Texas tax none - Page 2

xoxoxoBruce · 09-19-2004, 02:07 AM

Size of Family Unit
48 Contiguous States and D.C./ Alaska/ Hawaii
1 $ 8,980- $11,210- $10,330
2 12,120- 15,140- 13,940
3 15,260- 19,070- 17,550
4 18,400- 23,000- 21,160
5 21,540- 26,930- 24,770
6 24,680- 30,860- 28,380
7 27,820- 34,790- 31,990
8 30,960- 38,720- 35,600
For each additional
person, add 3,140 3,930 3,610

OK, so the income up to the poverty level is exempt, $8,980 for me. The only way I can see that working is you file for a refund at the end of the year. That would mean a system to process those returns and refunds. That means the IRS still runs the system and everyone has to file or forfeit. It also means they'll be holding $2700 of my money for near a year, unless I can file as soon as I top the $8,980.

Happy Monkey · 10-07-2004, 12:59 PM

When dividend tax cuts are mentioned, keep this in mind:

Undertoad · 10-07-2004, 01:19 PM

Do you want to discuss how they fuck with the statistics to get you that chart?

Happy Monkey · 10-07-2004, 01:23 PM

Discuss is a strong word, since I don't know their methodology. But if you do, then I certainly wouldn't discourage you from explaining it.

Undertoad · 10-07-2004, 01:37 PM

K. This chart alleges to say "people who make more money, make more money from capital gains" but what it actually says is "people who make more money from capital gains, make more money" - a "duh" statement.

Check it. I'm in sector ONE, right? And I have a house, with a mortgage. If I sell my house without buying another one, and move into an apartment - that's a capital gain. And, it MOVES me from line one to line three. AND, over 70% of my income is in capital gains!

But am I rich? Fuuuuuck no. In fact, I've probably sold the house to recoup for something else, such as a business failure or personal debt or such.

That's just me, let's examine the family farmer whose land is being encroached on by development. His income puts him in the first line but he is not too concerned, because like almost all family farmers, his retirement is tied up in his land. But because of the changing economy, he can't make enough money from the land to make a living, and he has to sell it.

The year he sells the land, it is a massive capital gain. He goes into the fifth line that year. But is he rich? Naw, he has no other means of income. 100% of his income that year is the sale of the land... 100% capital gains.

Happy Monkey · 10-07-2004, 02:14 PM

Interesting. Do you think that people making large one-time sales make up a large percentage of high-income households each year? And does the entire sale price count as a capital gain, or just the difference between purchase and sale price?

Undertoad · 10-07-2004, 02:32 PM

It's the difference, but due to inflation that difference is large on items held for a long time... say, in a plan for retirement (as opposed to a retirement plan ala 401k which is something else entirely).

My house has appreciated in value since I bought it, but that doesn't really help me day-to-day, unless/until I get some money out of it.

I don't know from what numbers these things make for, but every homeowner faces that fact whether they realize it or not, and I'll guess that 98% of family farms have turned over in the last 50 years.

I haven't looked at the rules in a long time so I may be rusty on some of this...

lookout123 · 10-07-2004, 02:36 PM

BTW - not to threadjack, but if you are really concerned about capital gains hits on your real estate, you can shelter that in a self directed IRA. not too many companies handle that specific type due to the EXTREMELY tricky tax issues, but if you are really concerned you can look into it.

****back to your regularly scheduled discussion******

lookout123 · 10-07-2004, 02:48 PM

the reality of that chart is that people only need XX amount to live on. if they make a XXXX money they will spend more but not substantially more on a consistant basis. and the simple fact of the matter is that somewhere around $80-100K/year people start becoming more wealth maintenance focused rather than survival and wealth creation focused.
when that happens they get to the point where cars and such are paid for in cash and they strive to put as much money as possible to work for them. they invest it in
A) 401K or similar plans
B)Roth, IRA, SEP, SIMPLE or similar plans
C) overfunded insurance plans (LIRPs)
D) real estate
E) standard investment accts.

all of these vehicles hold the same investments they are just sheltered in a different way.

a person who makes $50K per year has access to the same types of investments as a person who makes $300K per year. the person who makes more is just going to put more money into the plan annually.

5 years down the road the guy who made $50K probably makes $55-60 and saves a little more than he did. the guy who made $300 probably still makes $300-310 and saves a little more. (a smaller percentage of income growth)

where your chart comes in is that the power of compounding causes the "rich" guy's investment income grow at a greater percentage than his working income. because he is at the peak of his career his annual salary won't increase much, but his investments continue to compound so that each year a larger and larger portion of his earned income is from Cap gains and dividends.

Happy Monkey · 10-07-2004, 03:19 PM

Precisely. I think that that demographic is larger than the group of people who need to sell large real estate investments to pay other bills - especially in the sixth bar. The chart isn't supposed to denigrate the use of capital gains and dividends. It is just supposed to show who gets the benefits of a dividend tax cut.

There are probably people who, as Undertoad says, end up in a high income bracket for one year due to a major sale, but I doubt it's a large percentage of the people in the bracket.

lookout123 · 10-07-2004, 03:24 PM

but it is key to remember that 93% of americans currently are gaining something from capital gains and dividends, whether or not the realize it. anyone with a 401k, pension, or insurance policy is gaining from capital gains and dividends.

obviously, those with more money at risk in the market, stand to gain more in the market.

Happy Monkey · 10-07-2004, 03:40 PM

That is included in the chart.

russotto · 10-07-2004, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout123

the reality of that chart is that people only need XX amount to live on. if they make a XXXX money they will spend more but not substantially more on a consistant basis.

This isn't so. The more people make, the more they spend -- substantially more. There are lots of high income people living paycheck to paycheck.

Quote:

where your chart comes in is that the power of compounding causes the "rich" guy's investment income grow at a greater percentage than his working income. because he is at the peak of his career his annual salary won't increase much, but his investments continue to compound so that each year a larger and larger portion of his earned income is from Cap gains and dividends.

Sorry, that doesn't work, because the capital gains are only realized when the investment is sold. Tony's hypothesis that the chart reflects mostly events where someone in a fairly low income level realizes a one-time gain from a long-held investment makes lots more sense. It's not just selling the farm, either -- consider that any successful IPO will likely generate such an event for the founders of a company

Happy Monkey · 10-07-2004, 05:17 PM

The chart includes capital gains and dividends, which are more obviously compounding. It would be interesting to see them separated, but I didn't make the chart.

lookout123 · 10-07-2004, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by russotto

This isn't so. The more people make, the more they spend -- substantially more. There are lots of high income people living paycheck to paycheck.

these type of people wouldn't be getting a large portion of their money from capital gains and dividends though, as they don't have the discipline to save and invest. the majority of high income individuals do invest though. maybe not as much as they could, but more than many others are able to do.

Quote:

Sorry, that doesn't work, because the capital gains are only realized when the investment is sold.

the average investor has a very large portion of their portfolio in mutual funds which pay out capital gains annually and dividends more frequently. stocks and bonds do work how you were describing though.

09-19-2004, 02:07 AM	#16
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	Size of Family Unit 48 Contiguous States and D.C./ Alaska/ Hawaii 1 $ 8,980- $11,210- $10,330 2 12,120- 15,140- 13,940 3 15,260- 19,070- 17,550 4 18,400- 23,000- 21,160 5 21,540- 26,930- 24,770 6 24,680- 30,860- 28,380 7 27,820- 34,790- 31,990 8 30,960- 38,720- 35,600 For each additional person, add 3,140 3,930 3,610 OK, so the income up to the poverty level is exempt, $8,980 for me. The only way I can see that working is you file for a refund at the end of the year. That would mean a system to process those returns and refunds. That means the IRS still runs the system and everyone has to file or forfeit. It also means they'll be holding $2700 of my money for near a year, unless I can file as soon as I top the $8,980. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

10-07-2004, 12:59 PM	#17
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	When dividend tax cuts are mentioned, keep this in mind: __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-07-2004, 01:23 PM	#19
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Discuss is a strong word, since I don't know their methodology. But if you do, then I certainly wouldn't discourage you from explaining it. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-07-2004, 02:14 PM	#21
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Interesting. Do you think that people making large one-time sales make up a large percentage of high-income households each year? And does the entire sale price count as a capital gain, or just the difference between purchase and sale price? __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-07-2004, 02:36 PM	#23
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	BTW - not to threadjack, but if you are really concerned about capital gains hits on your real estate, you can shelter that in a self directed IRA. not too many companies handle that specific type due to the EXTREMELY tricky tax issues, but if you are really concerned you can look into it. **back to your regularly scheduled discussion**** __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

10-07-2004, 01:19 PM	#18
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Do you want to discuss how they fuck with the statistics to get you that chart?

10-07-2004, 01:37 PM	#20
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	K. This chart alleges to say "people who make more money, make more money from capital gains" but what it actually says is "people who make more money from capital gains, make more money" - a "duh" statement. Check it. I'm in sector ONE, right? And I have a house, with a mortgage. If I sell my house without buying another one, and move into an apartment - that's a capital gain. And, it MOVES me from line one to line three. AND, over 70% of my income is in capital gains! But am I rich? Fuuuuuck no. In fact, I've probably sold the house to recoup for something else, such as a business failure or personal debt or such. That's just me, let's examine the family farmer whose land is being encroached on by development. His income puts him in the first line but he is not too concerned, because like almost all family farmers, his retirement is tied up in his land. But because of the changing economy, he can't make enough money from the land to make a living, and he has to sell it. The year he sells the land, it is a massive capital gain. He goes into the fifth line that year. But is he rich? Naw, he has no other means of income. 100% of his income that year is the sale of the land... 100% capital gains.

10-07-2004, 02:32 PM	#22
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	It's the difference, but due to inflation that difference is large on items held for a long time... say, in a plan for retirement (as opposed to a retirement plan ala 401k which is something else entirely). My house has appreciated in value since I bought it, but that doesn't really help me day-to-day, unless/until I get some money out of it. I don't know from what numbers these things make for, but every homeowner faces that fact whether they realize it or not, and I'll guess that 98% of family farms have turned over in the last 50 years. I haven't looked at the rules in a long time so I may be rusty on some of this...

10-07-2004, 02:48 PM	#24
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	the reality of that chart is that people only need XX amount to live on. if they make a XXXX money they will spend more but not substantially more on a consistant basis. and the simple fact of the matter is that somewhere around $80-100K/year people start becoming more wealth maintenance focused rather than survival and wealth creation focused. when that happens they get to the point where cars and such are paid for in cash and they strive to put as much money as possible to work for them. they invest it in A) 401K or similar plans B)Roth, IRA, SEP, SIMPLE or similar plans C) overfunded insurance plans (LIRPs) D) real estate E) standard investment accts. all of these vehicles hold the same investments they are just sheltered in a different way. a person who makes $50K per year has access to the same types of investments as a person who makes $300K per year. the person who makes more is just going to put more money into the plan annually. 5 years down the road the guy who made $50K probably makes $55-60 and saves a little more than he did. the guy who made $300 probably still makes $300-310 and saves a little more. (a smaller percentage of income growth) where your chart comes in is that the power of compounding causes the "rich" guy's investment income grow at a greater percentage than his working income. because he is at the peak of his career his annual salary won't increase much, but his investments continue to compound so that each year a larger and larger portion of his earned income is from Cap gains and dividends. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

10-07-2004, 03:19 PM	#25
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	Precisely. I think that that demographic is larger than the group of people who need to sell large real estate investments to pay other bills - especially in the sixth bar. The chart isn't supposed to denigrate the use of capital gains and dividends. It is just supposed to show who gets the benefits of a dividend tax cut. There are probably people who, as Undertoad says, end up in a high income bracket for one year due to a major sale, but I doubt it's a large percentage of the people in the bracket. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-07-2004, 03:24 PM	#26
lookout123 changed his status to single Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Right behind you. No, the other side. Posts: 10,308	but it is key to remember that 93% of americans currently are gaining something from capital gains and dividends, whether or not the realize it. anyone with a 401k, pension, or insurance policy is gaining from capital gains and dividends. obviously, those with more money at risk in the market, stand to gain more in the market. __________________ Getting knocked down is no sin, it's not getting back up that's the sin

10-07-2004, 03:40 PM	#27
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	That is included in the chart. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-07-2004, 05:17 PM	#29
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	The chart includes capital gains and dividends, which are more obviously compounding. It would be interesting to see them separated, but I didn't make the chart. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)