For Dawg's Edification (on Taxes):

by SixofNine 16 Replies latest jw friends

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine

    And Marvin Shilmer's blood pressure ;)

    You Think I’m Rich, Don’t You?
    By David Glenn Cox


    Poor Joe the plumber, plucked from obscurity and thrust into the national limelight, his life has now become an open book. After all, all he did was ask a question about tax policy. Little did he know the McCain campaign and Fox News would seize upon him and try to make him an icon.

    I wondered about Joe even before the stories started to come out about the tax lien against him or his lack of plumbing license. For years I worked for a man that made well over $250,000 a year and he was a heck of a lot sharper than Joe the Plumber.

    Mr. Ben had started in the 1940’s with one auto parts house and by the late 1970’s Mr. Ben owned over 120 auto parts stores with three auto parts warehouses located across three states. When I was promoted to manager I began to have meetings with Mr. Ben once a week. Right after Ronald Reagan was elected I asked Mr. Ben, “Is Ronny going to cut your taxes?”

    “Probably” he answered, “but I voted for Carter. You can’t build a business on tax cuts. The Democrats build roads and bridges and every mile of highway is money in my pocket. I don’t want to pay one nickel more than I have to, but taxes are just the cost of doing business. Our vendors raise prices and no one cries 'you’re going to bankrupt us!' The city passes a sales tax and you just pay it and go on; it’s the same for everyone. I wouldn’t own all these stores if the state and federal government hadn’t built all those roads, and taxes paid for every foot of them."

    Mr. Ben once explained, “It's not about who has the best hand, it's about how you play it.” He also owned a realty company and when he planned to open a new parts store they would build a strip shopping center. The parts store would be the anchor store and the other businesses would subsidize the rent. If the parts store did well Mr. Ben raised the rent until they just barely made money. That way the construction loan could be paid off faster while paying fewer taxes in the parts business. If the store did poorly he would lower the rent, but either way he made money.

    Mr. Ben traveled the highways extensively to keep an eye on his holdings. He had been pricing a new Buick Roadmaster, finally telling a local dealer, “I’m going to send a man over there with a cashier’s check for $30,000 and you either give him the car or turn him around.”

    I shook my head at his directness and tenacity when Mr. Ben asked, “You think I’m rich, don’t you?”

    I answered, “I think you’re doing all right, a lot better than I am at least.”

    “I’m not rich,” he said smiling. “I’m almost seventy years old and I don’t even own a car. The company owns that car,” he said with a wink. “The company owns my wife’s Cadillac, too. The company pays for the gas and the insurance and for the tires and the oil. You see, it’s not what the company pays you, it’s what the company gives you. The company pays for our health insurance and the Realty Company pays for our vacation home down on Alligator Point in Florida. You see, we don’t own it, we lease it. I don’t have to make much money; my needs are meet and my nest egg is in this business.”

    He was sharp, the company owned his 72-foot yacht as well. It was for entertaining customers, of course. The wholesale parts warehouses would cut us deals and pass along savings to us in the retail parts stores. For three years the parts houses did very well and the warehouses lost money. Then the tide was reversed; the warehouses were charging company stores higher prices than our competitors. The warehouses made huge profits and the retail stores lost money, all because Mr. Ben was playing out his tax hand. Two of his three businesses were making money and one was always losing money.

    The money, of course, all belonged to the same person, Mr. Ben. Because of this I always had to check with Mr. Ben on my purchases. “If you can sell it,” he said, “then put it on the shelf. I make 3% on my money in the bank and I make 20% on the money on the shelf.” Mr. Ben used to insist that we take advantage of the discounts offered for prompt payment. “If they’ll give you a 2% discount for paying in ten days, what’s that equal in a year?”

    I think Ben liked to share his knowledge with us because it was rejected by his idiot son, Ben Jr., who went by the name Bubba. Bubba had the title of manager in the smallest of Ben’s three warehouses. Bubba’s office had golf clubs in one corner and fishing tackle in the other. The walls were decorated with football memorabilia from Auburn University where Bubba once attended for one semester before flunking out. On his desk was a model of the Coast Guard cutter Bubba had served on after leaving school. Mr. Ben had pulled some strings to get Bubba into the Coast Guard and out of Vietnam.

