Page 3 of 129 FirstFirst 123456781353103 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 2573

Thread: Biggest Reform EVER passed thread

  1. #41
    THE quintessential dwarf palmab03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    44,418
    Quote Originally Posted by WFFaithful View Post
    Why is that money going to go into employment?
    I imagine things like call centers will come back. Uber for call centers (people working part time when they want seems like a decent idea to me). There's a value to having a native English speaker doing customer service. Outsourced accounting is another industry I've encountered. I'm sure there are plenty of industries that don't affect my life that I don't have an example off the top of my head, I'm not an expert on supply-chain management for retailers or Apple.

    In the long run, other countries' wealth is growing faster than our country, so the competitive advantage China has now sewing sneakers won't last forever. We should plan our tax structure for 100 years down the road, not 3 years down the road.
    just drivin' round in John Voight's car

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by palmab03 View Post
    Accountants are expensive but not that expensive.
    It's mostly tax attorneys, insurance salesmen, and other financial planners. And once you get a plan in place there are annual trust expenses and other compliance costs. It is just a massive resource suck that in many cases isn't even ultimately needed, but the person really has no choice but to plan like it will be because they can't predict the future. Plus, the mental distraction of planning and tax minimization distracts significant focus from actual business. It is a generally useless tax that wastes a whole lot of resources.

  3. #43
    THE quintessential dwarf palmab03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    44,418
    Quote Originally Posted by 2&2 Slider To Leyritz View Post
    It's mostly tax attorneys, insurance salesmen, and other financial planners. And once you get a plan in place there are annual trust expenses and other compliance costs. It is just a massive resource suck that in many cases isn't even ultimately needed, but the person really has no choice but to plan like it will be because they can't predict the future. Plus, the mental distraction of planning and tax minimization distracts significant focus from actual business. It is a generally useless tax that wastes a whole lot of resources.
    Tech is coming at these things hard. They're already taking on real estate brokers and insurance brokers. The free market will eliminate this cost. As you mention... there's too much money being made by these folks to solve a problem that I can pretty much learn after a few hours of research.
    just drivin' round in John Voight's car

  4. #44
    THE quintessential dwarf palmab03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    44,418
    Like how much more complicated are the options than what someone can learn from simply reading the top few google articles?

    https://smartasset.com/taxes/5-ways-...the-estate-tax

    https://www.estateplanning.com/Under...-Estate-Taxes/
    Last edited by palmab03; 09-27-2017 at 02:43 PM.
    just drivin' round in John Voight's car

  5. #45
    I disagree with you
    ImTheCaptain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    41,230
    most people are not smart. also, many "smart" people are not smart when it comes to financial matters.

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by palmab03 View Post
    Like how much more complicated are the options than what someone can learn from simply reading the top few google articles?

    https://smartasset.com/taxes/5-ways-...the-estate-tax
    Because you have to actually do them, not just read about them. Using that article as an example, #1 is fine but is obviously very limited in effect. #3 is just giving shit away to unrelated entitites, so is kind of stupid to include. #2, #4 (these aren't even really used any more), and #5 are part of what the industries I mentioned above actually do. A regular person isn't going to be able to write a compliant ILIT, and handle the annual compliance requirements. Tech has done an awful job trying to take over those components; usually the products from things like Legal Zoom and similar are absolutely horrible and make things worse than would have been without them, and the person doesn't know what they are supposed to do on an annual basis. But you never find out and can't fix them because when the time comes to utilize them you're dead, so the whole process was a waste and the heirs end up spending twice as much to try to unravel and fix it.

  7. #47
    THE quintessential dwarf palmab03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    44,418
    Quote Originally Posted by 2&2 Slider To Leyritz View Post
    Because you have to actually do them, not just read about them. Using that article as an example, #1 is fine but is obviously very limited in effect. #3 is just giving shit away to unrelated entitites, so is kind of stupid to include. #2, #4 (these aren't even really used any more), and #5 are part of what the industries I mentioned above actually do. A regular person isn't going to be able to write a compliant ILIT, and handle the annual compliance requirements. Tech has done an awful job trying to take over those components; usually the products from things like Legal Zoom and similar are absolutely horrible and make things worse than would have been without them, and the person doesn't know what they are supposed to do on an annual basis. But you never find out and can't fix them because when the time comes to utilize them you're dead.
    I think betting on tech not getting smarter is a bad bet. I mean most the techies are terrified they'll learn how to exterminate us all. Fairly sure they'll figure out estate planning before then
    just drivin' round in John Voight's car

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by palmab03 View Post
    I think betting on tech not getting smarter is a bad bet. I mean most the techies are terrified they'll learn how to exterminate us all. Fairly sure they'll figure out estate planning before then
    Even if you're right, that kind of proves my point. So we'll have savvy techies spending their brainpower trying to help people avoid taxes rather than doing something productive. The whole industry is just an unnecessary drain.

  9. #49
    THE quintessential dwarf palmab03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    44,418

    Next Up: Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by 2&2 Slider To Leyritz View Post
    Even if you're right, that kind of proves my point. So we'll have savvy techies spending their brainpower trying to help people avoid taxes rather than doing something productive. The whole industry is just an unnecessary drain.
    The concept of taxing rich people when they die isn't an unnecessary drain. And none of the people I do the books for spend an inordinate amount of time worrying about the estate tax. They pay someone $10-20k and they handle it.

    Their businesses aren't affected by the estate tax at all
    just drivin' round in John Voight's car

  10. #50
    THE quintessential dwarf palmab03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    44,418
    How about instead of getting rid of the estate tax you get rid of the entities or methods with which people avoid it. Then the lawyers and accountants will have nothing to do
    just drivin' round in John Voight's car

  11. #51
    I disagree with you
    ImTheCaptain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    41,230
    Quote Originally Posted by palmab03 View Post
    I think betting on tech not getting smarter is a bad bet. I mean most the techies are terrified they'll learn how to exterminate us all. Fairly sure they'll figure out estate planning before then

    tech gets smarter, but people don't. there's no way to out-tech the legal system or provide simple answers to complex financial questions

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by 2&2 Slider To Leyritz View Post
    I think there would be, though obviously the details aren't out yet. If not, I could see a scenario where the heir gets to utilize the decedent's primary residence gain exclusion for say 2 years following death or something like that, which would cover the majority of issues.
    That's just the tip of the iceberg. Your typical 1 million estate has no taxes currently and would have a step-up in basis but without this exemption you would have to track historical basis on every asset the passed through and pay taxes on the unrealized gain. That would end up being a tax increase to most estate pass-throughs not the reverse
    Last edited by ChrisL68; 09-27-2017 at 03:03 PM.

  13. #53

  14. #54
    PM a mod to cement your internet status forever RJKarl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    HB, CA
    Posts
    68,037
    Quote Originally Posted by palmab03 View Post
    Might not get some of them, but can get plenty of them. Cause it costs money to ship things across an Ocean.
    Not that kind of money. About a decade ago, a container cost about $1000-1500 from China to LA/LB. Think of how many laptops or shirts or flat screen you can get into a 20' container. It's not that much per unit.

    The reality is without demand no tax rate change will create jobs.

  15. #55
    So much automation on the way, no tax code is going to change that. The days of the only skill you have is being human are over.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL68 View Post
    That's just the tip of the iceberg. Your typical 1 million estate has no taxes currently and would have a step-up in basis but without this exemption you would have to track historical basis on every asset the passed through and pay taxes on the unrealized gain. That would end up being a tax increase to most estate pass-throughs not the reverse
    I don't think that would be the case ... I'm pretty sure there would be a step-up in basis, and if not then at least a carryover basis like 2010. So the heir wouldn't pay until a recognition event.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by 2&2 Slider To Leyritz View Post
    I don't think that would be the case ... I'm pretty sure there would be a step-up in basis, and if not then at least a carryover basis like 2010. So the heir wouldn't pay until a recognition event.
    Which is what I'm saying. Without a step up in basis then it is a huge negative tax impact on most estates because many of the beneficiaries will want to liquidate the estate.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisL68 View Post
    Which is what I'm saying. Without a step up in basis then it is a huge negative tax impact on most estates because many of the beneficiaries will want to liquidate the estate.
    Yeah, I agree, which is why I think a step-up will be involved. The articles covering it now are MSM propaganda pieces that don't go into that level of detail, I don't think the specific technical components will be reported on for a little while.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by palmab03 View Post
    It does make some sense to eliminate the state tax deduction in theory. States who spend too much subsidize it from those that don't.
    Can you help me understand that point? I assume Alabama residents arenít literally sending money to California residents. I understand that higher state tax rate means bigger deductions so you can essentially charge higher tax rates than the residents will feel. However, as the conservative Tax Foundation annually reports, the states that benefit the most from the state tax deductions still pay more to the federal government than they get back in federal spending. So in the end, even with the state tax deductions California and other rich states are still subsidizing poorer states by paying more in federal tax dollars than they get back.

  20. #60
    THE quintessential dwarf palmab03's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    paradise
    Posts
    44,418
    Quote Originally Posted by tiltdeac View Post
    Doubling the standard deduction while losing the exemptions becomes almost inconsequential to me, and really fucks over the poors with kids.

    Well played , pubs.
    just drivin' round in John Voight's car

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •