|
Post by fixit on Jan 2, 2015 14:38:09 GMT -5
Rough numbers from Canada. 20 percent corporate up to 400000 28 percent personal up to around 30000 then 43 percent up to around 50000 and approximately 50 percent above 50000. Of course, all depends on a lot of other variables. Investment income taken in a corporation is 50 percent tax automatically. In other words, not encouraged to have cash collecting interest in a corp..reinvest.....create more jobs.....people pay personal income tax.....etcetc. is the idea. Alvin. Edit. Talking net income as opposed to gross Canadian residents who own corporations will pay personal tax on the dividends. I wonder if some think rich people only pay company tax?
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jan 2, 2015 14:56:22 GMT -5
Quite likely, or not unheard of to pay zero tax by devious methods, often illegal , but probably even legal loopholes? Alvin
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 2, 2015 18:23:16 GMT -5
Rough numbers from Canada. 20 percent corporate up to 400000 28 percent personal up to around 30000 then 43 percent up to around 50000 and approximately 50 percent above 50000. Of course, all depends on a lot of other variables. Investment income taken in a corporation is 50 percent tax automatically. In other words, not encouraged to have cash collecting interest in a corp..reinvest.....create more jobs.....people pay personal income tax.....etcetc. is the idea. Alvin. Edit. Talking net income as opposed to gross Canadian residents who own corporations will pay personal tax on the dividends. I wonder if some think rich people only pay company tax? Only if they pay themselves with dividends. It's actually better to draw a salary and just pay a personal tax in the long run.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 2, 2015 18:24:11 GMT -5
Quite likely, or not unheard of to pay zero tax by devious methods, often illegal , but probably even legal loopholes? Alvin Yes there are many loopholes and tax shelters.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 2, 2015 19:15:44 GMT -5
Canadian residents who own corporations will pay personal tax on the dividends. I wonder if some think rich people only pay company tax? Only if they pay themselves with dividends. It's actually better to draw a salary and just pay a personal tax in the long run. Residents of most countries who are owners of corporations pay income tax on both salary and dividends. They also pay consumption taxes.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 2, 2015 19:26:40 GMT -5
Only if they pay themselves with dividends. It's actually better to draw a salary and just pay a personal tax in the long run. Residents of most countries who are owners of corporations pay income tax on both salary and dividends. They also pay consumption taxes. Well our accountant has advised us not to pay personal salary in the form of dividends because then the company has to pay taxes on the dividends. If it is paid in the form of salary it is used as a company expense. You still would pay personal income tax on the money of course, but your company wouldn't be paying tax on dividends and could use the salary as a company expense instead.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 2, 2015 20:23:23 GMT -5
Residents of most countries who are owners of corporations pay income tax on both salary and dividends. They also pay consumption taxes. Well our accountant has advised us not to pay personal salary in the form of dividends because then the company has to pay taxes on the dividends. If it is paid in the form of salary it is used as a company expense. You still would pay personal income tax on the money of course, but your company wouldn't be paying tax on dividends and could use the salary as a company expense instead. I don't understand why folks think the poor pay more tax than the rich. Generally the rich pay more tax than the poor.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 20:26:12 GMT -5
Ideology is possibly a term that could be used to label my beliefs about a group of people who elected themselves through force to be our rulers in the past. Now they are there only to wave to the masses Most republics have also come to power through violence, and a lot of them are as violent or more violent than the monarchies they overthrew. Monarchs who content themselves with waving their hands are no problem for their citizens -- and most of the ones who practiced violence on their citizens have lost their thrones by now anyway. On this continent we have a monarchy where people on average are wealthier and more comfortable than their neighbors in the what they consider the world's model republic -- and their head of state (the queen) is ALWAYS more popular than the president of the republic. Just some thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 20:29:10 GMT -5
As a teaholic also known as a drinker of vitamin T I can appreciate the sacrifice.The British Parliament in those days was not that democratic. Most democratic countries have come a long way since. King George who was slightly mad from inbreeding and so on has gone down in history as losing the USA. But Corgi's. Getting back to taxation. I would be interested to know how much corporate tax is paid as a percentage of gross tax take and how much personal tax is paid. Seems to me that the richer you are the less tax you pay which means the guy putting jam in jars has to pay more. Any thoughts on this or figures from the USA which show what I'm looking for? Is there anywhere in the world where the more money you earn the less tax you pay? Do you mean total amount, or percentage of income. If you're thinking of percentage of income, yes, in the USA the VERY wealthy normally pay a much lower percentage of their income in tax -- occasionally none at all.