    Bubba was a rabid Republican and a strong believer in tax cuts. During the presidential campaign Bubba bought tickets to meet Bush 41 and was very impressed. Mr. Ben explained “that the boy didn’t know which side his bread was buttered on. I make my own tax cuts! I don’t need politicians to do that for me.”

    Mr. Ben always read the "Dodge Reports," a trade paper that tracks construction and road projects and one day I asked, “Do you read that for your realty company?”

    “I go where the roads go,” he answered. “Where the roads go, growth goes. Where growth goes, prosperity goes. Years ago in Dothan the city leaders and business merchants had a bitter fight over traffic congestion in downtown. The answer was a by-pass, and by the time it was finished most of the downtown merchants were broke. The traffic followed the road and took the money with it. The by-pass brought new jobs and industry and new cars lots sprang up. That’s what I like to see is new car lots, because every new car sold is a new customer for us.”

    He explained that they were trying to find a site for a new store and it had come down to a location in a major shopping center or another location on a newly-widened highway. Mr. Ben said, “The choice is clear, the shopping center is at its peak today! The widened highway will see growing traffic for years; it’s the chicken and the egg. The chicken is all it can ever be but the egg is just beginning.”

    When Mr. Ben reached 60 he announced that he was no longer coming in on Fridays. When he turned 65 that he would no longer come in on Mondays, then Tuesdays, then Thursdays. He worked only one day a week and spent the rest of his time on his boat in Florida. He attended a meeting that we had arranged to discuss the changing model in the auto parts business. The Auto Zones and Advance Auto Parts were moving in and the old model didn’t work anymore. The general manager laid out an intricate plan to build our own super stores to compete with them, heads up. Mr. Ben congratulated him on a wise strategy but added, “I’m done, at my age a lifetime book club membership isn’t a very good deal. It’s up to Bubba.”

    Well, the stores are all gone now, as are all three warehouses. Only the Realty Company survives, selling off the strip centers that Mr. Ben had built during his lifetime. The warehouse where we held that meeting is a parking lot now, only identified by a sign for the long-term parking contact. Poor Joe the plumber is more like Bubba than like Mr. Ben. Worried about his taxes even before he makes the money, he can’t wait to put that money in his pocket. Trying to be rich without building a business instead of building a business that will make him rich. A business that can only thrive in a prosperous economy and Mr. Ben knew that. We will always pay taxes so the argument is who will benefit from them, the few or the many?

  • Marvin Shilmer
    Marvin Shilmer

    Sixofnine,

    Silly you. It is not about taxation. It is about the level of taxation, whether it is acquired on a fair basis, and whether the revenue is spent on something worthwhile for society at large.

    Surely Mr. Ben knew taxes were a cost of doing business, which is precisely what I pointed out several times for Dawg and anyone carrying to read what I wrote. But this cost of doing business only makes sense at a level that gives society what it needs to thrive without wasting too much. When tax revenue is wasted the net effect is that the consumer (you and I, all of us) gain no benefit from whatever tax money was wasted. All we did was hand the money over and got nothing in return. We lost twice. My primary concern is wrapped in this premise: our government leaders (all of them!) have plenty of revenue to run this country if they would stop wasting it. This is what burns my backside about our government leaders asking Americans to pony up more and more revenue in the form of tax. The cover charge for living and conducing business in the United States goes up and up and up, but the floorshow never improves and in many ways gets worse.

    What bothers me the most about taxation is when revenue is given as entitlements to people who are just plain lazy and/or criminal. I know leftwing radical who advocate entitlements to criminals like pedophiles because “They have a disease”. (Teardrop. Not!) That sort of thinking has brought down more than a few societies, and ours is not immune.

    When it comes to subjects like healthcare insurance, my belief is that our government should arrange (by taxation et al if need be) for every citizen to have it that is a productive member of society and for those incapable of supporting themselves through no fault of their own. I see no reason to give healthcare benefits to deadbeats. These women who have babies like popcorn machines should be given no sympathy. We have an obligation to the poor wretched children they bring into the world, but not to the woman who had them. I cannot bring myself to call them mothers or moms! They are simple baby-makers, just like the males who got them pregnant and then ignored them are simple deadbeats.

    Aiding deadbeats is not in the best interest of society at large. Society should reward hard work and determination. It should let deadbeat behavior run its natural course unaided by the rest.

    Marvin Shilmer

  • purplesofa
    purplesofa

    Saw McCain on Letterman last night and he aplogized to Joe the Plumber about all the publicity.

    purps

  • beksbks
    beksbks

    Do you think the tax revenue has been wisely spent over the last eight years Marvin?

