Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pigdog

Dear pigdog,

Certainly your spreadsheet shows "embedded" taxes of 17+%.

And it shows "embedded" net profits of nearly 70%. LOL!!!

That's because, after your initial input of $1, all the rest of your inputs have been either profits or taxes. ROTFLMAO!!!

In Level 6, you show a business entity that has a total pre-tax profit margin of 29%, but no costs other than the cost of the initial input to that level. LOL!!! Of COURSE you're going to cascade such ridiculous amounts of tax.

What else do you expect?

Why don't you create a spreadsheet that shows the actual profit and taxes of real businesses? Like manufacturers:

General Electric: ~ 2% of revenues in federal corporate income taxes
Dell: ~ 2% of revenues in federal corporate income taxes
Boeing: ~ 0.3% of revenues in ALL (federal AND state) corporate income taxes
Lockheed Martin: ~ 1% of revenues in federal corporate income taxes
Whirlpool: ~ 1.5% of revenues in ALL (federal AND state) corporate income taxes

Like distributors/wholesalers:

TechData: ~ 0.2% of revenues in federal corporate income taxes
Ingram Micro: ~ 0.17% of revenues in ALL (federal AND state) income taxes

Or retailers:

Wal-Mart: ~ 1.6% of revenues in federal corporate income taxes
Sears: Less than 0.5% of revenues in ALL (federal AND state) corporate income taxts
Target: ~ 1.8% of revenues in federal corporate income taxes

Or the corner appliance store: 0% (because it's a proprietorship or a Subchapter S corporation, an LLC or a partnership).

Sprinkle some of those tax rates, which go from 0% to about 2% of revenues, into your spreadsheet, and watch what happens to the accumulated "embedded" taxes.

Also, in the REAL world, pigdog, companies ADD VALUE to their inputs before selling them to others. Even Wal-Mart's cost of goods sold is 76%, meaning that the other 24% of the selling price is the value that Wal-Mart's adds to the product when selling it to the consumer. That isn't all profit, pigdog. In fact, a relatively small part of it is profit. Most of it is the "cost of doing business."

Wal-Mart's actual pre-tax profits are about 5.6% of their revenues.

In the REAL world, companies don't enjoy 29% net pre-tax profit margins, all without adding any value whatsoever.

Now, as to the taxes paid by folks like me, who own small businesses that are not incorporated as Chapter C corporations. Here's the amount we pay in federal corporate income taxes: $0. As a percentage of revenues, that's 0%.

I get 100% of the income of my business to me.

I file a business tax return, just like a C corporation (though I think I use a different form). But whereas the C corporation pays corporate income taxes on profits, I pay $0. Again, as a percentage of revenue, that's 0%.

Then, I file my 1040, and report my personal income, on which I pay personal income taxes on my income.

Only one level of taxation, the personal level.

When the proponents of the NSRT are talking about doing away with the corporate income tax, that's because they're acknowledging that corporate income is taxed TWICE. Once at the corporate level, at a top marginal rate of 35%, and then a second time, as personal income, when it is paid to the shareholders as dividends, currently at a top rate of 15%.

But I don't pay any corporate income taxes, thus, I have none embedded in the cost of my services.

You can assert "that's different" all day long, but you've offered no coherent, consistent, or even minimally-logical argument as evidence why my personal income taxes are any different than one of my employee's personal income taxes.

We're both gonna need them to pay that hefty 30% national sales tax.


sitetest


122 posted on 08/23/2005 10:55:50 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]


To: sitetest

We're both gonna need them to pay that hefty 30% national sales tax.

Just as we need both of them to pay individual and business income/payroll taxes today to the tune of precisely the same amount of federal taxation.

The rate is a matter of the base you choose to determine it from. Whether it is from gross consumption expenditures, or the price a producer receives sans sales taxes, or the 66% tax added on us on top taxed takehome pay now is irrelavent.

The amount of tax government extracts from the citizenl remains the same.

 

The Wrong Camera: The Denominator of the
Tax Incidence Equation.

