4 ms·
I have income and I have costs. Why is my income not completely offset by my costs? I'd love to spend more money to pay fewer taxes. My labor is turned into pro
by dxuh 2y ago
I have income and I have costs. Why is my income not completely offset by my costs? I'd love to spend more money to pay fewer taxes.
My labor is turned into profits for my employer and similarly their profit is eventually taxed. In that sense my labor doesn't have to be taxed directly either. Why is it? I think it's absurd that one the hand they are reporting revenue to shareholders and on the other hand they are reporting no profits to tax authorities. Am I misunderstanding something here? I think it's an arbitrary choice that people are supposed to pay for the expenses of the state and corporations are not. I don't think that's a good choice, but that's partially subjective.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> it's absurd that one the hand they are reporting revenue to shareholders and on the other hand they are reporting no profits to tax authorities. Am I misunderstanding something here? Yes and no. It's clearly an abuse of the tax code. But the idea that a company would have different books for the IRS and itself is no different than you probably having a different set of "books" for your household budget and tax filings. They're held to different standards of precision and serve different purposes.
- ksec 2y agoBecause part of their cost is to pay for your income. You also get Tax deduction on certain "cost" as well. Just not everything. > My labor is turned into profits for my employer and similarly their profit is eventually taxed. Your labour is tuned into revenue first. There are plenty of companies burning through cash for 10 years before making a single cent of profits.