets to develop and profit from it. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~cba/news/story/11-30-10GoldmanSDDT.pdf

9th paragraph down. (can search on McMillin)
http://www.balboaparkhistory.net/glimpses/nolen_waterfront.htm

More:
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/sep/17/developer-breaking-promise-liberty-station-residen/

[ucodegen]

[quote gandalf]In truth, I don’t know what the answer is. VAT? Flat?[/quote]

I would love a Flat/VAT tax (personally benefits me – though in reality, it would not be right.), but looking at that tax schedule above, people netting under $40-50k a year would pay quite a bit more in taxes. Those over $40-50k will pay less (the flat tax equivalent for the current in terms of government revenues was estimated at around 15% to 17%). VAT tax only taxes when someone spends. Basic survival costs are virtually the same for rich and poor – so VAT taxes are even more regressive than a flat tax. The percentage of income going to taxes will reduce with increasing income in a VAT tax system. – this is why Steve Forbes was proposing both of these. (snark)Britain has partial VAT tax .. and has a quasi landed ‘aristocracy’. I wonder why the VAT (/snark).

[quote gandalf]Definitely not a ‘fair system’ right now. Public finance is a mess, GOP is starving the beast, while billionaires and corporations within corps within corps play shell games with asset growth.[/quote]
First, it has to be realized that taxing is just like pressing down on a balloon. Push down on one area and another pops up. If you tax a company too much, they will offshore. If you also tax their offshore income, they will move completely out of the country. There are several foreign countries which have almost no corporate taxes. The trick is to balance the company’s desire to stay in-country with its desire to avoid taxes. Being within the United States has several advantages; educated workforce(generally), a workforce that tends to work instead of “mai phan rai”(sp) or mañana(generally), reliable power and water, low government graft-extortion(offset by being harder to bribe the gov), predictable environment(few revolutions, gov is not likely to seize assets just because). It is a tricky balance.

The rich don’t game it through the offshore/shell game, etc methods. If you want to see how they do it, take a look at how Spanos and McMillin do it.
Spanos: gets a ticket guarantee at the stadium – not tied to performance of the team. He can they just choose the cheapest and not the best players. It was estimated that the city was kicking in around $3mil/yr on the guarantee. He then tries twisting the city’s arm to get a stadium built for him (that he does not have to pay for, but gets the proceeds from) at the city’s cost.
McMillin: effectively gets the deed to the Naval Training Center property(prime real-estate/land) for a song and gets to develop and profit from it. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~cba/news/story/11-30-10GoldmanSDDT.pdf

9th paragraph down. (can search on McMillin)
http://www.balboaparkhistory.net/glimpses/nolen_waterfront.htm

More:
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/sep/17/developer-breaking-promise-liberty-station-residen/

[ucodegen]

[quote gandalf]In truth, I don’t know what the answer is. VAT? Flat?[/quote]

I would love a Flat/VAT tax (personally benefits me – though in reality, it would not be right.), but looking at that tax schedule above, people netting under $40-50k a year would pay quite a bit more in taxes. Those over $40-50k will pay less (the flat tax equivalent for the current in terms of government revenues was estimated at around 15% to 17%). VAT tax only taxes when someone spends. Basic survival costs are virtually the same for rich and poor – so VAT taxes are even more regressive than a flat tax. The percentage of income going to taxes will reduce with increasing income in a VAT tax system. – this is why Steve Forbes was proposing both of these. (snark)Britain has partial VAT tax .. and has a quasi landed ‘aristocracy’. I wonder why the VAT (/snark).

[quote gandalf]Definitely not a ‘fair system’ right now. Public finance is a mess, GOP is starving the beast, while billionaires and corporations within corps within corps play shell games with asset growth.[/quote]
First, it has to be realized that taxing is just like pressing down on a balloon. Push down on one area and another pops up. If you tax a company too much, they will offshore. If you also tax their offshore income, they will move completely out of the country. There are several foreign countries which have almost no corporate taxes. The trick is to balance the company’s desire to stay in-country with its desire to avoid taxes. Being within the United States has several advantages; educated workforce(generally), a workforce that tends to work instead of “mai phan rai”(sp) or mañana(generally), reliable power and water, low government graft-extortion(offset by being harder to bribe the gov), predictable environment(few revolutions, gov is not likely to seize assets just because). It is a tricky balance.