Dan R. Mastromarco;
LLM, Argus Group, Washington D.C.
Tax Analysts Document Number:
Doc 1999-32575
Citations: (October 8, 1999)

B. Use a Consistent Size Screen to Portray It.

[118] When considering the rate of a national sales tax, or any tax for that matter, one must always decide which of two distinct means of portraying this rate -- the "tax-inclusive rate" or "tax- exclusive rate" -- best expresses the tax burden. Which one we employ changes absolutely nothing in terms of the taxes that are actually raised or paid by the taxpayer under the taxing regime examined, in the same way that measuring a journey in inches or meters does not change the distance. However, how the rate is presented changes how the relative tax burden is perceived by those who wish to compare the merits of competing tax proposals. Confusion results when we compare alternatives under different measuring scales.

[119] The sales tax is particularly susceptible to this confusion because state sales taxes are normally expressed on a tax- exclusive basis, while income, estate, and payroll taxes, as well as the Flat Tax and other VATs, are normally expressed on a tax- inclusive basis. If we were to express a sales tax rate as a percent of the product price as is done in the states, we would be unfairly overstating the burden of the tax when we compare it to what it is meant to replace at the national level. Or conversely, we would be greatly understating the relative burden of the federal income and payroll taxes for those who don't have time to learn the different measuring systems.

[120] Presentation of a rate of tax on a tax-exclusive basis simply means that the rate of the tax is expressed as the tax paid over a base determined after the tax was already imposed (for example, taxable income under our personal income tax system that is net of the tax). In other words, a tax-exclusive rate would be defined as:

$ tax paid
-------------------------------------------------------------------
($ base on which the tax was imposed)-($ tax paid)

[121] The rate therefore reflects the ratio of taxes paid to what is left in the base, such as net of tax income.

[122] On the other hand, defining the rate of tax on a tax- inclusive basis simply means that the rate of the tax is expressed as the tax paid over the base before the tax has been imposed. In other words, a tax-inclusive rate would be defined as:

$ tax paid
-------------------------------------------------------
$ base on which the tax is to be imposed

[123] Since the base of the tax before the tax is imposed is always more than the base after tax (the denominator is greater), expressing the tax in a tax-exclusive way will always yield a higher rate. In other words, it will express the tax as having a higher burden. /56/

[124] Let us take the following example.

Example: An individual earns $1,000 and pays $200 in taxes
(under either a VAT, income tax, or sales tax) but spends the
remaining $800 on a stereo. Although the taxpayer will pay the
same amount of taxes ($200) out of the same amount of pretaxed
income ($1,000) a question arises as to how the rate should best
be expressed? Is the tax rate 20 percent or 25 percent?

[125] Clearly, one might say that the income or Flat Tax rate is the lower rate, 20 percent, since the taxpayer paid $200 on $1,000 of pretaxed income. That is because the income tax and VATs are normally looked at (unquestionably looked on) on a tax-inclusive basis. However, when we view traditional state sales taxes we might say that the state sales tax rate needed to raise $200 of revenues is 25 percent, even though the sales tax rate raises the same amount of revenue as a 20 percent tax-inclusive income or Flat Tax rate. The taxpayer would be considered to have paid the tax at a 25 percent rate since the taxpayer paid $200 of tax on $800 worth of goods exclusive of tax. That is because the state sales taxes are normally looked on on an after-tax or tax-exclusive basis. To use our formula for tax-exclusive representation:

$ tax paid
--------------------------------------------------------------
(base on which the tax was imposed)-(tax paid)

or,

$200/$800 or, 25 percent.

[126] Which is the correct way of expressing this rate? To the casual observer, it is obvious which tax to prefer. All else being equal, one would prefer a 20 percent rate over a 25 percent rate. But that same person may be surprised to find out that they are saying the same thing, and paying the same tax.

[127] The problem with using a tax-exclusive basis for determining the rate of a national sales tax and a tax-inclusive base to portray the income tax is that it can be very misleading. Let us look at a taxpayer who is at the top marginal rate under each taxing scheme. The tax-inclusive and tax-exclusive rates would be compared as shown in the charts just above and just below.

[128] In the tax-inclusive chart, we see comparisons that we are used to seeing. This chart reflects the maximum marginal rate of the current personal income tax system as 43.3 percent. /57/ Here the sales tax rate is 23 percent and the Flat Tax rate is 32.3 percent, reflecting the combined payroll and Flat Tax burdens. /58/ But the tax-exclusive chart indicates that the income tax with the payroll tax bears a maximum marginal rate that is 75.8 percent of the tax- exclusive base. Even the federal individual income tax alone reflects a maximum marginal tax-exclusive base of 43.3 percent. According to the chart above, the Flat Tax bears a maximum marginal rate of 47.7. The FairTax plan bears a maximum marginal rate of 29.9 percent. In this chart, the taxes paid are calculated as a percentage of what remains after tax.

[129] In making comparisons between alternative taxing systems it is important to ensure therefore that these comparisons are consistent, fair in terms of expectations, and are well explained. Fair comparisons eliminate and do not exacerbate confusion over a relatively critical point as the means of expressing the tax rate. The only means to do so is to ensure that a tax-inclusive rate is compared with a tax-inclusive rate.

Footnotes:

/56/ When calculating the tax-inclusive sales tax base, two algebraically equivalent methods may be used. The tax-exclusive rate may be converted into a tax-inclusive rate by dividing the tax- exclusive rate by one plus the tax-exclusive rate: ti = te / (1+ te). Conversely, a tax-inclusive rate may be converted into a tax- exclusive rate by dividing the tax-inclusive rate by one minus the tax-inclusive rate: te = ti / (1-ti). Alternatively, the tax- inclusive sales tax rate may be calculated by adding the repealed income tax revenue back into the tax base (consumers, after all, would have that money to spend), whereas one would not do so when calculating the tax-exclusive base (consumers would be spending that amount on tax and it would not be appropriation to include it in the calculation of a tax-exclusive base).

/57/ The maximum marginal payroll rate is 15.3 percent, but this rate applies regressively between $0 and $72,600 for 1999. When this rate attaches, it is possible for a tax to apply at a maximum marginal rate of 43.3 percent (28 percent individual income tax rate plus 15.3 percent payroll tax rate).

/58/ While it is beyond the scope of this article, it is important to understand that the Flat Tax rate of 17 percent assumes a substantial reduction in government revenues.


129 posted on 08/23/2005 11:09:11 AM PDT by ancient_geezer (Don't reform it, Replace it!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

To: sitetest
Nonsense, s-test. It's unfortunate you can't understand a simple example of cascading of embedded taxes which do not even include paroll taxes or commpliance costs.

Whatever value might be added is encompassed by the example and the fact you can't/won't see that changes nothing. In asddition, the fact that you are not a Sub C corp changes nothing. You business still accrues tax liaibilities even though they may be paid via your 1040. The effect of those taxes still remains in the business and pretending it does not is (at the very least) shortsighted.

"Embedded net profits" BTW is a meaningless concept since these are different businesses in the example. The profits are not cascaded and accumulated (remember Nightie already tried that one), but the taxes are as part of the costs passed ahead in prices. The example shows costs that can be removed from prices - and the assumption is that profits remain. If you'd like to "embed" profits and remove them also ... well ...???

As for the C-corp figures you present, I can only offer a big yawn and say "so what". If those are correct figures (and I doubt they are), there are many tax-abatement stunts that can be used (frequently short term ones) but over a longer term the taxes would most likely go back up.

According the The Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy for 2004:

"ITEP's new report examines the U.S. profits and federal income taxes of 250 of the nation's largest and most profitable corporations over the 1996-98 period. Although big corporations ostensibly are supposed to pay 35 percent of their profits in taxes, the 250 companies in ITEP's survey paid only 20.1 percent in 1998. "

Perhaps you were able to cherry pick only those corporations (and keep in mind that many other business entities pay taxes, too) who paid very low taxes it contributes nothing to your argument except, perhaps to show your desperation by the tactic.

Actually, longer term sutudies by the IRS (I believe it was) show the "typical" (whatever that means) tax rate for C-corps is about 25% and has held right around that rate for many years with occasional slight variations.

141 posted on 08/23/2005 12:16:27 PM PDT by pigdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson