quote:

Originally posted by Bucky:

quote:

Originally posted by Trans Lady:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Koski:
I'm not a CPA by any means but it seems to me if a 35% tax is eliminated and replaced with a 16% tax that is a good thing for business and helps level the playing field with imported goods?

Bill, he wants to tax our "gross receipts from sales of goods and services" which normally we are taxed on our net not our grosses. That why I considered a consumption tax.

I do not know yet if this would be good for small business. Does he want to replace the IRS with business owners? We already collected sale tax for the state.

From his website:
"The current corporate tax code is riddled with years of accumulated loopholes and special favors, burdening U.S. businesses with the highest top tax rate among the advanced nations. This convoluted and anti-competitive structure will be replaced with a simple 16% tax on net business sales (gross sales minus expenses and capital expenditures)."

I went to his site and it says the same thing that he wrote in the Wall Street Journal.......

• Elimination of the payroll tax and the corporate income tax, to be replaced by a 16% Business Flat Tax. This would tax companies’ gross receipts from sales of goods and services, less purchases from other businesses, including capital investment. Simple, efficient, fair.


http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2493


He think the biggest expense to business is payroll taxes, what about labor? Or how about the taxes state charges.

https://www.tedcruz.org/tax_plan_summary/

Includes the line that was in my quote. Which of course is very important.

quote:

Originally posted by Bucky:
https://www.tedcruz.org/tax_plan_summary/

Includes the line that was in my quote. Which of course is very important.

Why didn't he include that word in his article or on his government site?

As far as that .org site goes, Bill or Dave could be writing that stuff on there.

quote:

Originally posted by Trans Lady:
Why didn't he include that word in his article or on his government site?

As far as that .org site goes, Bill or Dave could be writing that stuff on there.

LOL..

Sounds like you wouldn't understand it any better if I did...

Shoot even I caught (gross sales minus expenses and capital expenditures)." after Bucky posted it...
TL, I think you should consider endorsing Bernie.. That way you know your going to lose you butt in the end...lol


Dave

From the .org site..

quote:

•The current corporate tax code is riddled with years of accumulated loopholes and special favors, burdening U.S. businesses with the highest top tax rate among the advanced nations. This convoluted and anti-competitive structure will be replaced with a simple 16% tax on net business sales (gross sales minus expenses and capital expenditures).

From the Op-ed

quote:

Elimination of the payroll tax and the corporate income tax, to be replaced by a 16% Business Flat Tax. This would tax companies’ gross receipts from sales of goods and services, less purchases from other businesses, including capital investment. Simple, efficient, fair.

I think NET is supposed to be Gross after deducting expenses...

So simple even a cave man can figure it out....lol

Dave

quote:

Originally posted by David Covey:
From the .org site..

quote:

•The current corporate tax code is riddled with years of accumulated loopholes and special favors, burdening U.S. businesses with the highest top tax rate among the advanced nations. This convoluted and anti-competitive structure will be replaced with a simple 16% tax on net business sales (gross sales minus expenses and capital expenditures).

From the Op-ed

quote:

Elimination of the payroll tax and the corporate income tax, to be replaced by a 16% Business Flat Tax. This would tax companies’ gross receipts from sales of goods and services, less purchases from other businesses, including capital investment. Simple, efficient, fair.

I think NET is supposed to be Gross after deducting expenses...

So simple even a cave man can figure it out....lol

Dave

You would think "one of Harvard Law's smartest" would not confuse "NET" with "GROSS."

Gross less expenses pretty much gets one to net!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Koski:
Gross less expenses pretty much gets one to net!

Geez Bill, that's not what he wrote or said on his government site.

Well, one of the sites is incorrect anyhow. Can we agree on that?

I guess it comes down to this for me: Both plans are a disaster.

