4 ms·

I think you have it backwards. The extremely rich that might make millions or even billions a year but pay $0 income taxes love to play that game and muddy the

I think you have it backwards. The extremely rich that might make millions or even billions a year but pay $0 income taxes love to play that game and muddy the water by saying they paid taxes…everyone in these contexts is talking about federal income taxes, not sales tax or property taxes. How about turn your question around and ask why the top CEOs (especially in tech) pay $0 federal income taxes claim they did pay taxes when they are referencing having paid sales tax, as if not paying sales tax is even a real issue, is in good faith.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wbl 5y ago
There is no way to do that as a CEO. At best your stock holdings can rise, but your compensation will be taxed. The places where you can earn significant untaxed income are via real estate.
- throwawaycities 5y ago
  All those CEOs that take $0 or $1 salaries and then do press releases about it, how much do you think they are paying in taxes on that salary?
  - zsmi 5y ago
    Although you're totally correct I think you're underselling the complexity of the situation. On paper, the super rich (and even just merely "very" rich) can even show negative incomes [1] because they can a take very low interest-rate loan (which is in a way kind of tax, but paid to the bank) backed by their assets to pay expenses thus they can show no income and no realized capital gains. But, if you think about it, the practice is not all that different than taking out a home equity line on a house, for example. So whomever writes that law better be really careful or else the only ones who are going to get caught in that net are the middle class. Here is a nice article on the subject. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57383869 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57383869 [1] They would never actually do that because one needs to harvest that loss. They want to show $0 so they would sell something the balance the negative income out.
  - wbl 5y ago
    Not earning income is a way to avoid income tax.
    - throwawaycities 5y ago
      It might come as a surprise to you but the CEOs that don’t pay income taxes I’m referencing nevertheless receive compensation packages that put them in the 1% of the 1%. They are tax strategies that aren’t available to the rest of us, otherwise everyone would have a s-Corp/LLC pay themselves $0 salary and take everything they make as a distribution of profit to avoid payroll taxes/Medicare/SS on income, when the little guy does that it’s called tax fraud.
- zsmi 5y ago
  Don't underestimate the inginuity of accountants. There are ways to realize cash flow but show no total compensation.
skinnymuch 5y ago
I don’t think it’s backwards. I think it’s just that the extremely wealthy and other sympathizers love to play the game any way they can. In certain situations, yes they love to say what you said. In other circumstances, they love to only point out how little so many others pay, if at all. This points to the larger problem of inequality and how the water is beyond muddy now.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

wbl 5y ago

There is no way to do that as a CEO. At best your stock holdings can rise, but your compensation will be taxed. The places where you can earn significant untaxed income are via real estate.

throwawaycities 5y ago
All those CEOs that take $0 or $1 salaries and then do press releases about it, how much do you think they are paying in taxes on that salary?
- zsmi 5y ago
  Although you're totally correct I think you're underselling the complexity of the situation. On paper, the super rich (and even just merely "very" rich) can even show negative incomes [1] because they can a take very low interest-rate loan (which is in a way kind of tax, but paid to the bank) backed by their assets to pay expenses thus they can show no income and no realized capital gains. But, if you think about it, the practice is not all that different than taking out a home equity line on a house, for example. So whomever writes that law better be really careful or else the only ones who are going to get caught in that net are the middle class. Here is a nice article on the subject. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57383869 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57383869 [1] They would never actually do that because one needs to harvest that loss. They want to show $0 so they would sell something the balance the negative income out.
- wbl 5y ago
  Not earning income is a way to avoid income tax.
  - throwawaycities 5y ago
    It might come as a surprise to you but the CEOs that don’t pay income taxes I’m referencing nevertheless receive compensation packages that put them in the 1% of the 1%. They are tax strategies that aren’t available to the rest of us, otherwise everyone would have a s-Corp/LLC pay themselves $0 salary and take everything they make as a distribution of profit to avoid payroll taxes/Medicare/SS on income, when the little guy does that it’s called tax fraud.
zsmi 5y ago
Don't underestimate the inginuity of accountants. There are ways to realize cash flow but show no total compensation.

skinnymuch 5y ago

I don’t think it’s backwards. I think it’s just that the extremely wealthy and other sympathizers love to play the game any way they can. In certain situations, yes they love to say what you said. In other circumstances, they love to only point out how little so many others pay, if at all. This points to the larger problem of inequality and how the water is beyond muddy now.