    I went to bed last night, thinking of a way (in my own pathetic words) to express my thoughts on the differences in the tax plans. Oddly enough it was similar to Six's Mr. Ben story.

    TopHat said if we raise taxes on the company she works for, they will cut employees. I see it differently. Let's say the company in question is Motorola, makers of cell phones. They are most interested in their bottom line profits, so of course they have downsized and have the least number of employees they can, and still do business. Taxes are raised. They are paying more, but if they cut employees, they can't keep up with the demand for cell phones. So they have to suck it up and accept a lower bottom line profit. Now that tax money they just paid is put into America in the form of ohhhhh bridges in Minnesota, or levees in New Orleans. Those projects need workers. Now those workers are not only making a decent wage, they are paying taxes. They all head to lunch at the local sandwich joint, that place is now so busy at noon, they have to hire a couple more people for that shift. More taxpayers. Maybe a few of the bridge/levee workers can now buy a house. Maybe that house needs some work done on the wood flooring. The local floor guy now has more business, so he's able to grab that latte in the morning. Now Starbucks is doing better, and needs to increase hours for a couple of employee's. Now this whole group of employees from the bridge/levee guys, to the sandwich makers, the floor guy, and the Starbucks kids are able to .............buy a new cell phone. Motorola needs to hire, because demand for their product has increased.

    Most of these scenarios are from my own personal experience recently, only they were in reverse. We've been cutting taxes on the top, and Starbucks is laying people off, Mervyn's and Linen's N Things are closing stores. The floor guy who owned his own business is now working part time at Lowe's, people can't pay their mortgages.........................etc. etc. It hasn't worked.

    Ok Burn, it's probably about time for you to come in and tell me what an ignoramus I am.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    Under Obama's Plan, Joe the Plumber Would Keep .39 Out of Every Dollar After $250,000

    Obama and Joe Biden keep repeating that they don't know many plumbers who make $250,000.

    Joe the Plumber noted that he wasn't talking about his current income; he was talking about the income he hopes to make if and when he runs his own business.

    Yesterday I heard a bit of audio from The View, and Joy Behar (I think) declared that Joe was "fantasizing." Remember that the next time you hear a salute to the American Dream.

    Whoopi Goldberg charged that Joe and the others have a problem with progressive taxation, and that's not quite right. The system is actually much less progressive than it seems.

    Right now, if you're the richest of the rich, you have the resources to hire teams of accountants to determine every last deduction, loophole, filing advantage and tax shelter. And if you're that rich - the Bill Gateses, the Teresa Heinz-Kerrys, the Jon Corzines, the Paris Hiltons and yes, the Cindy McCains — you really rarely have to worry that your tax bite is going to affect your lifestyle.

    Those folks might resent the title "the idle rich" but that's who most people have in mind when they talk about "the rich." Then there's the "working rich," those making a lot more than the median income but still quite far from "champagne wishes and caviar dreams." Let's say your small business starts booming and after years of hard work, you're now making what you've always perceived as "real money" — let's go beyond the $250,000 to $350,000.

    Your income tax will go up from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. On the first $102,000, and then on every dollar after $250,000, the Social Security tax rate will be 12.4 percent. (It is 6.2 for those who aren't self-employed.)

    You're keeping 48 cents out of every dollar you're making after $250,000 — and that's before state income taxes, anywhere from none in seven states to 5.3 percent in Massachusetts to 9.3 percent in California (10.4 if your income exceeds a million).

    In Ohio, Joe the Plumber would be looking at an additional 6.24 percent on income after he made $200,000. In Holland, the village in which he lives, he has an additional 2.25 percent.

    So Joe would be earning 39.5 cents on the dollar for every dollar he made after $250,000.

    It's tougher in other parts of the country. If you live in New York City, you pay a state income tax of 8.14 percent and a city income tax up to 4 percent. In those circumstances, you're keeping a little over thirty-five cents of every dollar you make after $250,000.

    And we haven't even gotten to any property or car taxes.

    Obama is aiming for Paris Hilton and he's hitting the guy who runs the company that tiles her bathroom.

    UPDATE: Campaign Spot reader Paul writes in, "You forgot Medicare. That would be another 1.45 percent (2.9 percent for the self-employed) on each and every dollar from the first to the last." So poor Joe is down to 36.6 cents on every dollar.