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 20:33:49 GMT -5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I know that this is not politically correct, but the devil made me do it While looking around at the exotic merchandise, he noticed a very lifelike, life-sized, bronze statue of a rat. It had no price tag, but was so incredibly striking the tourist decided he must have it. He took it to the old shop owner and asked, "How much for the bronze rat ?" "Ahhh, you have chosen wisely! It is $12 for the rat and $100 for the story," said the wise old Chinaman. The tourist quickly pulled out twelve dollars. "I'll just take the rat, you can keep the story". As he walked down the street carrying his bronze rat, the tourist noticed that a few real rats had crawled out of the Alleys and sewers and had begun following him down the street. This was a bit disconcerting so he began walking faster. A couple blocks later he looked behind him and saw to his horror the herd of rats behind him had grown to hundreds, and they began squealing. Sweating now, the tourist began to trot toward San Francisco Bay. Again, after a couple blocks, he looked around only to discover that the rats now numbered in the MILLIONS, and weresquealing and coming toward him faster and faster. Terrified, he ran to the edge of the Bay and threw the bronze rat as far as he could into the Bay. Amazingly, the millions of rats all jumped into the Bay after the bronze rat and were all drowned. The man walked back to the curio shop in Chinatown . "Ahhh," said the owner, "You come back for story ?" "No sir," said the man, "I came back to see if you have a bronze muslim." Is there any word play here?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 20:35:01 GMT -5
Is there anywhere in the world where the more money you earn the less tax you pay? As a percentage of income or as an absolute amount? In the US, at the end of the day, my tax rate seems to be close to 30%. Mitt Romney's tax rate is 11% -- when he finally disclosed it.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 2, 2015 20:38:55 GMT -5
Is there anywhere in the world where the more money you earn the less tax you pay? Do you mean total amount, or percentage of income. If you're thinking of percentage of income, yes, in the USA the VERY wealthy normally pay a much lower percentage of their income in tax -- occasionally none at all. Yes, the USA seems to be in need of tax reform. In most jurisdictions the higher income earners pay a higher tax rate. Mitt Romney still paid a lot of Federal tax though: $3,226,623
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 20:41:45 GMT -5
Rough numbers from Canada. 20 percent corporate up to 400000 28 percent personal up to around 30000 then 43 percent up to around 50000 and approximately 50 percent above 50000. Of course, all depends on a lot of other variables. Investment income taken in a corporation is 50 percent tax automatically. In other words, not encouraged to have cash collecting interest in a corp..reinvest.....create more jobs.....people pay personal income tax.....etcetc. is the idea. Alvin. Edit. Talking net income as opposed to gross It's not uncommon among countries for the very wealthy to pay 50% in income tax above a certain usually very large level of income. It's a mechanism that keeps the nation's currency from being siphoned off into predatory interests where it stops circulating in the middle class.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 20:47:04 GMT -5
Only if they pay themselves with dividends. It's actually better to draw a salary and just pay a personal tax in the long run. Residents of most countries who are owners of corporations pay income tax on both salary and dividends. They also pay consumption taxes. Of course, if you're wealthy enough you can find ways to establish a bank account in some tiny territory where virtually no one lives, so you can hide your money there and they have no need to tax you equally for services as required in a country of 350 million.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 21:07:28 GMT -5
Well our accountant has advised us not to pay personal salary in the form of dividends because then the company has to pay taxes on the dividends. If it is paid in the form of salary it is used as a company expense. You still would pay personal income tax on the money of course, but your company wouldn't be paying tax on dividends and could use the salary as a company expense instead. I don't understand why folks think the poor pay more tax than the rich. Generally the rich pay more tax than the poor. The rich don't want to understand what's wrong with that. Here's how it works. 11 percent of $500,000,000 = $55,000,000 tax = $445.000.000 for rich man to keep. 25 percent of $40,000 = ..............$10,000 tax = ........$30,000 for the lower middle class man to keep. The middle class man spends all of it, the rich man, if he spends $1 million of it, still has $444 million to keep. That means, his $444 million is equivalent to the spendable income of 14 million lower middle class people -- money which will no longer circulate in the nation's economy. The answer is not, "But the rich man will invest it and give people jobs." Baloney. He will invest it the same way he invested this year and siphon off the same $445,000,000 again next year, and he won't hire any more people because there's no money out there to buy more of his product, and he's smart enough not to waste it all on charity employment. If he gave it all away, 14 million people may buy more things from his company, and he can pay more people with the money he earns from the money they are spending. And he won't have lost a penny of his original investment. It doesn't matter how much anyone pays in taxes -- what really matters is that a nation regulates the circulation of THE NATIONS CURRENCY so that it will CIRCULATE THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE SOCIETY, or the economy will collapse while billionaires collect more money than they could possibly spend in a dozen lifetimes. That's not what a country's money is for. What the government does with the added revenue -- they can replace bridges that are ready to fall down, they can built rail service like they had 30 years ago in Japan, build schools fit for the number of students who need them, and provide medical care for the homeless people whose care is 10 percent of what their untreated "management" cost is to the state, and on and on. But you're right -- this government would spend half of it on more bombs anyway.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 21:25:15 GMT -5
