|
Whiskey Sours posted:I don't think so. The depreciation would have to be recaptured, then capital gain applies to the difference between the sale price and the original purchase price. I suppose you could use some shell company voodoo to avoid recapture, but it seems more likely that the author of that article doesn't understand capital gains. This is where you're getting confused: per Section 1001, you determine the Section 1250 recapture and the capital gain in excess using the sale/disposal price ('amount realized') and the adjusted basis, which is $0 based on the facts given (since they're saying there's a $50 million gain on disposal, even if it doesn't factor in Section 1250 recapture in the specific breakdown of the gain, since recapture is gain, just a 25% rate for 1250 property to the extent of depreciation in excess of the straight-line basis rather than the more favorable capital gains rate for gain in excess of original basis). It's clear based on the facts that the building was fully depreciated. Edit: BTW, I was responding to your "Does anyone know where I can buy an office tower for $0?" comment since it's clear that they didn't buy it for $0 but rather depreciated it down to $0 from the purchase price and then sold it . Horseshoe theory fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Apr 16, 2014 |
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
Joementum posted:Speaking of Republicans paying taxes. Well it was certainly how a large group of political "consultants" who milked Romney for months with cooked polls got their paychecks. I can only hope that Josh does the same, I want nothing less than generation after generation of failed Romney bids, pouring their millions away on a populace that will never ever vote them into executive office, let the tears stain their family tree 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
It just has to be postmarked by today so he's probably shipping it out book rate. Anyone else surprised his return isn't thicker?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Sancho posted:It just has to be postmarked by today so he's probably shipping it out book rate. Anyone else surprised his return isn't thicker? If Romeny is filing anything today it's an extension. There's no way in hell he actually files them anyway. He has an accountant figure everything out and then finally pays what he owes in October because why wouldn't you when extensions are free?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:I agree, and said as much, but people shouldn't defend our absurd tax code just because someone they don't like is criticizing it accurately. Our tax code is a Kafkaesque mess, but for most people the criticisms really don't hold up. The IRS has done a pretty decent job of streamlining things for the average taxpayer who has a W-2, a few 1099s, and may have to itemize a mortgage and some dependents. In no small part because they've cooperated with TurboTax and the like, but there have also been changes like explaining things in plain English and so on. Where it really gets complicated is when you start filing business income, and then the corporate tax code is just its own world beyond that. But then those aren't too complicated either, except where having lawyers and accountants plumb potential complexities is profitable - compliance is simple, compliance while actively minimizing your bill can be trickier but as others have pointed out companies don't do it because they like wasting money on tax accounting. So yeah, the whole thing more or less needs to be burned to the ground and rebuilt coherently, but not because of obsolete stand-up comedy about how taxes are hard or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
I'm guessing it's local La Jolla taxes, which obviously don't pay Harry Reid's salary, but don't bother telling ol' Glarey McPunchey Jr. that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:38
|
|
|
Gyges posted:He has an accountant figure everything out and then finally pays what he owes in October because why wouldn't you when extensions are free?  They're not free? He needs to make a payment on the (anticipated) liability - filing an extension does not absolve him from essentially putting down a deposit to avoid accruing interest and penalties (mainly failure to pay).
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:Our tax code is a Kafkaesque mess, but for most people the criticisms really don't hold up. The IRS has done a pretty decent job of streamlining things for the average taxpayer who has a W-2, a few 1099s, and may have to itemize a mortgage and some dependents. In no small part because they've cooperated with TurboTax and the like, but there have also been changes like explaining things in plain English and so on. A surprisingly large percentage of the tax code is necessary because the past century or so of tax lawyers have come up with increasingly intricate dodges and we've had to repeatedly amend the code to take care of them. I mean, sure, some (many) of the code provisions are just raw industry handouts, but much of the really crazy and intricate poo poo exists for some at least tenable reason. Is there any comparably complex western economy that has a markedly simpler tax code? Is the US code a giant outlier in its complexity or do we just have a relatively "normal" amount of bureaucratic creep and cruft?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
Sancho posted:It just has to be postmarked by today so he's probably shipping it out book rate. Anyone else surprised his return isn't thicker? It's probably just an empty envelope for the photo op.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
He was probably just making sure he didn't pay one more cent than he was legally obligated to, since we all know that will disqualify you from being President.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:46
|
|
|
zoux posted:He was probably just making sure he didn't pay one more cent than he was legally obligated to, since we all know that will disqualify you from being President. He was just paying tribute to Learned Hand: "Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes."
