4 ms·
For someone self-employed, the numbers are tax-deductible. If you're employed, but still have insurance and expenses that aren't covered, those expenses need t
by lowercased 4y ago
For someone self-employed, the numbers are tax-deductible. If you're employed, but still have insurance and expenses that aren't covered, those expenses need to be more than ... 7% of your adjusted income to be deductible (but only the amount over 7%). The 7% might not still be the correct number, but it's something like that.
So... you have a job, but there's no employer-provided health insurance. You make $60k/year. Your adjusted income (after some deductions) might be, say, $45k. You decide to buy your own health insurance, and it costs you $500/month. That's $6k/year. 7% of $45k is $3150. So... $6000-$3150 = $2850 which would be the amount that you could avoid paying taxes on.
Confusing much?
> If so, how is the US still so well known for startups?
Because there's metric-ass-loads* of money here looking for places to be invested, and we idolize the unicorn homeruns so much so that we have entire industries catering to their ecosystem.
* Note, this is one of the few times we use the metric system in the US. 2 liters of coke/pepsi, and metric-ass-loads of <fill-in-the-blank>.
- Macha 4y agoInterestingly enough, the inverse of your comment is true here. "Gallons upon gallons" as a superlative, and drinks in pubs are the two uses of imperial liquid measures here
- lowercased 4y agoI watch a moderate amount of UK tv, and I'm still (decades later) surprised when one UK person says to another UK person "you look a million dollars!". "You look a million pounds" doesn't sound the same. "You look a million quid!" might be better?
- Macha 4y agoPounds has the double meaning as a unit of weight and so a million pounds has a unintended double meaning, which may be part of why the dollar version gets used