Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On 2015-10-06 8:02 AM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:30:17 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-05 3:58 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:10:18 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-01 7:08 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-09-30 12:26 PM, John Larkin wrote:
[...]
The best tax is sales tax. If you want a Porsche or a 4K teevee, buy
it and pay the tax.
And then when you sell the Porsche the next guy must pay sales tax
again. A double-dipping grab at its finest.
The "Fair Tax" doesn't tax the second transfer.
But it does tax the savings that have already been taxed.
The Fair Tax doesn't tax *any* savings. Only spendings. It's really
more of a VAT tax, with a pile more honesty, and a "prebate" to make
it progressive enough to have a chance (there's something for the
lefties to tweak).
Ok, let me explain this with an example:
a. Mr. "Spend-it-all" earns $1300, pays no tax, then buys a big TV for
$1000 plus $300 in "new VAT". So $1300 from the fruits of his labor buy
him a TV.
b. Mr.Frugal earned $1300 in the pre-VAT days, pay $300 in taxes and
saves the remaining $1000 for a rainy day. Eventually he decides that he
has sufficient savings and wants ti buy the same big TV set. But now
they instituted the new VAT. He finds out that they double-taxed him
because while Mr.Spend-it-all got his TV with $1300 of wages Mr.Frugal
no longer can. He must pay $300 more than Mr.Spend-it-all.
Fair? Not. Therefore, I will not support this.
Yes, there is the problem of retirees, particularly Roths but I
predict they'll get screwed anyway). That'll have to be fixed. The
plan won't fly anyway because it requires a Constitutional amendment
and that'll never happen again.
And it shouldn't happen.
The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.
They would have to declare Oregon residency, then would probably get
gigged for out-of-state income tax.
Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can
be in another state where you make a living.
No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA,
you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.
I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states
and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a
residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in
each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that.
Ask a CPA.
...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll
lose.
AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many
million Dollars in jury awards.
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:57:23 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 8:02 AM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:30:17 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-05 3:58 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:10:18 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-01 7:08 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.
They would have to declare Oregon residency, then would probably get
gigged for out-of-state income tax.
Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can
be in another state where you make a living.
No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA,
you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.
I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states
and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a
residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in
each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that.
Ask a CPA.
...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll
lose.
AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many
million Dollars in jury awards.
Nonsense. There would be no awards is such a case. At most a refund
of taxes paid.
On 2015-10-06 3:38 PM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:57:23 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 8:02 AM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:30:17 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-05 3:58 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:10:18 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-01 7:08 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
[...]
The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.
They would have to declare Oregon residency, then would probably get
gigged for out-of-state income tax.
Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can
be in another state where you make a living.
No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA,
you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.
I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states
and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a
residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in
each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that.
Ask a CPA.
...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll
lose.
AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many
million Dollars in jury awards.
Nonsense. There would be no awards is such a case. At most a refund
of taxes paid.
Oh yeah?
https://www.nevada123.com/learning-center/gil_hyatt_vs_ca_ftb
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:45:46 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 3:38 PM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:57:23 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 8:02 AM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:30:17 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-05 3:58 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:10:18 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-01 7:08 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
[...]
The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.
They would have to declare Oregon residency, then would probably get
gigged for out-of-state income tax.
Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can
be in another state where you make a living.
No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA,
you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.
I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states
and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a
residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in
each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that.
Ask a CPA.
...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll
lose.
AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many
million Dollars in jury awards.
Nonsense. There would be no awards is such a case. At most a refund
of taxes paid.
Oh yeah?
https://www.nevada123.com/learning-center/gil_hyatt_vs_ca_ftb
Come on Joerg! That's a little more than tax collection. That's like
saying that Obama's IRS tricks are 1040 recalculations.
On 2015-10-07 8:32 AM, krw wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:45:46 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 3:38 PM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:57:23 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 8:02 AM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:30:17 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-05 3:58 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:10:18 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-01 7:08 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
[...]
The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.
They would have to declare Oregon residency, then would probably get
gigged for out-of-state income tax.
Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can
be in another state where you make a living.
No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA,
you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.
I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states
and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a
residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in
each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that.
Ask a CPA.
...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll
lose.
AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many
million Dollars in jury awards.
Nonsense. There would be no awards is such a case. At most a refund
of taxes paid.
Oh yeah?
https://www.nevada123.com/learning-center/gil_hyatt_vs_ca_ftb
Come on Joerg! That's a little more than tax collection. That's like
saying that Obama's IRS tricks are 1040 recalculations.
Nope. It's a guy they tried to extract taxes from where CA had no legal
basis to do so, and then they tried to strong-arm him. The result was
what I said above.
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:13:07 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-07 8:32 AM, krw wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:45:46 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 3:38 PM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:57:23 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 8:02 AM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:30:17 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-05 3:58 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:10:18 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-01 7:08 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
[...]
The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.
They would have to declare Oregon residency, then would probably get
gigged for out-of-state income tax.
Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can
be in another state where you make a living.
No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA,
you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.
I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states
and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a
residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in
each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that.
Ask a CPA.
...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll
lose.
AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many
million Dollars in jury awards.
Nonsense. There would be no awards is such a case. At most a refund
of taxes paid.
Oh yeah?
https://www.nevada123.com/learning-center/gil_hyatt_vs_ca_ftb
Come on Joerg! That's a little more than tax collection. That's like
saying that Obama's IRS tricks are 1040 recalculations.
Nope. It's a guy they tried to extract taxes from where CA had no legal
basis to do so, and then they tried to strong-arm him. The result was
what I said above.
Good Lord, Joerg. Read the damned article. The problem wasn't that
they tried to extract the taxes but *HOW* they went about it. No,
that wasn't the point above.
On 2015-10-07 11:23 AM, krw wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:13:07 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-07 8:32 AM, krw wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:45:46 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 3:38 PM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 12:57:23 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-06 8:02 AM, krw wrote:
On Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:30:17 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-05 3:58 PM, krw wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:10:18 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
On 2015-10-01 7:08 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 08:05:20 -0700, Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com
wrote:
[...]
The rich folks would buy the Porsche in Oregon, pay no tax and
"officially" keep it there for a while.
They would have to declare Oregon residency, then would probably get
gigged for out-of-state income tax.
Not really. You just need a 2nd home there. Your main residence one can
be in another state where you make a living.
No, you have to declare residency. If your driver's license says CA,
you're going to pay CA tax, sooner or later.
I think you misunderstand. You can have income in two different states
and get taxed in each state proportionately. You can also have a
residence in two or more states and what you buy there and what stays in
each is taxed per regulations in that state. I know people like that.
Ask a CPA.
...and wait for the state of residency to catch up with them. They'll
lose.
AFAIR California lost a major case in that respect, to the tune of many
million Dollars in jury awards.
Nonsense. There would be no awards is such a case. At most a refund
of taxes paid.
Oh yeah?
https://www.nevada123.com/learning-center/gil_hyatt_vs_ca_ftb
Come on Joerg! That's a little more than tax collection. That's like
saying that Obama's IRS tricks are 1040 recalculations.
Nope. It's a guy they tried to extract taxes from where CA had no legal
basis to do so, and then they tried to strong-arm him. The result was
what I said above.
Good Lord, Joerg. Read the damned article. The problem wasn't that
they tried to extract the taxes but *HOW* they went about it. No,
that wasn't the point above.
How else could they possibly try to extract taxes in a case when they
are not entitled to those taxes?
As I said, the court clearly spoke "No, you cannot tax this guy".
Q.e.d., as the Romans used to say.
I've never had any trouble with the taxman but I did have my skirmishes
with agency overreach. In one case they finally let us and dozens of
others off the hook, then literally begged me to stop the media barrage
and to say something positive about them.