One way is a huge decrease in both personal and corporate taxes, with the only spending decrease being getting rid of a couple agencies.....one of which actually collects the money for the country to pay the bills. (Not real sure how that is going to work anyhow.) Ok. So we also need to decrease spending by what?....17% as a guess...to make up for the decreased revenue? Fine. Let's get to work. Oh yes, a big portion of what we spend is debt payments, and we can't get rid of those unless we get rid of our debt.....which we can't do if we collect maybe 17% less taxes. Ok, so we need to cut spending by as a guess, 25% in order to break even in this scheme. And we still are spending more than we take in. So we get to cut spending by another 10%. This out of a country led by politicians who have proven that they can't stop spending more than we take in EVER! Great plan.

Ok so maybe that isn't the plan. Maybe it is the Gross receipts plan. So that will put the hurt on businesses, who will pass it along to consumers, who still have an income tax to pay.

I really must be missing something in this plan. I'm sure I am. What is it? I know I am just throwing numbers around. But it is worth a discussion anyhow.

It would never have been posted if it did not even out!
The way the "tax and spenders" calculate tax revenues is deducting what ever the number in less tax revenues will be with changes with NO calculation in how much new revenue will be created by the new policies!!!!!
The "tax and spenders" mantra is ALWAYS "we can't afford it" with no appreciation for what tax payers can afford!!!!!

I don't think Trump is as smart as he thinks.


Trump.............

"I went to the Wharton School of Business," Donald Trump routinely brags at his campaign rallies. "I'm, like, a really smart person."

And I'm, like, really? We don't believe you. We think you're full of it, just like you grossly exaggerate and lie about virtually everything else pertaining to your personal and professional life (note the Politifact study illustrating he tells the truth just 1% of the time).

On paper, Trump's educational background appears impressive. He first attended Fordham University and then transferred in 1966 to the real estate studies program at Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, receiving a Bachelor of Science degree.

But contrary to his self-aggrandizing over-the-top embellishing, Trump's two years at the prestigious business school, from all public accounts, seem mediocre at best. His fellow students have no recollection of him. No Dean's List, no Honor Roll, no notable extra-curricular accomplishments. A completely unmemorable academic existence, including continuing rumors that his grades were unimpressive.

So is the Republican front-runner--the man who questions President Obama and Sen. Ted Cruz's citizenship, and who calls everyone in government "stupid," an academic fraud? Is his self-purported "smarts" as mythical as the Muslims he claims were dancing in the streets following the 9/11 attacks?

The "Transcripter" movement demands that Trump release his full Fordham and Wharton transcripts. It's time for him to prove just how smart he is, or isn't. Let's see the grades. I suspect his GPA never cracked 3.0, which is why the transcripts remain a hidden mystery.

Trump had his azz handed to him by Chris Matthews.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mat...kLWfFTCNzJAreAS9EWCB

MORE HYPOCRISY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did we ever see RETARD #1 demand that "totus" release a single record from any where??????????????????????????

quote:

Originally posted by Bob H:
Trump had his azz handed to him by Chris Matthews.



http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mat...kLWfFTCNzJAreAS9EWCB

Gpa

quote:

Originally posted by Bob H:
Trump had his azz handed to him by Chris Matthews.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mat...kLWfFTCNzJAreAS9EWCB

If THAT is Trump's original sin.....the thing that is most unlikable about him.....then he is a ringer for president!! It says something when that is the worst you can say about a guy.
And I really don't care where he went to school. His experience, his integrity, his values and his leadership skills are what are most important. Frankly, I question those things about the entire lot of them.

quote:

I don't think Trump is as smart as he thinks.

Troll, makes him way smarter than what we have.

quote:

Trump had his azz handed to him by Chris Matthews.

Troll, nice copy and paste

Yeah, but did he get a thrill up his leg...

Dave

Augusta Warrior Project
Gpa

Is a reality show now a prerequisite for presidential teams? I see has the endorsement of a female who was popular with some here during the last election. I remember her having some sort of reality tv show that was short lived. Interesting woman.