BREAKING: Second source confirms Reid's allegations Romney paid no taxes for 10 year

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by jms62

Also we need to know how Romney can accumulate 100 Million in his IRA.

Certainly if Romney is breaking any Federal Tax Laws he should be prosecuted to the full extent. If not then the tax code needs to be changed.

IRA-401K's etc. were all designed to promote tax free savings. If true, Mitt has taken it to a whole new level. While I don't think investment income should be taxed at the same rate income is, it shouldn't be tax free.

Look America has also purported itself as fair, where everyone is equal. Decide on a percentage and instill a flat tax with personal contributions to IRA/401K's capped at say $10K. No deductions. Married or not moot, investment income or not moot.

At a 20% flat tax with a contribution of 10% of salary allocated into a IRA/401K. The following scenarios would pan out:

Individual A: $22K in income 7K individual deduction (I think should be lower)
and $2.2K put into an IRA leaves a taxable income of $12.8K. At 20% individual A would pay $1,560 in taxes. An effective rate of 7%.

Individual B: $50K in income, putting away $5K, leaves a taxable income of $38K. At 20% they would pay $7,600. An effective rate of 15.2%

Mitt: 200 million in income putting away the max $10K and the $7K individual deduction leaves him with $199,983,000 in taxable income and a $39,966,000 tax bill. An effective tax rate of 20%.

Mitt's payment would equal 27,000 individual A's and 5,000 individual B's.

Besides we could get rid of more than half the IRS and free up Federal courts for useful cases, like suing the States of Arizona and Florida.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Certainly if Romney is breaking any Federal Tax Laws he should be prosecuted to the full extent. If not then the tax code needs to be changed.

IRA-401K's etc. were all designed to promote tax free savings. If true, Mitt has taken it to a whole new level. While I don't think investment income should be taxed at the same rate income is, it shouldn't be tax free.

Look America has also purported itself as fair, where everyone is equal. Decide on a percentage and instill a flat tax with personal contributions to IRA/401K's capped at say $10K. No deductions. Married or not moot, investment income or not moot.

At a 20% flat tax with a contribution of 10% of salary allowed into a IRA/401K. The following scenarios would pan out:

Individual A: $22K in income 7K individual deduction (I think should be lower)
and $2.2K put into an IRA leaves a taxable income of $12.8K. At 20% individual A would pay $1,560 in taxes. An effective rate of 7%.

Individual B: $50K in income, putting away $5K, leaves a taxable income of $38K. At 20% they would pay $7,600. An effective rate of 15.2%

Mitt: 200 million in income putting away the max $10K and the $7K individual deduction leaves him with $199,983,000 in taxable income and a $39,966,000. An effective tax rate of 20%.

Mitt's payment would equal 27,000 individual A's and 5,000 individual B's.

Besides we could get rid of more than half the IRS and free up Federal courts for useful cases, like suing the States of Arizona and Florida.

401k's aren't tax free, they're tax deferred. ira's can be done either with after tax dollars, or tax deferred. but none of them are tax free.
and a flat tax would be a huge whammy on the lower income folks, and a huge break for upper income.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Certainly if Romney is breaking any Federal Tax Laws he should be prosecuted to the full extent. If not then the tax code needs to be changed.

IRA-401K's etc. were all designed to promote tax free savings. If true, Mitt has taken it to a whole new level. While I don't think investment income should be taxed at the same rate income is, it shouldn't be tax free.

Look America has also purported itself as fair, where everyone is equal. Decide on a percentage and instill a flat tax with personal contributions to IRA/401K's capped at say $10K. No deductions. Married or not moot, investment income or not moot.

At a 20% flat tax with a contribution of 10% of salary allocated into a IRA/401K. The following scenarios would pan out:

Individual A: $22K in income 7K individual deduction (I think should be lower)
and $2.2K put into an IRA leaves a taxable income of $12.8K. At 20% individual A would pay $1,560 in taxes. An effective rate of 7%.

Individual B: $50K in income, putting away $5K, leaves a taxable income of $38K. At 20% they would pay $7,600. An effective rate of 15.2%

Mitt: 200 million in income putting away the max $10K and the $7K individual deduction leaves him with $199,983,000 in taxable income and a $39,966,000. An effective tax rate of 20%.

Mitt's payment would equal 27,000 individual A's and 5,000 individual B's.

Besides we could get rid of more than half the IRS and free up Federal courts for useful cases, like suing the States of Arizona and Florida.

You used a lot of words to not answer the question How the **** does someone's IRA account get to 100 Million dollars given the limits currently set in place? Hey I want to know.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by jms62

You used a lot of words to not answer the question How the **** does someone's IRA account get to 100 Million dollars given the limits currently set in place? Hey I want to know.

I'm going to go out on a limb and predict Romney doesn't have close to a hundred million in a IRA.