Sixth Circuit Upholds Tax Loophole for the Rich!

Tax
1

Interesting !

2

It’s always good to be rich. :slight_smile:

In another news, nobody really pays the inheritance tax either. There are so many loopholes I don’t get why people get upset. For starter, you need to have at least 10M to worry about it…

3 Likes
3

I have been telling you. I know a guy, who went to see this other guy owning a small company, about $1.2M income. After wages and whatnot, he owed about $300K-$600K in taxes. This guy looked at the way he had structured his company and after changing and dialing up some things the guy ended up paying $36K

I don’t criticize Trump for using loopholes, just for being an idiot spouting or scalding others for “not paying taxes”.

Now, whether you like it or not, we owe $19T. And guess how much in 401Ks and whatnot is there? $19T. Somehow, if I were you, I would get out of that rat race.

Oh, I heard somewhere, the current administration or the current tax laws being dialed up call for taxing Roth IRAs. True or not, just the fact that we have to find a war to pay that debt call for a look at where the republicans are aiming at, not at the top 1%ers for sure.

4

The national debt is a ruse used by Republicans to trap Democrats. .Not really as important as Trump thinks…There are a lot more important issues out there

2 Likes
5

Like what happened “last night in Sweden”? :stuck_out_tongue::stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

6

Life goal: be rich enough to afford a good lawyer, CPA and estate planner.

Trump is right. Only poor and dumb people pay taxes.

2 Likes
7

How I know about a comma, an “and” of “if” changes any law? Because in my trek to become who I am, a naturalized citizen, the wording of some rules or laws killed me. I swear, it hurts to be subject of a “crime” of a word or a simple letter.

“Each word of the ‘substance-over-form doctrine,’ at least as the Commissioner has used it here, should give pause,” Sutton wrote for a three-judge panel. “‘Form’ is ‘substance’ when it comes to law. The words of law (its form) determine content (its substance). How odd, then, to permit the tax collector to reverse the sequence – to allow him to determine the substance of a law and to make it govern ‘over’ the written form of the law – and to call it a ‘doctrine’ no less.” (Parentheses and emphasis in original.)