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
 GA Senate candidate forum tonight featuring Paul Broun, Phil Gingrey, Karen Handel, and two others. Great picture to use out of context 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:51
|
|
|
ReindeerF posted:US taxes are loving stupid. Okay, Rumsfeld is a dick, but he's not wrong. He's just banging on about it for the wrong reasons. Our tax code is one of the single best anti-government arguments, not because of the amount, but because of how convoluted it is. Don't fall into Grover Norquist's* trap! We can blame this one on his ilk and the corporations, too: The Tax Complexity Lobby quote:You might think that everyone hates tax complexity, but you’d be wrong. * This guy: 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
ThirdPartyView posted:
That still sounds like free money in that he continues to earn interest on the money he would have paid in April, minus the deposit. Stretch the 'accounts payable'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
You have to prepay your taxes by 90%* anyway or you'll get slapped with late penalties, so the extension doesn't put off the paying, it just puts off tying up all the loose ends reporting-wise. *or 110% of what you owed last year
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
Breitbart has uncovered footage even more devastating than that time they found the tape of Obama hugging a Professor: Al Franken using traffic cones to play at having big tits. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXsQI1wFdwE Not even the Lizard People can save Franken now! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Breitbart has uncovered footage even more devastating than that time they found the tape of Obama hugging a Professor: Al Franken using traffic cones to play at having big tits. No one tell him about all those years on SNL
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Breitbart has uncovered footage even more devastating than that time they found the tape of Obama hugging a Professor: Al Franken using traffic cones to play at having big tits. Haha I forgot how flat that HUGE BOMBSHELL fell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Expect a series of "no, I'm Hoot_the_Owl, HootOwl8 is a completely different person" scandals. Hieronymous Alloy posted:Huckabee is the most terrifying potential Republican candidate and by far the most electable. He's the only one in the stable that I think would have a reasonable chance of beating Clinton. Fortunately he wants the $$$ more than the office.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Breitbart has uncovered footage even more devastating than that time they found the tape of Obama hugging a Professor: Al Franken using traffic cones to play at having big tits. Making cone tits like some fauntleroy is really going to upset the feudalists. I tried to think of who would care and that's what I came up with.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
How can Al Franken be so insensitive to breast cancer survivors. This is the straw that broke the camel's back, when good women cried out for liberty and said no, I will not be mocked by a liberal cabal. I will not be talked down to by men who try to pay for my birth control on the one hand but conetit in their own driveway. You sir,
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:It's a well-worn adage among people with money that if you owe on your tax bill, you should wait until the very last minute to pay. So thanks for proving that your dad's a grudging miser, Josh! What posters have already said with regard to extensions applies here too. Taxes are actually due quarterly, not annually. If you haven't paid at least 90% of your total tax bill (or 100% of last year's amount) by January 15th you get slapped with interest and penalties as well (sane for missing the other quarterly deadlines) Most people don't notice or realize this because their employer witholds their taxes and submits the quarterly payment for them, and most people get refunds. But if you claim too many exemptions and underwithold or you get a big sum of money during the year you could get surprised by it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:A surprisingly large percentage of the tax code is necessary because the past century or so of tax lawyers have come up with increasingly intricate dodges and we've had to repeatedly amend the code to take care of them. I mean, sure, some (many) of the code provisions are just raw industry handouts, but much of the really crazy and intricate poo poo exists for some at least tenable reason. The last time the tax code got a major revision was back in the 60's, I believe. Since then it's just been layer upon layer of bandaids and exceptions. The tax code has to be updated for new developments and methods, and it still has old rules in there that are effectively defunct. And beyond all those bandaids, there's also the simple fact that it has to cover as much as possible. The number of potential variations are pretty drat insane.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
Taxes are actually super loving easy if you document your poo poo properly and earn less the 150k a year. If easy taxes are so drat important to Rummy he should give all his assets to charity and get a minimum wage job in retail. Filing a 1040-EZ only requires a W-2 and five minutes of your time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Taxes are actually super loving easy if you document your poo poo properly and earn less the 150k a year. If easy taxes are so drat important to Rummy he should give all his assets to charity and get a minimum wage job in retail. Filing a 1040-EZ only requires a W-2 and five minutes of your time. The tax preparation companies are required to provide you an option to file for free (there are probably other I am not aware of). They just throw a bunch of ads at you encouraging you to buy extra services. http://www.irs.gov/uac/Free-File:-Do-Your-Federal-Taxes-for-Free
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
Old James posted:The tax preparation companies are required to provide you an option to file for free (there are probably other I am not aware of). They just throw a bunch of ads at you encouraging you to buy extra services. Yeah, Turbotax did this a lot when we used it a week or two ago.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:Taxes are actually super loving easy if you document your poo poo properly and earn less the 150k a year. If easy taxes are so drat important to Rummy he should give all his assets to charity and get a minimum wage job in retail. Filing a 1040-EZ only requires a W-2 and five minutes of your time. I run my own business and it's a little tricker than that. It took a whole TEN MINUTES of talking to my accountant and then a whole FIVE MINUTES writing out checks to the IRS. Granted I kept my books in ship shape all year round and had everything printed out from quickbooks ready to go. Most business owners are morons when it comes to that poo poo. If you know how to manage your loving finances, it's not rocket science at all. On Terra Firma fucked around with this message at 03:40 on Apr 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:I run my own business and it's a little tricker than that. It took a whole TEN MINUTES of talking to my accountant and then a whole FIVE MINUTES writing out checks to the IRS. Granted I kept my books in ship shape all year round and had everything printed out from quickbooks ready to go. Most business owners are morons when it comes to that poo poo. Mind your place job creator! Now fire 3 employees and give yourself a raise!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:I run my own business and it's a little tricker than that. It took a whole TEN MINUTES of talking to my accountant and then a whole FIVE MINUTES writing out checks to the IRS. Granted I kept my books in ship shape all year round and had everything printed out from quickbooks ready to go. Most business owners are morons when it comes to that poo poo. I don't know how you deal with that Schedule C. I mean it's two WHOLE pages! When will Obama stop this insanity?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
Old James posted:The tax preparation companies are required to provide you an option to file for free (there are probably other I am not aware of). They just throw a bunch of ads at you encouraging you to buy extra services. H&R Block used to auto-fill your previous year's information for free. This year their free version excluded it (and probably other stuff) so their free version is just manually entering a bunch of info and even then you're still going to be charged to file any state return with them. That these companies fought against the IRS making free and simple online filing is all the more reason they should've been told to gently caress off and provide a better service if they want to stick around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:What posters have already said with regard to extensions applies here too. Taxes are actually due quarterly, not annually. If you haven't paid at least 90% of your total tax bill (or 100% of last year's amount) by January 15th you get slapped with interest and penalties as well (sane for missing the other quarterly deadlines) When I first got my quarterly inheritance checks I was blow away with the fact that even though I took out the proper amount through work I still ended up owing over $2k to the IRS and almost $500 to the state and all the interest that's added onto it since the trust that distributes everything was never setup to auto-pay taxes like my work does. The one easy trick to get around this was to have additional lump sum payments taken out of every check and so now I'm usually +/- $500 total to the IRS and state combined every year which isn't a big deal. The first time my wife and I joint filed she got pissed about it because when she was single she always got a huge refund until I showed her just how much I get (she knew I had a trust when we married, but had no idea on how much) and while we don't count it as regular income since it gets deposited into an investment account with a stupidly good return it made making major purchase like a house and wedding literally just writing a check as opposed to massive loans that all of our friends had to take out and now it's just accumulating interest and returns for our retirement fund that we really don't have to ever worry about. Really, the problem is that most people are just loving stupid and/or lazy when it comes to money and that just because you're rich doesn't magically exempt you from being stupid and/or lazy when it comes to money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/15/tennessee-is-making-pregnancy-a-criminal-liability.html This and other laws make it a simple matter to charge a woman who gets pregnant and has anything go wrong with a crime. War on women? What war on women? It would make me terrified to get pregnant there even if I was a rich married white woman! I thought the Right was worried the brown folk would out breed us white folk or something. Well, I guess in their ideal world consent would be optional anyway. They should have passed this in Texas so that they could have made that dead woman give birth to her dead or brain-damaged-from-lack-of-oxygen fetus an then immediately arrested her for giving birth to a defective baby. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 05:53
|
|
|
Xibanya posted:http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/15/tennessee-is-making-pregnancy-a-criminal-liability.html quote:Tennessee may become the first state with a law that could criminally prosecute pregnant women if they harm their unborn children by taking illegal drugs...The recent bill stands in sharp contrast to what the state passed last year: the Safe Harbor Act. That legislation guaranteed mothers would not lose parental rights if they came forward and entered drug treatment rehabilitation programs...“It [the Safe Harbor Act] made a woman who was pregnant above the law.” At last the reign of terror by roving bands of pregnant women looting, pillaging, and murdering unconstrained by and unanswerable to any mortal law will come to an end 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 06:04
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:Mind your place job creator! Now fire 3 employees and give yourself a raise! Everyone that works for me is a 1099 because the nature of what I do isn't steady at all. It kind of works out in my favor, but I do pay people exceptionally well and have created a shitload of jobs even if I'm only able to supply them a few weekends a month, if that. I know keeping people on as 1099's isn't the most popular thing to a lot of people on here. Trust me when I say that they are well taken care of. I started this having zero knowledge of how to run a business. If I can figure out how best to prepare for my taxes, anyone should be able to. It's not rocket science. People who say it's too hard or that they're being taxed to death are liars/inept at running a business and should be put out of business as soon as possible. My attitude is, if it's too hard and you can't do it, you didn't think through your business plan. If you think taxes are too high, you aren't properly managing your money. If you blame the government for not being able to keep a steady stream of income, then you aren't offering anything people want.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 07:55
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:It's not even gun deaths, it's gun MURDERS meaning criminal gun deaths, which would presumably be lowered by virtue of there being more ways to rule a gun death lawful, but then that didn't even happen. See, that's what I thought was happening at first.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 09:48
|
|
|
Time_pants posted:See, that's what I thought was happening at first. I only just figured out how to properly read the graph too, god drat that is an amazing hack job. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 09:59
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Is there any comparably complex western economy that has a markedly simpler tax code? Is the US code a giant outlier in its complexity or do we just have a relatively "normal" amount of bureaucratic creep and cruft? The US corporate tax code is also much more complex and open to abuse than other codes because the regulation of corporations, and creation of new types of corporation, is done at state level, but the federal tax code has to account for all of them. At the end of the day, the Treasury threw its hands up and introduced the "check-the-box" rules, which let taxpayers elect whether they want to be treated as a corporation or a partnership. This is widely derided by tax experts around the world as single-handedly undermining the US's Subpart F rules (which stop companies piling up cash from US businesses overseas) and enabling a whole raft of international tax avoidance. As other posters have said, the IRS has tried to patch up the rules where they can (adding another layer of complexity), but it's a pretty shoddy system that's unnecessarily complex and easy to manipulate. Essentially what happened in most Western countries that I know of (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the UK) was that they went through big tax code rewrites in the 90s, simplifying huge chunks of it and ripping out bits that don't work, as well as checking for consistencies with other areas of law. That hasn't happened in the US, probably partly because the structure of the government is different (all those countries I mentioned operate Westminster-style parliaments where the executive and the legislature will almost always be controlled at the same time), partly because the US congress is terrible at passing even legislation it wants to pass (I think even the Regan tax reform took three years to get through Congress), but also because the US has a much bigger economy than those countries and therefore much a more influential business lobby to prevent any tax reform which would close any of these loopholes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 12:00
|
|
|
This should probably also go in the 2014 thread, but in the spirit of this thread's title I present: Palin for Senate http://gawker.com/sweet-jesus-sarah-palin-may-be-running-for-senate-this-1563405764 Apparently one of the lawyers behind McCutcheon v. FEC thinks this is a fantastic idea... Or maybe they're just grifting, but who can tell these days.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 12:51
|
|
|
The actual tax part of the tax code really isn't complicated. That's not to say it couldn't be simplified, I'm personally for a single rate that applies to all income (no separate treatment of cap gains), and that starts at some threshold well above $0, so that the first X dollars in income are taxed at a 0% rate, replacing having a bunch of exemptions, deductions, credits, adjusted gross income calculations, etc. and leaving only charitable deductions and the EITC. That could slim down a 1040 from 2 pages to 1 page. It's all the accounting rules that are mind numbing. And take up tomes and tomes. Take taxation of partnerships. The partnership's income is not taxed. Distributions to a partner exceeding their capital contribution are taxed at the applicable individual rates, the end. Everything else, which takes up page after page after page after page, is all basically accounting rules for partnerships.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
ReindeerF posted:I agree, and said as much, but people shouldn't defend our absurd tax code just because someone they don't like is criticizing it accurately. Heh, I'll only defend the tax code when it's being used to wipe out a piece of poo poo like Donald Rumsfeld. The accuracy of his criticism is utterly immaterial. I don't like riding on buses, but I'd buy stock in Greyhound tomorrow if the crosstown express ran him over in the street like a loving dog.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2014 13:31
|
|