The rich don’t game it through the offshore/shell game, etc methods. If you want to see how they do it, take a look at how Spanos and McMillin do it.
Spanos: gets a ticket guarantee at the stadium – not tied to performance of the team. He can they just choose the cheapest and not the best players. It was estimated that the city was kicking in around $3mil/yr on the guarantee. He then tries twisting the city’s arm to get a stadium built for him (that he does not have to pay for, but gets the proceeds from) at the city’s cost.
McMillin: effectively gets the deed to the Naval Training Center property(prime real-estate/land) for a song and gets to develop and profit from it. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~cba/news/story/11-30-10GoldmanSDDT.pdf

9th paragraph down. (can search on McMillin)
http://www.balboaparkhistory.net/glimpses/nolen_waterfront.htm

More:
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/sep/17/developer-breaking-promise-liberty-station-residen/

[ucodegen]

[quote gandalf]In truth, I don’t know what the answer is. VAT? Flat?[/quote]

I would love a Flat/VAT tax (personally benefits me – though in reality, it would not be right.), but looking at that tax schedule above, people netting under $40-50k a year would pay quite a bit more in taxes. Those over $40-50k will pay less (the flat tax equivalent for the current in terms of government revenues was estimated at around 15% to 17%). VAT tax only taxes when someone spends. Basic survival costs are virtually the same for rich and poor – so VAT taxes are even more regressive than a flat tax. The percentage of income going to taxes will reduce with increasing income in a VAT tax system. – this is why Steve Forbes was proposing both of these. (snark)Britain has partial VAT tax .. and has a quasi landed ‘aristocracy’. I wonder why the VAT (/snark).

[quote gandalf]Definitely not a ‘fair system’ right now. Public finance is a mess, GOP is starving the beast, while billionaires and corporations within corps within corps play shell games with asset growth.[/quote]
First, it has to be realized that taxing is just like pressing down on a balloon. Push down on one area and another pops up. If you tax a company too much, they will offshore. If you also tax their offshore income, they will move completely out of the country. There are several foreign countries which have almost no corporate taxes. The trick is to balance the company’s desire to stay in-country with its desire to avoid taxes. Being within the United States has several advantages; educated workforce(generally), a workforce that tends to work instead of “mai phan rai”(sp) or mañana(generally), reliable power and water, low government graft-extortion(offset by being harder to bribe the gov), predictable environment(few revolutions, gov is not likely to seize assets just because). It is a tricky balance.

The rich don’t game it through the offshore/shell game, etc methods. If you want to see how they do it, take a look at how Spanos and McMillin do it.
Spanos: gets a ticket guarantee at the stadium – not tied to performance of the team. He can they just choose the cheapest and not the best players. It was estimated that the city was kicking in around $3mil/yr on the guarantee. He then tries twisting the city’s arm to get a stadium built for him (that he does not have to pay for, but gets the proceeds from) at the city’s cost.
McMillin: effectively gets the deed to the Naval Training Center property(prime real-estate/land) for a song and gets to develop and profit from it. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~cba/news/story/11-30-10GoldmanSDDT.pdf

9th paragraph down. (can search on McMillin)
http://www.balboaparkhistory.net/glimpses/nolen_waterfront.htm

More:
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/sep/17/developer-breaking-promise-liberty-station-residen/

[ucodegen]

[quote gandalf]In truth, I don’t know what the answer is. VAT? Flat?[/quote]

I would love a Flat/VAT tax (personally benefits me – though in reality, it would not be right.), but looking at that tax schedule above, people netting under $40-50k a year would pay quite a bit more in taxes. Those over $40-50k will pay less (the flat tax equivalent for the current in terms of government revenues was estimated at around 15% to 17%). VAT tax only taxes when someone spends. Basic survival costs are virtually the same for rich and poor – so VAT taxes are even more regressive than a flat tax. The percentage of income going to taxes will reduce with increasing income in a VAT tax system. – this is why Steve Forbes was proposing both of these. (snark)Britain has partial VAT tax .. and has a quasi landed ‘aristocracy’. I wonder why the VAT (/snark).

[quote gandalf]Definitely not a ‘fair system’ right now. Public finance is a mess, GOP is starving the beast, while billionaires and corporations within corps within corps play shell games with asset growth.[/quote]
First, it has to be realized that taxing is just like pressing down on a balloon. Push down on one area and another pops up. If you tax a company too much, they will offshore. If you also tax their offshore income, they will move completely out of the country. There are several foreign countries which have almost no corporate taxes. The trick is to balance the company’s desire to stay in-country with its desire to avoid taxes. Being within the United States has several advantages; educated workforce(generally), a workforce that tends to work instead of “mai phan rai”(sp) or mañana(generally), reliable power and water, low government graft-extortion(offset by being harder to bribe the gov), predictable environment(few revolutions, gov is not likely to seize assets just because). It is a tricky balance.

The rich don’t game it through the offshore/shell game, etc methods. If you want to see how they do it, take a look at how Spanos and McMillin do it.
Spanos: gets a ticket guarantee at the stadium – not tied to performance of the team. He can they just choose the cheapest and not the best players. It was estimated that the city was kicking in around $3mil/yr on the guarantee. He then tries twisting the city’s arm to get a stadium built for him (that he does not have to pay for, but gets the proceeds from) at the city’s cost.
McMillin: effectively gets the deed to the Naval Training Center property(prime real-estate/land) for a song and gets to develop and profit from it. http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~cba/news/story/11-30-10GoldmanSDDT.pdf

9th paragraph down. (can search on McMillin)
http://www.balboaparkhistory.net/glimpses/nolen_waterfront.htm

More:
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/sep/17/developer-breaking-promise-liberty-station-residen/

[ucodegen]

As mentioned on another thread, I’m still investigating the economics and practicality of PV EV. PhotoVoltaic Electric Vehicle. Perhaps eventually combining a grid tie solar system to partially or completely charge an electric car. Solar net metering tariffs allow you to get credit for power you generate, offsetting additional usage for nighttime car charging.

Someone who has already done it.. All of their power is solar (house and car) and they net positive to the grid.
http://www.solarwarrior.com/

I thought I published this link somewhere on this site previously…

[ucodegen]

As mentioned on another thread, I’m still investigating the economics and practicality of PV EV. PhotoVoltaic Electric Vehicle. Perhaps eventually combining a grid tie solar system to partially or completely charge an electric car. Solar net metering tariffs allow you to get credit for power you generate, offsetting additional usage for nighttime car charging.

Someone who has already done it.. All of their power is solar (house and car) and they net positive to the grid.
http://www.solarwarrior.com/

I thought I published this link somewhere on this site previously…

[ucodegen]

As mentioned on another thread, I’m still investigating the economics and practicality of PV EV. PhotoVoltaic Electric Vehicle. Perhaps eventually combining a grid tie solar system to partially or completely charge an electric car. Solar net metering tariffs allow you to get credit for power you generate, offsetting additional usage for nighttime car charging.

Someone who has already done it.. All of their power is solar (house and car) and they net positive to the grid.
http://www.solarwarrior.com/

I thought I published this link somewhere on this site previously…

[ucodegen]

As mentioned on another thread, I’m still investigating the economics and practicality of PV EV. PhotoVoltaic Electric Vehicle. Perhaps eventually combining a grid tie solar system to partially or completely charge an electric car. Solar net metering tariffs allow you to get credit for power you generate, offsetting additional usage for nighttime car charging.

Someone who has already done it.. All of their power is solar (house and car) and they net positive to the grid.
http://www.solarwarrior.com/

I thought I published this link somewhere on this site previously…

[ucodegen]

As mentioned on another thread, I’m still investigating the economics and practicality of PV EV. PhotoVoltaic Electric Vehicle. Perhaps eventually combining a grid tie solar system to partially or completely charge an electric car. Solar net metering tariffs allow you to get credit for power you generate, offsetting additional usage for nighttime car charging.

Someone who has already done it.. All of their power is solar (house and car) and they net positive to the grid.
http://www.solarwarrior.com/

I thought I published this link somewhere on this site previously…

[ucodegen]

[quote gandalf]I don’t think your post really addresses the core issue of what constitutes ‘taxable’ in the first place, which is where most of the avoidance occurs at higher levels, especially in corporate finance/accounting departments.[/quote]
I didn’t want to write a blog post that was as long as the tax code. One thing I do worry about is what makes something ‘taxable’. I have a close relative that deals with Financial Accounting and who started with Corporate Auditing. This person doesn’t always have a good opinion of the ‘knowledge’ of some of the people they have dealt with – even from some of the accounting firms. Most of the dirty games seem to be at the ‘corporate’ level vs personal income tax level. A company making over 100M/year can afford more/better accountants than an individual.

[quote gandalf]I’d be interested in your assessment of this underlying tax policy issue, avoidance strategies at the high-end. And I would dispute your assertion that ‘real tax’ is distributed fairly.[/quote]I never asserted it is fair. I was dealing with the statement

The thing that (rightfully) pisses people off is that the brunt of our nation’s tax revenue is generated by the bottom 80% of citizens who take home about 40% of income.

One of the current problems with tax structures, is that money is ‘mobile’. If you tax too heavily in one locale/state/country, it will move and along with it goes the income it can generate and the associated jobs. Tax too hard and the state/fed will get a boost in tax revenues, but that boost is fleeting because those taxed will adapt to the change(Un-intended consequences of tax policy changes). Too many people feel that the simple solution is just tax them.. but reality is much more complicated.

[quote gandalf]Substantial wealth is accrued by corporations and HNW-individuals without officially reporting the YOY differences as wealth as income or even as gains.[/quote] The problem with doing it YOY is that some of the gains are long term, and could be easily eaten up with just one bad year. Some of these are on owned assets. Should the government be able to tax you on the year to year change in value of object held? Imagine the situation with owning a car. If the value of the vehicle goes up, you will owe tax on it. You did nothing to do cause this, and the value change was most likely due to inflation. Imagine the games with inflation that the government would play if YOY asset value changes were handled as taxable income. This is why it is dependent upon a taxable event, ie sale or conversion to cash.

When I look at the house my parents owned way back in the ’60s and ’70s and know how much they paid($35k) when they bought it and how much it is worth now($2.5M).. is that difference caused by any improvement(not really), others driving up real estate prices(definitely) inflation(definitely). The period involved was quite long (almost 50 years). So is this considered ‘weath’ or is it devaluation of the currency due to inflation?

[quote gandalf]In particular, numbers associated with offshore tax havens are unacceptably large at a time when public budgets everywhere are under duress.[/quote]
There is a lot of statements relative to offshore tax havens. The truth there is that many of the procedures they claim are illegal. The problem is catching them. It is also easy for politicians to claim the problem is due to tax evasion for the purposes of preventing people from looking behind the curtain and seeing that a lot of the behavior is due to the politicians spending behaviors and governmental money allocation and budgeting techniques.

[quote gandalf]. My view is, I think taxes can be lower, and one of the mechanisms for reducing tax rates in a responsible way would be to reform the tax system to reduce avoidance at the high-end.[/quote] I agree they can be lower, but I think that the amount loss to high-end avoidance is less than people think. I do know for a fact, that if you are making more than $100k a year, your taxes get looked at much closer than those at lower incomes.

It should be interesting what happens as the updated requirements with respect to capital gains reporting hits the brokerage companies.

[ucodegen]

[quote gandalf]I don’t think your post really addresses the core issue of what constitutes ‘taxable’ in the first place, which is where most of the avoidance occurs at higher levels, especially in corporate finance/accounting departments.[/quote]
I didn’t want to write a blog post that was as long as the tax code. One thing I do worry about is what makes something ‘taxable’. I have a close relative that deals with Financial Accounting and who started with Corporate Auditing. This person doesn’t always have a good opinion of the ‘knowledge’ of some of the people they have dealt with – even from some of the accounting firms. Most of the dirty games seem to be at the ‘corporate’ level vs personal income tax level. A company making over 100M/year can afford more/better accountants than an individual.

[quote gandalf]I’d be interested in your assessment of this underlying tax policy issue, avoidance strategies at the high-end. And I would dispute your assertion that ‘real tax’ is distributed fairly.[/quote]I never asserted it is fair. I was dealing with the statement

The thing that (rightfully) pisses people off is that the brunt of our nation’s tax revenue is generated by the bottom 80% of citizens who take home about 40% of income.

One of the current problems with tax structures, is that money is ‘mobile’. If you tax too heavily in one locale/state/country, it will move and along with it goes the income it can generate and the associated jobs. Tax too hard and the state/fed will get a boost in tax revenues, but that boost is fleeting because those taxed will adapt to the change(Un-intended consequences of tax policy changes). Too many people feel that the simple solution is just tax them.. but reality is much more complicated.

[quote gandalf]Substantial wealth is accrued by corporations and HNW-individuals without officially reporting the YOY differences as wealth as income or even as gains.[/quote] The problem with doing it YOY is that some of the gains are long term, and could be easily eaten up with just one bad year. Some of these are on owned assets. Should the government be able to tax you on the year to year change in value of object held? Imagine the situation with owning a car. If the value of the vehicle goes up, you will owe tax on it. You did nothing to do cause this, and the value change was most likely due to inflation. Imagine the games with inflation that the government would play if YOY asset value changes were handled as taxable income. This is why it is dependent upon a taxable event, ie sale or conversion to cash.

When I look at the house my parents owned way back in the ’60s and ’70s and know how much they paid($35k) when they bought it and how much it is worth now($2.5M).. is that difference caused by any improvement(not really), others driving up real estate prices(definitely) inflation(definitely). The period involved was quite long (almost 50 years). So is this considered ‘weath’ or is it devaluation of the currency due to inflation?

[quote gandalf]In particular, numbers associated with offshore tax havens are unacceptably large at a time when public budgets everywhere are under duress.[/quote]
There is a lot of statements relative to offshore tax havens. The truth there is that many of the procedures they claim are illegal. The problem is catching them. It is also easy for politicians to claim the problem is due to tax evasion for the purposes of preventing people from looking behind the curtain and seeing that a lot of the behavior is due to the politicians spending behaviors and governmental money allocation and budgeting techniques.

[quote gandalf]. My view is, I think taxes can be lower, and one of the mechanisms for reducing tax rates in a responsible way would be to reform the tax system to reduce avoidance at the high-end.[/quote] I agree they can be lower, but I think that the amount loss to high-end avoidance is less than people think. I do know for a fact, that if you are making more than $100k a year, your taxes get looked at much closer than those at lower incomes.

It should be interesting what happens as the updated requirements with respect to capital gains reporting hits the brokerage companies.

[Author]

Posts