Jump to content


The Republican Utopia


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

"Democrats agreed to scale back a plan for the IRS to try to crack down on tax cheats"

 

 

"Good, that's a dumb idea"

 

 

"Trying to catch tax cheats is a dumb idea?"


"Nice try on the extrapolation?"

 

 

...what? 

Exactly…what?  
 

hownis looking at every single $600 transactions going to catch millionaires and billionaire tax cheats (which is who Dems are on record of wanting to catch).  I mean is that how they got to be millionaires and billionaire?  By cheating on $600 transactions?   
 

And yes it’s a stupid extrapolation as is your quite dumb post.  I would like people to pay what they owe in taxes.  Looking at every single $600 transaction without cause ain’t the way to do it.   Do we also get to go into every household that buys a safe?  Maybe they are hiding money at home that should be taxed?  I mean come on and get a clue at some point.  

  • Plus1 1
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Exactly…what?  
 

hownis looking at every single $600 transactions going to catch millionaires and billionaire tax cheats (which is who Dems are on record of wanting to catch).  I mean is that how they got to be millionaires and billionaire?  By cheating on $600 transactions?   
 

And yes it’s a stupid extrapolation as is your quite dumb post.  I would like people to pay what they owe in taxes.  Looking at every single $600 transaction without cause ain’t the way to do it.   Do we also get to go into every household that buys a safe?  Maybe they are hiding money at home that should be taxed?  I mean come on and get a clue at some point.  

That's not really how it would work.

 

Quote

What's True

According to the proposed American Families Plan, banks would “report gross inflows and outflows” for all business and personal accounts to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), “with the exception of accounts below a 'low de minimis gross flow threshold of $600 or fair market value of $600.'” But ...

 

What's False

... this does not mean all individual transactions above that threshold would be reported. Rather, aggregated numbers would be provided to the IRS annually.

 

The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report “all transactions” above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cashflows above $600, that doesn’t mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing “aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year — gross inflow and gross outflow — and not individualized transaction information.” This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo, but wouldn’t require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can get other information through audit

 

CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, “Only the prior year’s total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS “monitors” you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January

 

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-banks-600-dollar-irs/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Sooo…..helping the IRS catch people not paying their taxes is bad…..how?

Yes it is bad when the the rules proposed are that onerous and seems to assume guilt until one proves otherwise.  
 

However, I’m intellectually curious to your view so let’s play it out…..

 

—why stop at $600?  Since we want to help the IRS catch tax cheats, let’s just go ahead and have submit every single transaction that takes place.  Surely there are tax cheats doing transactions under $600.  
 

—we should have every safe purchased registered to the government and an address so that IRS agents could also be able to actively search any home that has one of those registered safes.  That way we are helping catch those tax thieves that work in cash and don’t deposit to a bank.  

 

—I assume you would want a massive increase in IRS agents hired so we can audit every single tax return in order to make sure every dime is rightfully collected.  Otherwise we aren’t helping the IRS catch tax cheats.  
 

There isn’t much of reason to stop at $600 transactions based on your logic or reasoning so the above should be fine. 

  • Plus1 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
21 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Why shouldn't everyone be on board with this?  Are you saying Republicans don't want to catch rich tax cheats?

Not sure.

 

No.

 

Why $600 limit?  Are you saying you don’t want to catch the tax cheats that use lesser transaction amounts?  No answers to the other questions posed to help catch tax cheats? 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

9 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Why $600 limit?  Are you saying you don’t want to catch the tax cheats that use lesser transaction amounts?  No answers to the other questions posed to help catch tax cheats? 

This is a red herring.  Why should any figure be the limit? 

 

This argument is only coming from Republicans because they really don't want to help the IRS.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
11 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Yes it is bad when the the rules proposed are that onerous

Onerous on who? The bank computers that will automatically submit the reports?

 

11 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

and seems to assume guilt until one proves otherwise.  

This is at least a decent argument. But as the fact check @Scarletlinked points out, it won't be individual transactions that are sent to the IRS but instead annual aggregations.

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

This is a red herring.  Why should any figure be the limit? 

 

This argument is only coming from Republicans because they really don't want to help the IRS.

No, you specifically said something about asking am I not wanting wanting to catch tax cheats.  If that’s the verbiage that you are relying on to make your point then what’s wrong with going way farther to catch more tax cheats?  I find it interesting you don’t want to confront that, and instead just try and blow it off.   

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

8 minutes ago, RedDenver said:
11 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

 

This is at least a decent argument. But as the fact check @Scarletlinked points out, it won't be individual transactions that are sent to the IRS but instead annual aggregations.

If that’s the argument then why not aggregate the entirety of transactions?  
 

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

No, you specifically said something about asking am I not wanting wanting to catch tax cheats.  If that’s the verbiage that you are relying on to make your point then what’s wrong with going way farther to catch more tax cheats?  I find it interesting you don’t want to confront that, and instead just try and blow it off.   

I am confronting it by pointing out that it's a red herring...for which it is.  

 

What wrong with $600?  And, if that's wrong, what's the right number?

 

5 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Banks are saying it will be onerous.  

Which, I really don't care.  I have friends who are presidents of banks and they b!^@h about anything extra they have to do.

1 minute ago, Archy1221 said:

What about the middle income people who own banks?

I know people who own banks.  I wouldn't call them middle income people.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...