[InTheatersNow]

Originally Posted by David87

People are still going to invest money whether the gain is taxed at 15% or 25%.


A businessman is going to worry about one thing, and one thing only...making money. He'll pay the taxes on the money he makes later.

No, a businessman will take tax into consideration before he invests anything.

[David87]

Originally Posted by InTheatersNow

No, a businessman will take tax into consideration before he invests anything.

I've heard many businessmen say making money is making money....in fact I lifted that quote pretty much word for word from Mark Cuban.

[InTheatersNow]

Originally Posted by David87

I've heard many businessmen say making money is making money....in fact I lifted that quote pretty much word for word from Mark Cuban.

And if you are being taxed higher you are making less money.

http://bit.ly/RXHHqo

[David87]

When we're talking about "job creators" who are investing with the expectation of making large sums of money over a long period of time, the difference between a 15% tax rate and a 25% tax rate is very low on the list of "things I should be worried about with this investment."

Ie if someone is investing a large amount of money and is expecting to see a 2 million dollar gain over a 5 year period...the tax change we're talking about takes the profit from 1.7 million to 1.5 million. As in "I still just made a million and a half dollars"

Uncertainty in what the rate is going to be in 5 years is much more detrimental to investment than what the actual rate is, at least when we're talking about changes from 15 to 20 to 25 percent. If someone was pushing a 70% rate, then that might be a big deal. As it stands now, the expected impact on the economy is relatively small. People will still invest, people will still make large gobs of money.

[mattmatumbo]

Originally Posted by mazerfaka

Hm! Trying to understand it! Over here you pay 35% regardless of what you work with or what you earn, but when you go over a limit (which very very few people do) you have to pay 50% tax.

We have bracketed taxable income: Most posters in here fall into the 16-20% tax rate as we don't make more than 165,000 dollars a year. Make 165,000 dollars up into the 280,000 range, you pay 33% or higher. The last tax bracket is anything above the 280,000 (or whatever) range and pay 45% or higher or so. But we have tons of loop holes to avoid paying what the supposed tax bracket suggests.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

[apoemtothedead]

Originally Posted by mattmatumbo

We have bracketed taxable income: Most posters in here fall into the 16-20% tax rate as we don't make more than 165,000 dollars a year. Make 165,000 dollars up into the 280,000 range, you pay 33% or higher. The last tax bracket is anything above the 280,000 (or whatever) range and pay 45% or higher or so. But we have tons of loop holes to avoid paying what the supposed tax bracket suggests.

Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, you're wrong and a simple google search would have told you so.

[mattmatumbo]

Originally Posted by apoemtothedead

Yeah, you're wrong and a simple google search would have told you so.

According to that list on the first page I'm not far off.

[EasySkankin]

"loopholes"

[InTheatersNow]

Originally Posted by EasySkankin

"loopholes"

Losses on investments. Charitable donations. Mortgage interest. Or loopholes if you want to call them that.

[birdman]

Originally Posted by David87

I've heard many businessmen say making money is making money....in fact I lifted that quote pretty much word for word from Mark Cuban.

What about someone who is 10 years away from retirement and has an investment portfolio that he could sell off now at a 15% cap gains tax or wait and sell it at a 25% rate. Why wouldn't they sell now and reinvest under the new tax code? Why would they reinvest at all?

We aren't talking about a billionaire here either, we are talking about your parents.

Raising the tax rate for the 1% is about symbolism, it's not a solution. Can we get an actual solution already?

[David87]

Originally Posted by birdman

What about someone who is 10 years away from retirement and has an investment portfolio that he could sell off now at a 15% cap gains tax or wait and sell it at a 25% rate. Why wouldn't they sell now and reinvest under the new tax code? Why would they reinvest at all?

We aren't talking about a billionaire here either, we are talking about your parents.

Raising the tax rate for the 1% is about symbolism, it's not a solution. Can we get an actual solution already?

Neither of my parents are lucky enough to have any type of investments, let alone have significant investments that would be vastly effected by an increase in the tax rate.

[birdman]

Originally Posted by David87

Neither of my parents are lucky enough to have any type of investments, let alone have significant investments that would be vastly effected by an increase in the tax rate.

What does this have to do with luck?

[David87]

Luck might not be the right word....fortunate, maybe. Definitely some luck though.

Usually, when you choose a career path that doesn't include college, you end up busting your ass for 40-50 hours a week at a full time job for an income on the lower end of median. If you're lucky, you'll be part of a union that fights to get you decent health benefits and maybe some dental. But chances are the income you're taking it won't be nearly enough to raise a kid, live in a halfway decent area, and still have extra income at the end to invest. That is, assuming you have any sort of education at all on even how to go about investing. As luck would have it, she's lucky enough to have a union that fought to get her a 401K and pension as well. Of course, sacrifices had to be made by the union to get those things...she can't touch either account until she reaches a certain age, and if god forbid something happens to her, her children (aka me) don't get to inherit those accounts. Only a spouse can. Kind of discriminatory towards single parents, IMO.

[InTheatersNow]

Originally Posted by David87

Luck might not be the right word....fortunate, maybe. Definitely some luck though.

Usually, when you choose a career path that doesn't include college, you end up busting your ass for 40-50 hours a week at a full time job for an income on the lower end of median. If you're lucky, you'll be part of a union that fights to get you decent health benefits and maybe some dental. But chances are the income you're taking it won't be nearly enough to raise a kid, live in a halfway decent area, and still have extra income at the end to invest. That is, assuming you have any sort of education at all on even how to go about investing. As luck would have it, she's lucky enough to have a union that fought to get her a 401K and pension as well. Of course, sacrifices had to be made by the union to get those things...she can't touch either account until she reaches a certain age, and if god forbid something happens to her, her children (aka me) don't get to inherit those accounts. Only a spouse can. Kind of discriminatory towards single parents, IMO.

If you are not married you can select someone else as your beneficiary.

[apoemtothedead]

Originally Posted by birdman

What about someone who is 10 years away from retirement and has an investment portfolio that he could sell off now at a 15% cap gains tax or wait and sell it at a 25% rate. Why wouldn't they sell now and reinvest under the new tax code? Why would they reinvest at all?

We aren't talking about a billionaire here either, we are talking about your parents.

Raising the tax rate for the 1% is about symbolism, it's not a solution. Can we get an actual solution already?

Because the average return on investments is greater than the average return on fixed income, regardless of the tax rate.

"Money is money."