Do you work for small business? There is a 75% chance you do, in all likelihood you either do business with, shop at, work for, sell to or otherwise are involved with small business. Many national fast food chains are a small business do to their franchise status, many video stores the same, your mom and pop grocery, corner store, druggist, local gas station etc, likely all small business.
However, one canidate says most small business makes less then $250,000 a year.
Really? Well what does the Small Business Administration say?
The US Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a "small business" according to its average annual receipts or the number of its employees.
Crop production of all types (Farmers) — $750,000
Animal production except for cattle & chicken/eggs — $750,000
Cattle feedlots — $2.5M
Chicken/egg production — $12.5M
Forestry & logging — $7M
Fishing — $4M (Deadliest Catch anyone?)
Irrigation, sewage, water supplies — $7M
Housing construction — $33.5M
Heavy and civil engineering construction — $33.5M
Dredging and cleanup — $20M
Concrete, framing, and other housing contractors — $14M (This would be me.)
Car dealers — $23-29M
RV, motorcycle, & boat dealers — $7M
Furniture, hardware, clothing & sporting good stores — $7M
Electronic stores — $9M
Supermarkets, gas stations & department stores — $27M
Pharmacies — $7M
Wow, all of that is over $250,000.00 and I'd say that 90% of the small business. I know many small business people making over $250,000.00 in gross receipts as filing a subchapter S (Personal income tax) and just because they make $250K doesn't make them rich as most of that money goes to hire people, pay business bill, buy inventory and and other overhead and one canidate wants to raise their taxes, even though many barely get by now, just to keep the doors open and provide jobs to those they've hired.
Anyway you slice it $250,000 is NOT a lot of money, think of any small business you know, think about the number of people they employ and then figure their collective salaries and you'll see that $250,000 doesn't go very far in the wonderful world of small business.
The majority of growth in this country comes from small business. The largest employer of people collectively is small business and those hardest hit in tight time is small business, but one guy want to raise there taxes and that's absolutely foolish.
Click here to see where the numbers come from. (http://www.patterico.com/2008/10/07/obamas-tax-plan-and-small-businesses/)
As a side note, I have a small business friend that has gone 2 months without pay in order to pay his employees first and not lay anyone off do to a slow down ... and he needs to be taxed more? Insane! Foolish, naive, and just flat out ignorant.
Good thing I didn't mention their name or I'd be labeled a racist.
Cheeze, I was interested until your final (unnecessary, histrionic) comment.
Quote from: Zapranoth on October 14, 2008, 02:26:16 AM
Cheeze, I was interested until your final (unnecessary, histrionic) comment.
Just stating facts far from histrionic, and that happens to be one of the facts. And while I could give you a laundry list of examples, that is a different topic.
I'd ask you see comments by John Lewis, Moreen Dowd, Harry Reid, Frank Rich, David Axelrod and so many more.
It is not a fact, it is an unnecessary comment and says far more about you as a person than if you had just said Obama.
Quote from: That One Tars Tarkas on October 14, 2008, 09:22:02 AM
It is not a fact, it is an unnecessary comment and says far more about you as a person than if you had just said Obama.
Did you bother to research it? No, I don't think you did, what does that say about you? This is off topic, however prove my FACTS are wrong.
Harry Reid (http://joakley.wordpress.com/2008/10/09/harry-reid-calls-radio-host-racist-for-questioning-about-obamas-advisor-franklin-raines/)
John Lewis (http://www.black-and-right.com/2008/10/11/lewis-a-lazy-media-and-their-race-cards/)
Frank Rich (http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/12/1686/84642)
Barney Frank and Moreen Dowd (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=28952#continueA)
There are a few, I doubt you'll read any of them, but I'll let the FACTS speak for themself.
Now back to the death of small business under the left.
Quote from: CheezeFlixz on October 13, 2008, 11:39:27 PM
Do you work for small business? There is a 75% chance you do, in all likelihood you either do business with, shop at, work for, sell to or otherwise are involved with small business. Many national fast food chains are a small business do to their franchise status, many video stores the same, your mom and pop grocery, corner store, druggist, local gas station etc, likely all small business.
However, one canidate says most small business makes less then $250,000 a year.
That's profits, no?
Quote
Really? Well what does the Small Business Administration say?
The US Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a "small business" according to its average annual receipts or the number of its employees.
Crop production of all types (Farmers) — $750,000
Animal production except for cattle & chicken/eggs — $750,000
Cattle feedlots — $2.5M
(etc.)
That's revenue, no?
A business with revenues of $4M and a profit margin of 4% is
making a profit of $160K per year.
Quote from: schmendrik on October 14, 2008, 10:11:55 AM
Quote from: CheezeFlixz on October 13, 2008, 11:39:27 PM
Do you work for small business? There is a 75% chance you do, in all likelihood you either do business with, shop at, work for, sell to or otherwise are involved with small business. Many national fast food chains are a small business do to their franchise status, many video stores the same, your mom and pop grocery, corner store, druggist, local gas station etc, likely all small business.
However, one canidate says most small business makes less then $250,000 a year.
That's profits, no?
Quote
Really? Well what does the Small Business Administration say?
The US Small Business Administration (SBA) defines a "small business" according to its average annual receipts or the number of its employees.
Crop production of all types (Farmers) — $750,000
Animal production except for cattle & chicken/eggs — $750,000
Cattle feedlots — $2.5M
(etc.)
That's revenue, no?
A business with revenues of $4M and a profit margin of 4% is
making a profit of $160K per year.
No NET is profit, GROSS is sales.
This plan is NOT the bottom line, it's the top line before deductions.
If I build and sale a house for $300,000.00 and I have a net profit after, building materials, labor, permits, sub contracts, real estate agents, etc of $10,000 I'll break the $250,000 threshold and be taxed accordingly. Now couple that with a purposed increase in capital gains my additional tax would go from the current $1500.00 to $3950.00 and the original $300,000 would dictate my year end bracket.
This is why it's a bad, bad plan.
Some like to call it "Spread the wealth." I call it socialism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CY4K23Y7Qas&feature=related
Obama's economic plan is so horrible it's really unbelievable IMO. People who label it as Socialism are correct. He is trying to tap into that lazy mentality that has crippled this nation in some areas where people don't want to work for anything and just want the government to give them everything.
McCain's plans has it's problems but I really don't understand how anyone can get behind Obama.
And as for people griping about Cheeseflix's last comment, there is a prevailing theme in this campaign that if you aren't voting for Obama than it's automatically because he's black. I have friends of every ethnicity and a few of them have said that to me believe it or not when I've mentioned that I'm not voting for Obama.
I'm white and most of them know that I have had 2 black girlfriends (very serious relationships I might add BTW) over the years, so I really don't think they should be lobbing that my direction. That offends me to no end.
I'm not voting for Obama because his economic plan is horrible beyond belief, that's why. He's a terrible candidate that IMO is just tapping into the lazy mindset that has crippled this nation.
And for the record I doubt I'll be voting for McCain either. I might just write myself in if I'm allowed to do so. That way I voted and people can't get on me for not expressing myself through my vote.
But just vote, and let yourself be heard.
Torgo, there's always Bob Barr. I usually vote Libertarian (even though I can't stand their head in the sand approach to foreign policy) just because I don't care for either major party candidate.
Haven't decided what route to take this year yet.
Can anyone point to anywhere that reliably shows the Obama was speaking of GROSS, as opposed to NET? Everything I saw said business that MAKE $250,000, the key word as I see it is MAKE. If you do $1 Million in sales and $950,000 in expendatures, you didn't MAKE $1 Million, you MADE $50,000.
Quote from: ghouck on October 14, 2008, 03:37:02 PM
Can anyone point to anywhere that reliably shows the Obama was speaking of GROSS, as opposed to NET? Everything I saw said business that MAKE $250,000, the key word as I see it is MAKE. If you do $1 Million in sales and $950,000 in expendatures, you didn't MAKE $1 Million, you MADE $50,000.
That is the key problem with his plan it changes faster than the weather, he's said 'gross' at one point, he's said 'make' at another point he have never said 'net' ... frankly I don't think he know the difference between net and gross.
His economic plan is a absolute disaster waiting to happen. The last person to raise tax during a economic down turn was Hubert Hoover and that got us the Great Depression.
McCain's economic plan as Torgo pointed out has it's flaws, this is why I wanted Romney ... government is a business and you need a businessman to run not a lifelong politician or a new age socialist.
But we had to go through 4 years of Carter to get to Reagan.
Quote from: CheezeFlixz on October 14, 2008, 05:15:58 PM
That is the key problem with his plan it changes faster than the weather, he's said 'gross' at one point, he's said 'make' at another point he have never said 'net' ... frankly I don't think he know the difference between net and gross.
So now you don't know? I've seen nothing that states 'gross'. .
Quote from: ghouck on October 14, 2008, 06:46:46 PM
So now you don't know? I've seen nothing that states 'gross'. .
Quote from: Say it ain't so Joe BidenIn an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," Biden said wealthier taxpayers would indeed pay more under the proposals of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Under his plan, people earning more than $250,000 a year would pay more in taxes while those earning less - the vast majority of American taxpayers - would receive a tax cut.
"We want to take money and put it back in the pocket of middle-class people," Biden said. Of those who would pay more, he said: "It's time to be patriotic ... time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut."
Earn is EARN and a small business filing a subchapter S EARNS what ever they make in SALES. SALES are GROSS. So yes I do know, stop spinning.
Honestly, now I'm confused. "Under his plan, people earning more than $250,000 a year would pay more in taxes while those earning less - the vast majority of American taxpayers - would receive a tax cut." speaks of personal earnings, and has nothing to do with SALES or mention of a small business, unless it is an individual that has a business and files as an individual. We're changing gears here, , and no, I'm not spinning anything. You're the one giving the double talk, You say "That is the key problem with his plan it changes faster than the weather, he's said 'gross' at one point, he's said 'make' at another point he have never said 'net'" in one post, and "So yes I do know" in your next post. I'm just trying to figure this out based on facts, and honestly, I've seen nothing that makes me believe he means GROSS. Obviously from the comments on the first link you provided, I'm not the only one that raises this question, without firm answer, but only individual interpretation.
Quote from: ghouck on October 14, 2008, 07:58:24 PM
Honestly, now I'm confused. "Under his plan, people earning more than $250,000 a year would pay more in taxes while those earning less - the vast majority of American taxpayers - would receive a tax cut." speaks of personal earnings, and has nothing to do with SALES or mention of a small business, unless it is an individual that has a business and files as an individual. We're changing gears here, , and no, I'm not spinning anything. You're the one giving the double talk, You say "That is the key problem with his plan it changes faster than the weather, he's said 'gross' at one point, he's said 'make' at another point he have never said 'net'" in one post, and "So yes I do know" in your next post. I'm just trying to figure this out based on facts, and honestly, I've seen nothing that makes me believe he means GROSS. Obviously from the comments on the first link you provided, I'm not the only one that raises this question, without firm answer, but only individual interpretation.
See the bold and and bingo, most small business file as a subchapter S which is a business filing as a individual. This can combine your income, your spouses income and your business income onto one filing.
What is a S Corp you may ask or may not ask?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_corporation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_corporation)
The short of it is the company does not pay the taxes, the owner(s) i.e. shareholders do, this is a LLC. A S Corp can have no more than 100 shareholders, most have 1 or 2 (i.e. Mom and Pop) therefore any money made by the business go on your personal 1040 and if filing jointly can get to $250K rather quickly on the top line,
It's get very complicated really fast and this is why you have a CPA, Obama clearly IMHO has not thought his plan through, he's just spouting off what he thinks people want to here. Well most of those people are cutting off their noses to spite their face as the majority of them likely work for small business.
I've read Obama's plan and it makes no sense at all, many question are unanswered, (i.e. NET/GROSS) ... I've learned when a politician don't say which of something, expect the worst. He plan has changed a number of times and his lastest hair brain idea is one of the worst, early withdraw of your 401K ... crazy I'm not going to go into everything wrong with this idea, but the short term market effect and long term personal effect would be a economical time bomb.
Think of it like this ... a bunch of poor money managers run out and cash out their 401K (their retirement) to pay off all their bills, buy a car, pay off a house whatever, spend it on booze. They hit retirement age, guess what they've got squat, nothing, nada ... do you think they are going to live off SSI? SSI is bankrupt now and with 1000's hitting retirement age everyday do you think that they will be enough SSI to support them all? What are we going to do put more people on the government rolls? More government housing, food stamps, welfare, who will pay for it? Who will have any money left to pay for it? This has got to be one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard of as the long term effects would be total economic devastation.
Jeez the more I think about this guys plan the more it concerns me, not just for me but everyone ... people please stop listening to the hype and fluff it's nothing more than socialism. A people dependent on their government is a people easier to control ... the people should control the government not the other way around.
Oh and you can not cut taxes on 95% of the people when 40% of them don't pay any in the first place.
Want to know who pays the taxes ...
http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6 (http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=6)
edit typo
Actually Senator Obama's "tax cuts" work out to more like a welfare check being given out, because of the fact that literally tens of millions of those who under his plan would receive this check, actually pay zero taxes to start with. Pay no taxes, get money from the government? Unearned money? Sounds like welfare if you ask me, and I'm not alone in thinking so:
http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/oct/13/obama-tax-cut-refunds-those-who-dont-pay/
For those who don't like clicking links, here's an excerpt:
"Barack Obama says he will give 95 percent of all American workers a tax cut but does not mention that his plan would send checks to tens of millions of tax filers who pay no personal income taxes - payments that critics say look "suspiciously like welfare."
Mr. Obama's campaign promise, which he has repeated in his speeches and in the presidential debates, stems from his "Making Work Pay" tax cut that will give a $500 refundable tax credit to every worker or $1,000 to each working couple. But because this provision in his economic-recovery plan is "refundable," a large number of middle- to lower-income workers who have no income-tax liability after taking tax credits and deductions the that Internal Revenue Service allows, will be given the equivalent of the tax cut in the form of direct payments from the U.S. Treasury - funded by higher-income taxpayers.
Because the IRS says that nearly 46 million tax filers - one-third of all filers - had no tax liability in 2006, there is the question of how millions of Americans can receive an income "tax cut" when they pay no taxes.
"It's got to raise alarm bells when you claim you are going to cut taxes for 95 percent of working families when more than 40 percent of them pay no income taxes," said Phil Kerpen, policy director at Americans for Prosperity, a grass-roots free-market advocacy group."
Okay, that's my contribution to this topic. Hope everyone has a wonderful day!
"Pay zero taxes to start with" is incorrect. Even if workers don't mail a check to the IRS on April 1, they pay income taxes all year. They're called withholding taxes, they're sent by the employer directly to the Department of they Treasury, and they are why people get tax refunds at the end of the year.
I'm not voting for Obama and I don't like what I can discern of his plan, but that article is misleading, to put it kindly.
I also think Cheeze's interpretation of Obama's plan as taxing gross income before deductions is highly unlikely, because that would be an unprecedented move and would have been much bigger news. I couldn't find the actual details of his tax plan, though, as opposed to summaries put out by one party or the other, so I can't really contradict him.
Quote from: Rev. Powell on October 15, 2008, 02:49:57 PM
I also think Cheeze's interpretation of Obama's plan as taxing gross income before deductions is highly unlikely, because that would be an unprecedented move and would have been much bigger news. I couldn't find the actual details of his tax plan, though, as opposed to summaries put out by one party or the other, so I can't really contradict him.
Exactly his plan is vague, very vague. Now understand I'm not talking about C Corp, but S Corp and as a S Corp Obama has not defined which line of the 1040 is taxable and if they don't tell you what line is taxable, odds are it's the line with the biggest number. Nonetheless he has a a really, really bad plan and every time I hear another part of it, it's gets worse ... he is clueless and yet people think he's the best choice for the economy ... excuse me while I get the duct tape.
"Obama says-" this-or "Obama plans-" that. None of it means nothing. Obama-or McCain-when in office-will do what congress alows them to do. Or not. It's the giant beind the scenes corporations that REALLY decide. And whoever owns the most of any given canidate,wins. My own paranoid world view. (Which MAY be RIGHT....or it isn't! :lookingup:)
Quote from: RCMerchant on October 15, 2008, 05:59:08 PM
"Obama says-" this-or "Obama plans-" that. None of it means nothing. Obama-or McCain-when in office-will do what congress alows them to do. Or not. It's the giant beind the scenes corporations that REALLY decide. And whoever owns the most of any given canidate,wins. My own paranoid world view. (Which MAY be RIGHT....or it isn't! :lookingup:)
RC if Obama wins and you have Pelosi and Reid heading the congress and
IF congress get a filibuster proof majority we are all so screwed, Obama will get any socialist plan he wants passed and it will take decades to recover. I'm not thrilled with McCain but at least he understand capitalism and how it works, currently throwing all this money at the problem is only making it worse.
Cheeze, even though I disagree with your interpretation of how the tax would be administered, I agree that small business need tax cuts, not tax hikes. That, and that most voters don't really grasp that it's small businesses that get hardest by these kinds of taxes. Most seem to imagine that the top marginal rate only effects shiftless billionaires who inherited all their money anyway.
And as you know you don't pay taxes on money you have like trust funds (i.e. Paris Hilton) I can't give you a clear interpretation of Obama plan, I just watched the debate and I still didn't hear a answer. He's playing his cards so close to the vest you can't see them and that is concerning. He talks and talks and never really says anything. It's all smoke and mirrors.
If he is elected and I'll admit it looks like it he will be, people are going to see just how bad this guy is and the gang of 3 (Pelosi, Reid, Obama) likely it will put me out of business or I'll have to seriously scale back which includes laying people off. Facts are I can not and America can not afford Obama.
What I want to know who is Obama going to tax when there are no more "rich" people to tax. I'm not rich, but I'm not poor if I was rich I'd move my money off shore like all the really truly rich people will do. I just don't understand why people don't get it. People think Obama is going to take money from people like their boss or company owner and give it to them, what are they going to do when their boss says, "I can't afford you anymore"?
In regards to NET vs GROSS.
Obama said "If your REVENUE is above $250,000 your tax will be higher."
REVENUE is GROSS the top line according to the IRS.
It might not apply to you, but it likely applies to who you or some one in your family works for. More taxes = less jobs.
I'm certain Obama misspoke. See this discussion:
http://ask.metafilter.com/104398/Obamas-Small-Business-Tax-Revenue-or-Profit
No one would propose taxing gross revenue. That would mean taxing people who actually lost money in a given year; no one would stand for it. A few states tried gross receipts taxes, and they were disasters. Even if Obama really proposed it, Congress would never go along with it. It would be re-election suicide.
Put your mind at ease, Cheeze! Everything's nifty in Obama's America!
Quote from: Rev. Powell on October 17, 2008, 03:59:47 PM
Put your mind at ease, Cheeze! Everything's nifty in Obama's America!
Way to many "probably", "maybe", "perhaps" and "I don't know." in that transcript. It seems to me that the Obama team doesn't even know what the Obama plan is and I don't say that jokingly.