ADVERTISEMENT

IRS reports collecting $1 billion from rich households’ back taxes

if there is a time that evidence shows that we are going to bring in more money than what is being spent, I am ok with that. Looking at at total of 60 Billion being sent there way and 5.7 billion being used this year to recoup 1 billion, I am not sure why that makes me a moron. It’s another issue of Government overspending.
It's hilarious to see someone with no clue of how something works spew out nonsense
 
By my calculations that $1B would fund Federal spending for less than 2 hours. Yawn. We should just go to a flat tax if we want to end cheating and loopholes. Politicians would have the most to lose under this scenario though.
What makes you think tax cheats would pay a flat tax?

The point here is that people are not paying the taxes they owe. That needs to be rectified.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Funky Bunch
It’s not a moot point. Right now the math doesn’t add up or make any sense. You seem to be ok with that. Maybe that makes you a moron.
Are you suggesting the IRS should be done away with completely? No, funding whatsoever? Because that's your argument here.

The IRS has been severely underfunded for many, many years. A good portion of this funding is to build the infrastructure needed to service taxpayers overall. Some focus is being made to bring in revenue by making people pay what they owe who have not been doing so.

Why do you, personally, want to continue to allow tax cheats to game the system?
 
So because you don’t want rich fvcks to have more money, you think it is smart for the Government to spend 60 billion and 5.7 billion in order to get back 1 billion? I would like to do some business with you. Lol
How much does it cost to fund the IRS just to process taxes?

How much revenue does the IRS bring in overall?
 
J
Should we spend $5.7 billion to recoup $1 billion?
That is an interesting take.
Jeez Dude. What kind of take are you pushing?
An employee produces for one year, but is paid for years afterward and later production doesn’t count.
What?
Do you only count the production of your staff for one year, but then compare that to the lifetime of their effort.?
Does not compute.
 
There is clearly an investment required on the front end, so expenses will outpace collections.

Arguing otherwise is like asking why spend money building out a sales team because the revenues won’t come in for months or years?

As far as taxes, I get equally pissed at tax cheats as I do people who stole PPA funds during COVID or those scumbags who walk out of Target or Home Depot with a full cart they haven’t paid for. Sick of all types of people thinking stealing is a-ok if it’s to my benefit.
 
Would you support a flat tax that covered all income, earned and unearned. No matter what. No deductions. At all. For instance, no offsetting gains with losses. No offsetting personal income with capital losses. No depreciation deductions. No deductions from 1099 income. Social security taxed. Disability taxed. Charitable deductions taxed. Church income taxed.

Of course you don’t. I’m not sure anyone really does. If you don’t support limiting all those deductions, you don’t want a flat tax. You want a non progressive tax that favors no one except high earners.
Absolutely I would. Treat all income the same and tax it the same percentage. Straightforward, transparent, simple and easy to audit.
 
What makes you think tax cheats would pay a flat tax?

The point here is that people are not paying the taxes they owe. That needs to be rectified.
Some are outright cheating but the bigger abuse is using loopholes and creative ways to try and avoid taxes and going over the line with our overly complex tax code. A simple flat tax on all income eliminates those issues and makes it a hell of a lot easier for the IRS to audit.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk
Some are outright cheating but the bigger abuse is using loopholes and creative ways to try and avoid taxes and going over the line with our overly complex tax code. A simple flat tax on all income eliminates those issues and makes it a hell of a lot easier for the IRS to audit.
I disagree. Using the tax code is allowed……just be ready to pay up (plus penalty) when ruled against…..Flat-taxes sound easy/fair…..they ain’t…not top the poor and middle classes….The IRS needs more employees top audit….rich and corporations pay their lawyers MILLIONS $$ in fees to save them money…..lets just play the audit game o n an even playing field. Strong enforcement of the IRS rules will even things out over time……..Folks “cheat” on their taxes because they can get by with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fsu1jreed
So because you don’t want rich fvcks to have more money, you think it is smart for the Government to spend 60 billion and 5.7 billion in order to get back 1 billion? I would like to do some business with you. Lol
So should the FBI not prosecute a bank robbery if they can’t make a profit? If there is a rash of robberies in a certain area they shouldn’t spend more to increase enforcement unless they can make a profit?

Your hatred of all things government is showing through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RileyHawk
It’s an interesting take that you guys have with this. Should we simply stop trying to collect just because it cost money?

So should the FBI not prosecute a bank robbery if they can’t make a profit? If there is a rash of robberies in a certain area they shouldn’t spend more to increase enforcement unless they can make a profit?

Your hatred of all things government is showing through.
Pretty much the way it's gone in California with allowing shoplifters up to 1000K before they even think about prosecuting...
 
You got it. Treat ALL income just like people, equal. So much simpler and transparent.
That simply won’t work. At all. Example. I have about 23k in 1099 income a year. Of that, 10k or so are fees I pay to perform the service. If I have to pay taxes on that it just wouldn’t work.
 
That simply won’t work. At all. Example. I have about 23k in 1099 income a year. Of that, 10k or so are fees I pay to perform the service. If I have to pay taxes on that it just wouldn’t work.
No, you are confused by the difference between revenue and net income. I’m not suggesting you pay taxes on revenue.
 
No, you are confused by the difference between revenue and net income. I’m not suggesting you pay taxes on revenue.
But your suggestion is that all is treated as income/taxable…that was your “inference”…the current tax code is a hodge-podge of ways to attempt to separate revenue (deductions) from income…some how too much “income” gets converted to “wealth” without being taxed….(understand in America we tax “income” we do not tax “wealth”)…
 
The Radical Right wants less effort from the IRS for the obvious reasons.

Who gets targeted in these operations...the biggest violators/tax dodgers!

The reason wealthy CEOs support Trump isn't exactly a well kept secret.
Surprisingly many of the uber rich are Democrats.
But I bet you know that.

If those taxes are owed then they should be pursued and collected. It’s the right thing.

Now - let’s move on to how many Federal workers owe tax money too. It’s shocking.
 
No, you are confused by the difference between revenue and net income. I’m not suggesting you pay taxes on revenue.
I don’t think you understand what a flat tax is. A flat tax applies to all income. If I can deduct things from an income prior to the tax it isn’t a flat tax.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joelbc1
Surprisingly many of the uber rich are Democrats.
But I bet you know that.

If those taxes are owed then they should be pursued and collected. It’s the right thing.

Now - let’s move on to how many Federal workers owe tax money too. It’s shocking.
There’s nothing inherently different between federal workers and private workers. Some of them owe taxes. Those taxes need to be collected. The problem would be if those federal workers were being treated differently. I don’t believe that’s the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Paris
There’s nothing inherently different between federal workers and private workers. Some of them owe taxes. Those taxes need to be collected. The problem would be if those federal workers were being treated differently. I don’t believe that’s the case.
No disagreement but some work in the WH or are upper level types in DC.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT