American Politics: The Speaker's Cornered

[Pizza Friday Forever91]

For a government that is truly greedy or without ethics though, wouldn't it be more profitable to let people overpay on tax when that happens but just pocket the difference and not let them know anything? If it is in the end just about getting in more money for politicians and decision makers to play around with?

If you’re trying to be edgy…you’re failing.

He's not edgy, he's a neo-nazi.

[Umeria]

If I had my druthers, I would prefer the US Federal Government be forced by Constitutional Amendment not to exceed 10% of the GDP except in case of war or natural disaster. I would be forced to run on a flat tariff not to exceed 3.5%. I would have discretion to lessen or exempt certain goods, services, or nations. Goods billeted through to other nations would only pay relevant port authority fees. Any excess national debt would be leveed to each state in proportion to their population. Each state would use their tax authorities to gather the revenue as the People through their State legislatures see fit. I am a big proponent of repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments.

How would this change anything? The US is constantly at war

[Celritannia]

In the UK, people who overpay do receive a letter that it has occurred and repay you.

That's actually pretty cool. We send out letters to that effect, but then you have to file to claim it (in order to claim any other income the IRS may not know about and see if you *really* qualify).

I'm guessing they don't do as much social policy via the tax code as we do or, maybe they track eligibility differently.

My understanding of UK tax law is very limited, but I am sure it would be an interesting discussion in the UK politics thread if it is something you would like to follow up on.
I will say, one big difference between US tax and UK tax is unless you are a self-employed business in the UK, taxes are automatically done for you, which is why if you overpay you instantly get the money back.

Also, HMRC has the 3rd largest number of Civil Servants in the UK Government and keeps good track of their records.

[Umeria]

Governments taking advantage of some people overpaying is what I'd propose, in that mathematically it works and should pay off a given debt/deficit faster than if only relying on people paying the right amounts and needlessly correcting mistakes that benefit the coffers more than hurt it.

Believe it or not this is already happening. Means tested programs cause people to lose benefits even if they qualify due to administrative burdens, effectively an overpayment.

It actually costs more money than just making the programs universal because of the added bureaucracy. So your theory isn't cunning or edgy or whatever it's just hurting poor people with no benefit.

[Galloism]

That's actually pretty cool. We send out letters to that effect, but then you have to file to claim it (in order to claim any other income the IRS may not know about and see if you *really* qualify).

I'm guessing they don't do as much social policy via the tax code as we do or, maybe they track eligibility differently.

My understanding of UK tax law is very limited, but I am sure it would be an interesting discussion in the UK politics thread if it is something you would like to follow up on.
I will say, one big difference between US tax and UK tax is unless you are a self-employed business in the UK, taxes are automatically done for you, which is why if you overpay you instantly get the money back.

Seems to me underpayment would be way more common in most cases (multiple jobs, single exempt amount), but that may be me viewing it through my social context and assumptions regarding the UK not doing as much social policy via the tax code, and may not match the UK social context.

[Narland]

If I had my druthers, I would prefer the US Federal Government be forced by Constitutional Amendment not to exceed 10% of the GDP except in case of war or natural disaster. I would be forced to run on a flat tariff not to exceed 3.5%. I would have discretion to lessen or exempt certain goods, services, or nations. Goods billeted through to other nations would only pay relevant port authority fees. Any excess national debt would be leveed to each state in proportion to their population. Each state would use their tax authorities to gather the revenue as the People through their State legislatures see fit. I am a big proponent of repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments.

How would this change anything? The US is constantly at war

We haven't been in an officially declared war since WW2. Rhodes-ian belligerence making the world "safe for democracy" as the world's kneecappers... er police to enforce policy whims of Beltway Elitists doesn't count as war. It does count as crimes against humanity, and war crimes however, and I am all for trying our bad actors and faithless servants for their failings.

[Umeria]

How would this change anything? The US is constantly at war

We haven't been in an officially declared war since WW2. Rhodes-ian belligerence making the world "safe for democracy" as the world's kneecappers... er police to enforce policy whims of Beltway Elitists doesn't count as war.

I think they'd pass an official declaration pretty quick if it meant not having to drastically limit the budget.

[Celritannia]

My understanding of UK tax law is very limited, but I am sure it would be an interesting discussion in the UK politics thread if it is something you would like to follow up on.
I will say, one big difference between US tax and UK tax is unless you are a self-employed business in the UK, taxes are automatically done for you, which is why if you overpay you instantly get the money back.

Seems to me underpayment would be way more common in most cases (multiple jobs, single exempt amount), but that may be me viewing it through my social context and assumptions regarding the UK not doing as much social policy via the tax code, and may not match the UK social context.

HMRC has the 3rd largest number of Civil Servants in the UK Government and keeps good track of their records. I think that is also a big difference between the UK and the US. The UK has a massive organised state civil service that deals with all the records and actual policymaking.
The best representation of how this works is the BBC comedy series Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister.

[American Legionaries]

That's actually pretty cool. We send out letters to that effect, but then you have to file to claim it (in order to claim any other income the IRS may not know about and see if you *really* qualify).

I'm guessing they don't do as much social policy via the tax code as we do or, maybe they track eligibility differently.

My understanding of UK tax law is very limited, but I am sure it would be an interesting discussion in the UK politics thread if it is something you would like to follow up on.
I will say, one big difference between US tax and UK tax is unless you are a self-employed business in the UK, taxes are automatically done for you, which is why if you overpay you instantly get the money back.

Also, HMRC has the 3rd largest number of Civil Servants in the UK Government and keeps good track of their records.

The myriad things that have an impact on our tax burdens makes this impossible for anything other than an estimate.

For example my employer doesn't know how much money I borrowed to go to school, or how much it cost me in a year for my daughter's child care, or if I sold a car. In the end, they can only guess what is the appropriate amount to take. (In my case, my employer takes zero dollars, and that's too much)

[Elwher]

If it were simply a year-over-year arrangement, that would be true. However, in order to spend money you must get it and that is the basis of the taxation. Once you have gotten the money, what you do with it does not affect the tax situation.

If I make money and then spend it, I don't have any money now that I didn't have before. So my income is zero under your definition.

When you made the money but before you spent it, you did.

[Cannot think of a name]

If you’re trying to be edgy…you’re failing.

He's not edgy, he's a neo-nazi.

Being a neo-nazi is like prototype edginess.

[Elwher]

No, because you did not get any money or cash equivalent.

What is a cash equivalent?

After consideration, I withdraw the cash equivalent part of the phrase. They only become income when sold.

[Narland]

We haven't been in an officially declared war since WW2. Rhodes-ian belligerence making the world "safe for democracy" as the world's kneecappers... er police to enforce policy whims of Beltway Elitists doesn't count as war. It does count as crimes against humanity, and war crimes however, and I am all for trying our bad actors and faithless servants for their failings.

I think they'd pass an official declaration pretty quick if it meant not having to drastically limit the budget.

That would take an act of congress and signage by the president. That is not an easy task.

[Galloism]

What is a cash equivalent?

After consideration, I withdraw the cash equivalent part of the phrase. They only become income when sold.

I’m not even sure what this means.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

id rather not give russia an official reason to nuke wherever the fuck Narland lives just so Congress can give Ukraine Patriot missiles.

[Umeria]

I think they'd pass an official declaration pretty quick if it meant not having to drastically limit the budget.

That would take an act of congress and signage by the president. That is not an easy task.

To get a budget through? They do that every year

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

That would take an act of congress and signage by the president. That is not an easy task.

To get a budget through? They do that every year

With such gnashing of teeth you'd find enamel fragments decking the senate floor.

[Elwher]

After consideration, I withdraw the cash equivalent part of the phrase. They only become income when sold.

I’m not even sure what this means.

I was originally considering things like stocks and bonds, but as I tried to explain that I realized that in order to benefit from them, one must convert them to cash and they should be taxed at that time.

[Spirit of Hope]

What is a cash equivalent?

After consideration, I withdraw the cash equivalent part of the phrase. They only become income when sold.

So as long as I barter for goods or services I don't have to pay taxes?

[El Lazaro]

id rather not give russia an official reason to nuke wherever the fuck Narland lives just so Congress can give Ukraine Patriot missiles.

I have no idea what this is about, but Moscow, Russia absolutely should nuke Moscow, Idaho. There can only be one.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

id rather not give russia an official reason to nuke wherever the fuck Narland lives just so Congress can give Ukraine Patriot missiles.

I have no idea what this is about, but Moscow, Russia absolutely should nuke Moscow, Idaho. There can only be one.

If I had my druthers, I would prefer the US Federal Government be forced by Constitutional Amendment not to exceed 10% of the GDP except in case of war or natural disaster. I would be forced to run on a flat tariff not to exceed 3.5%. I would have discretion to lessen or exempt certain goods, services, or nations. Goods billeted through to other nations would only pay relevant port authority fees. Any excess national debt would be leveed to each state in proportion to their population. Each state would use their tax authorities to gather the revenue as the People through their State legislatures see fit. I am a big proponent of repealing the 16th and 17th Amendments.

[Incelastan]

I half seriously think that we should nuke the student loan servicers. Mostly being facetious. But they are a huge part of the problem. Navient and the other servicers are well known crooks, who gained incredible power under Betsy De Vos. The best solution would be to nationalize student debt servicers, begin closing down their operations, impose federal caps on tuition, permit refinancing for any federal student loan debt not cancelled or forgiven, set a minimum threshold like Australia before payments are even required, and ban any kind of interest charges. At the very least, private, for-profit student loan servicers should not exist. No one should profit at all from poor students needing financial aid to attend college.

[Umeria]

If I make money and then spend it, I don't have any money now that I didn't have before. So my income is zero under your definition.

When you made the money but before you spent it, you did.

Does a bank teller need to pay taxes every time he handles a deposit? He had money that he didn't have before.

[Tarsonis]

When you made the money but before you spent it, you did.

Does a bank teller need to pay taxes every time he handles a deposit? He had money that he didn't have before.

Well you've gone and and done it. You've engaged with libertarianism and let it drag you down to where you're spouting out nonsense like this. Take a look in a mirror, this is what rock bottom looks like.

[Galloism]

When you made the money but before you spent it, you did.

Does a bank teller need to pay taxes every time he handles a deposit? He had money that he didn't have before.

So, not the teller, but bank deposits become really problematic under the "if you have money you didn't have before that's taxes which includes loans" paradigm. You deposit $1000 in the bank, and the bank adds it to the books as cash and as liability (this is the accounting entry - when you have a deposit as a bank, YOU are the creditor and they deposit the cash into the bank's general operating funds. This is why deposits are credits on your bank statement and withdrawals are debits - those entries are told from the bank's perspective.), which under the new paradigm, that's income, and they have to pay taxes on it.

Even if you draw it out the next day.