The Tax Foundation has put together a wonderful “chartbook” of statistics on federal taxes. Just flipping through the slideshow would increase the average congresscritter’s tax IQ by 100 points, to about 110. It’s all great stuff, but I have favorites. The charts and captions are by the Tax Foundation.
Lesson: increasing the tax on “the rich” means increasing business taxes, reducing the ability of businesses to hire and grow.
And my favorite:
Lesson: the rich guy isn’t buying. Unless spending is reduced, the inevitable tax increase will fall on everyone, because the rich simply can’t cover the bill. Politicians who pretend that our fiscal woes will be solved by taxing “the rich” just hope you are easily fooled.
Lawmaker questions incentives for Iowa fertilizer plant (Quad City Times). Joe Bolkom (D, Iowa City), chairman of the Iowa Senate Ways and Means Committee, is not pleased with the incentive package for the Orascom fertilizer plant:
“We’d like to suggest that there was no reason to waste $250 million to convince this giant international corporation to essentially do what it was going to do any way. This is probably the worst economic development deal in the state’s history,” Bolkcom said. “We should have used this money to cut commercial property taxes for every Iowa business instead of giving this multi-national corporation this $250 million that we did not need to.”
I would suggest buying the Mercedes and Land Rover for the film producer might have been worse, dollar for dollar, but it’s debatable. Naturally the Governor, who got the deal done, disagrees:
Branstad spokesman Tim Albrecht rebutted Bolkcom’s claims, saying the state needed to provide up to $110 million in tax credits to sway the company to bring the 165 permanent jobs, along with hundreds of construction jobs and other financial benefits — such as lower-cost fertilizer — to Iowa rather than seeing the project end up in Illinois.
I’m pretty sure the fertilizer will cost the same in Illinois.
TaxProf Paul Caron reports that Accounting Today has issued its list of the 100 Most Influential People in Tax and Accounting. Once again I missed the cut, while the TaxProf, Max Baucus, Chuck Grassley and Doug Shulman all made the list. I’m sure I remain one of the 100 most influential tax bloggers in Polk County.
Mr. Goldberg is accused of keeping two bank accounts. There’s nothing wrong with that. However, he’s being accused of only including the deposits from one of the two accounts on his tax returns. Adding to his troubles is that he’s being accused of “structuring” bank deposits. Structuring is adjusting your bank deposits of cash deliberately so as to avoid currency transaction reports (CTR). If you make a deposit of $10,000 or more of cash, the bank will file a CTR. Mr. Goldberg is being accused of structuring bank deposits 147 times.
Bank employees are trained to spot “structuring” and are required to report it. If you do it 147 times, the chances of not getting spotted become vanishingly small.
William McBride, Is it True that “Just About Everyone” Eventually Pays Income Tax? (Tax Policy Blog)
Kay Bell, Payroll tax cut on its last legs
William Perez, Year-End Tax Planning for College Expenses
Shock! Robert D. Flach is undecided! MY DILEMMA
Critical questions for $200, Alex. Great unintentional juxtaposition at Tax.com this morning:
That is indeed a critical question. If “they” are Congress and the answer is “no,” be very afraid, because this is what they do sober.
Tags: TaxProf, Kay Bell, Russ Fox, Janet Novack, Robert D Flach, William Perez, tax.com, Tax Foundation, Peter Reilly, William McBride, Jason Dinesen, the rich guy's not buying, Anthony Nitti, The Critical Question