    ANOTHER UPDATE: I knew this post was going to draw out the accountants and self-employed.

    First, from Ohio:

    Don't forget workers comp and unemployment insurance. I just started turning a profit on my small one man business in Ohio and now I get the priveledge of paying about 1k a year to Ohio Jobs and Family services... about 2.7%. I'd love to leave Ohio.

    Second:

    I'm a long time reader, and had a comment on your calculations for this post. I'm a 38 year old self-employed software developer, so I have alittle background on this. You mentioned that self-employed people pay the full 12.4% social security tax. You also left out the 5.4% tax for Medicare. Note that these payroll taxes are only on "payroll" that you receive, and not necessarily on all income. Most self-employed people create an S-Corp or LLC to avoid these taxes. They have their income go to the business, and then they pay themselves a salary less than total income, which is subject to Social Security and Medicare taxes. The company then makes distributions of its profits to them as the primary shareholder. These distributions are not subject to the payroll taxes. The key is to pay yourself enough salary to not raise any flags with the IRS, but to avoid the payroll taxes. The drawback is that you won't receive as much in social security benefits, but I suspect I'd never receive everything I'm promised by the time I retire, anyways. (I'm still mad that W.'s social security reform didn't go through!) One other note, social security taxes are only applied to the first $102K of salary received in 2008, although the medicare taxes apply to the entire salary, if someone who is self employed doesn't go the S-Corp/LLC route.

    Another take:

    Let me start off by saying I want a flat tax of 20% and any other tax system is inherently unfair and inefficient.

    That being said, your analysis is wrong for a few reasons:

    1. The social security tax of 12.4% won't be applicable to the income above $250,000. Obama has said he would have a 2-4% tax above $250K*. And that would be started 10 years from now. Granted, he could be full of shit and probably is, but let's assume he is telling the truth. So that 48% becomes more like 58%. Still outrageously high but not as bad as you make it out to be.

    2. Whatever the SS rate is above $250K, it is a moot point for small business owners like Joe. The owner of the company does not - or at least should not if he's smart - pay payroll taxes on that much income. He should pay himself a salary on which he pays payroll tax and take the rest of the profits as dividends on which there is no payroll tax. No sane small business owner will pay himself a salary of $250K as a plumber. $60K, maybe $70K is all he'd pay payroll taxes on. The people getting hit by an increase in payroll taxes will be salaried employees making that much money...doctors employed by hospitals, lawyers employed by firms (as opposed to partners), execs at Goldman Sach, etc. Those are the people who should be running scared, not a plumbing business owner.

    3. The additional state tax is not a full rate since it is deductible from federal taxes. So if I pay 6% marginal state tax rate and pay a 39% fed marginal rate, my state tax is really only 61% of 6% or 3.66% on my last dollar earned.

    Problem is most people don't understand any of this. I doubt even McCain or Obama understand any of this There are people out there who think that if they get a tax refund check from H&R Block that means they pay no taxes. Ask 100 people what their marginal tax rate bracket is and I doubt 20 could tell you. I doubt 20 could even tell you what a marginal tax rate even is.

    And it is that stupidity displayed by Americans that will lead to an Obama presidency with a 60+ Dem Senate as well. People deserve the politicians they elect, and Americans are getting what's coming to them.

    On the first point, I would note that in June, Obama was talking about applying the full 12.4 percent in Social Security taxes on income beyond $250,000.

  • Marvin Shilmer
    Marvin Shilmer

    Beksbks,

    No. I do not think tax revenue has been spent wisely over the last eight years. It has been wasted left and right, literally and ideologically. Until a couple years ago Dubyah never saw a spending bill he could say “No!” to. Corruption is everywhere, which does not inspire any confidence in me that additional money taken from my pocket book in the form of tax will be well spent.

    I cannot say I am crazy about either presidential candidate. But I fear Obama because he has not demonstrated leadership at his current pay grade. So why should I vote to promote him to a position that requires much greater leadership?

    We need a Chief Executive that is willing to stand contrary to his party affiliates, is willing to publicly express his difference with the general sentiment of our citizenry and convince us his or her view is the best way forward, is willing to sponsor legislation when it politically unpopular, is willing to tell people “No,” is able to build consensus for the greater good, and is willing to sacrifice his or her own career in government to get things done. I have not seen any of this from Obama in his current pay grade. I have seen it all in McCain.