Do you mean total amount, or percentage of income. If you're thinking of percentage of income, yes, in the USA the VERY wealthy normally pay a much lower percentage of their income in tax -- occasionally none at all. Yes, the USA seems to be in need of tax reform. In most jurisdictions the higher income earners pay a higher tax rate. Mitt Romney still paid a lot of Federal tax though: $3,226,623 That's not a higher rate. It's a higher amount because he made $30,000,000. If he'd paid the same rate as his housekeeper he'd have paid about $8,000,000. Does he really suffer with only $27,000.000* disposable income a year? Corrected calculation BW
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 2, 2015 21:42:00 GMT -5
Yes, the USA seems to be in need of tax reform. In most jurisdictions the higher income earners pay a higher tax rate. Mitt Romney still paid a lot of Federal tax though: $3,226,623 That's not a higher rate. It's a higher amount because he made $30,000,000. If he'd paid the same rate as his housekeeper he'd have paid about $8,000,000. Does he really suffer with only $2,700.000 disposable income a year? Who said its a higher rate?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 2, 2015 23:06:05 GMT -5
That's not a higher rate. It's a higher amount because he made $30,000,000. If he'd paid the same rate as his housekeeper he'd have paid about $8,000,000. Does he really suffer with only $2,700.000 disposable income a year? Who said its a higher rate? The higher rate is the housekeeper's, of course. Romney's is the lower rate, and who said so? His campaign manager, who published his finances after a huge fight over his refusal to disclose it.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 3, 2015 0:11:32 GMT -5
Canadian residents who own corporations will pay personal tax on the dividends. I wonder if some think rich people only pay company tax? Only if they pay themselves with dividends. It's actually better to draw a salary and just pay a personal tax in the long run. When you say 'company' to what sort of entity are you referring - sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, or co-operative? I'm guessing, as in the US, the tax implications are different for each of the entities. Canadian residents who own shares in corporations will pay personal tax on any dividends the company issues.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 3, 2015 0:26:35 GMT -5
Only if they pay themselves with dividends. It's actually better to draw a salary and just pay a personal tax in the long run. When you say 'company' to what sort of entity are you referring - sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, or co-operative? I'm guessing, as in the US, the tax implications are different for each of the entities. Canadian residents who own shares in corporations will pay personal tax on any dividends the company issues. Corporation but with only one shareholder. That means they have a choice of whether to issue dividends or not.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Jan 3, 2015 0:32:12 GMT -5
Ed Clark, CEO of Toronto Dominion Bank here in Canada, says , if he could he would change the way money is "distributed" , but he says he can't do it himself. Many would argue he is paid waaaaay too much money as it is a very high sum, but for himself, personally, one thing he feels that he can do with the discrepancy is distribute his money personally , and he does. Ask the LGBT community in Toronto, and they will tell you also, what they think of the CEO of a bank WOW There are lots of "poor" people who would support his high salary, I imagine, as they benefit from it directly by his philanthropy. I know, one doesn't usually connect presidents and ceo's of banks, as advocates for the poor. just interesting. Alvin
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jan 3, 2015 2:41:45 GMT -5
For any society to prosper there has to be an incentive for individuals to gain marketable skills, work, save, invest and innovate.
|
|
|
Post by déjà vu on Jan 11, 2015 22:49:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2015 22:56:58 GMT -5
For any society to prosper there has to be an incentive for individuals to gain marketable skills, work, save, invest and innovate. The problem in the US is that investment if rare because work is poorly valued.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jan 11, 2015 22:58:23 GMT -5
This has happened several times in US history. Don't worry, it's the history of humankind.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jan 11, 2015 23:40:38 GMT -5
Do you mean the Turks leaving North America or one of the other immigrant populations such as the English, Irish, Scots, Russians, Germans etc?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2015 23:43:43 GMT -5
only if they allow more muslims to come to the USA and they dont assimilate...
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jan 11, 2015 23:49:52 GMT -5
What about people who convert to Islam who are already resident in the USA and perhaps can trace their ancestry in the USA back several centuries.
|
|