Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/03/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Fuji X-Pro1 - Jim
From: kcarney1 at cox.net (Ken Carney)
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:25:19 -0500
References: <CAEve6Xjwn16MN-eby294hon5QtxKBKXwadSUFf3bZgqAd=47Zw@mail.gmail.com> <CAH1UNJ2bOawP2zTZmfFPKpNz0J=BT6bLaNw1jgG6fdsVASg7_A@mail.gmail.com>

That is absolutely correct.  When we are evaluating a tax position, the 
only way to determine the marginal rate is make a with and without 
calculation.   However, I have long thought that the way you pay tax is 
more important.  I think there should be no payroll withholding or 
quarterly estimated tax payments.  Every year, people line up and pay 
their taxes in currency (folding money).  OK, that may be a tad extreme 
but if we had that system, the next Solyndra that popped up would 
probably draw a Frankenstein mob at the White House instead of talk show 
criticism.

Ken

On 3/22/2012 10:44 PM, Jayanand Govindaraj wrote:
> Bharani,
> What is the effective tax you pay on gross income? In most countries, tax
> brackets or slabs have no meaning, what with the slew of loopholes and
> deductions available.
> Cheers
> Jayanand
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 9:12 AM, scleroplex<scleroplex at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> not so.
>> you just have to have no dependents.
>> as a single man with no family and no mortgage i have been in the highest
>> tax bracket for 15 years.
>> when my gross income was less than $70,000, my total tax rate was 38%.
>> now it is 44% and i do not make more than $200,000.
>>
>> i don't particularly mind it as brookline does me nicely and my tax
>> accountant is honest.
>> many people in my tax bracket fiddle with the itemised deductions, declare
>> a home office, do a section 179 deduction for everything and get their 
>> rate
>> down to 13%.
>> i prefer to be able to look anyone in the eye. and i like services like
>> police and fire and ambulance.
>> our fire service here does not stand around watching a house burn down
>> saying the folks did not pay the $70 fee. quality of life needs to be paid
>> for.
>> bharani
>>
>>
>> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:02:41 -0500
>> From: Ken Carney<kcarney1 at cox.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Fuji X-Pro1 - Jim
>> To: Leica Users Group<lug at leica-users.org>
>> Message-ID:<4F6BCBB1.1030606 at cox.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>
>> Yes, but that marginal federal rate does not begin until taxable income
>> somewhere around USD200,000.  If you are paying an aggregate rate of
>> 46%, that is a much higher income than $200,000.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



In reply to: Message from scleroplex at gmail.com (scleroplex) ([Leica] Fuji X-Pro1 - Jim)
Message from jayanand at gmail.com (Jayanand Govindaraj) ([Leica] Fuji X-Pro1 - Jim)