    Whoever is our next president will be a hero if the economy regains itself and grows, or will be a scapegoat if it languishes or plops. I really do not care which party affiliate candidate wins the vote, if I were not so fearful of one over the other.

    As for McCain, there is no way in hell he will continue many of the policies pushed by Dubyah. It is pure political leveraging when Obama tries to brand McCain as continuance of Bush. Not that matters, but as far as I am concerned, that sort of rhetoric reduces Obama’s message, a message I happen to like. Again, when it comes to Obama his lack of demonstrated leadership is my biggest fear factor. How can I vote to promote until a man or woman earns their pay in their lesser job first?

    Marvin Shilmer

  • BabaYaga
    BabaYaga

    Cool article, Six, thank you.

  • skeeter1
    skeeter1

    This is the best blog on taxes; it's by Tax Professors and for the general public to learn about taxes.

    http://taxprof.typepad.com/

    You can look at all different subjects, and get a fill of taxes.

    Remember though, taxes only feed the Congressional spending beast. If you don't like to pay high taxes, we've got to stop Congress from spending/wasting so much money. This is why I usually vote Libertarian; but will vote for McCain and hope the war ends soon. Since Obama wants to fight in Afghanistan and Pakistan, I'm not sure he will end the war soon either.

    Skeeter

  • skeeter1
    skeeter1

    And, the above tax blog is very favorable to Obama. But, please rememer that these are academia types that are usually much more liberal/theoretical than those professionals who work at companies.

  • 144001
    144001
    When tax revenue is wasted the net effect is that the consumer (you and I, all of us) gain no benefit from whatever tax money was wasted. All we did was hand the money over and got nothing in return. We lost twice. My primary concern is wrapped in this premise: our government leaders (all of them!) have plenty of revenue to run this country if they would stop wasting it. This is what burns my backside about our government leaders asking Americans to pony up more and more revenue in the form of tax. The cover charge for living and conducing business in the United States goes up and up and up, but the floorshow never improves and in many ways gets worse.

    Marvin,

    I agree with you on the above. What have you and I received for the greater than $500 billion spent in Iraq? I haven't received any benefit. But then again, I'm not Haliburton.

    What bothers me the most about taxation is when revenue is given as entitlements to people who are just plain lazy and/or criminal.

    Criminal? You mean like "Blackwater?" I guess killing innocent Iraqi civilians with the support of our tax dollars is not "criminal," since they didn't find a law to prosecute these thugs with. How about Haliburton? Who is watching what they're doing with Iraqi oil? Why did they get "no-bid" contracts? $500 billion + ? The taxpayers certainly deserve some answers to these questions, especially given the fact that the money spent in Iraq could have retired every bit of our debt to China. And of course, McCain voted for this needless war.

    "Entitlements" is a term that is generally used in this country to address handouts to the poor. Bush and the Republican party are certainly against "entitlements" if they're benefiting the poor of our country, but they have no problem with "entitlements" that benefit the rich supporters that put them in office, e.g., Haliburton.

    When it comes to subjects like healthcare insurance, my belief is that our government should arrange (by taxation et al if need be) for every citizen to have it that is a productive member of society and for those incapable of supporting themselves through no fault of their own. I see no reason to give healthcare benefits to deadbeats. These women who have babies like popcorn machines should be given no sympathy. We have an obligation to the poor wretched children they bring into the world, but not to the woman who had them. I cannot bring myself to call them mothers or moms! They are simple baby-makers, just like the males who got them pregnant and then ignored them are simple deadbeats.

    Aiding deadbeats is not in the best interest of society at large. Society should reward hard work and determination. It should let deadbeat behavior run its natural course unaided by the rest.

    In principle, I agree with the above. However, in reality, as with everything else, the devil is in the details. How do we help the innocent children of deadbeats/idiots without directly or indirectly helping the deadbeats/idiots? .

    I wish there was a way to fairly regulate who has children in this country but any such regulation would be unconstitutional and there is no possibility that the political powers that be could agree on such a regulation. So it seems the best we can do is provide incentives for them to change their "deadbeat" behavior, using education and "entitlement" programs that motivate them to be responsible. There should also be consequences (i.e., both positive and negative reinforcement) for those who continue to act irresponsibly, but I'm not sure what we could do in this regard that wouldn't also hurt their children.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit