Lavender Room
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [tyrod1]
[ In reply to ]
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.If a retailer cracks down on shoplifting, are they raising prices? I guess that's sort of technically true.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [tyrod1]
[ In reply to ]
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses. Apparently Fox encourages cheats like TFG.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [tyrod1]
[ In reply to ]
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.Gawd, how stupid. Enforcing tax law on cheats is not a tax increase, but the simple minded MAGA crowd will still spew it.
Tyler, Ted Cruz, and Marjorie Taylor Greene were also pushing the 87,000 new agents lie even though it has been proven false.
https://apnews.com/...3a04584371843234cab7
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [Thom]
[ In reply to ]
Thom wrote:
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.If a retailer cracks down on shoplifting, are they raising prices? I guess that's sort of technically true.
The inverse is actually true since lower COGS.
However depending on the jurisdiction shoplifting isn't prosecuted
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [windywave]
[ In reply to ]
windywave wrote:
Thom wrote:
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.If a retailer cracks down on shoplifting, are they raising prices? I guess that's sort of technically true.
The inverse is actually true since lower COGS.
However depending on the jurisdiction shoplifting isn't prosecuted
?? Shoplifting lowers revenue not COGS.
"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
Don’t confuse the fellow.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [tyrod1]
[ In reply to ]
It's not unlike republicans claiming democrats are cutting medicare because negotiating drug prices will reduce costs. It's been know for years that increasing the IRS budget will be a net $ win but the IRS is one more agency republicans want to eliminate.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
Bretom wrote:
windywave wrote:
Thom wrote:
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.If a retailer cracks down on shoplifting, are they raising prices? I guess that's sort of technically true.
The inverse is actually true since lower COGS.
However depending on the jurisdiction shoplifting isn't prosecuted
?? Shoplifting lowers revenue not COGS.
Isn't losses part of COGS? Shoplifting is no different than breakage?
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [windywave]
[ In reply to ]
windywave wrote:
Bretom wrote:
windywave wrote:
Thom wrote:
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.If a retailer cracks down on shoplifting, are they raising prices? I guess that's sort of technically true.
The inverse is actually true since lower COGS.
However depending on the jurisdiction shoplifting isn't prosecuted
?? Shoplifting lowers revenue not COGS.
Isn't losses part of COGS? Shoplifting is no different than breakage?
When I said, "prices", I was referring to what the consumer is paying for the product. If they buy it instead of steal it, the price they pay has been raised.
It's a stupid argument, but technically true.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [Thom]
[ In reply to ]
Try that before a judge:)
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [windywave]
[ In reply to ]
windywave wrote:
Bretom wrote:
windywave wrote:
Thom wrote:
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.If a retailer cracks down on shoplifting, are they raising prices? I guess that's sort of technically true.
The inverse is actually true since lower COGS.
However depending on the jurisdiction shoplifting isn't prosecuted
?? Shoplifting lowers revenue not COGS.
Isn't losses part of COGS? Shoplifting is no different than breakage?
Unfortunately, upon further review, I think you're half-right. At the risk of embarrassing myself twice I think it actually does go to COGS but the impact depends on whether you choose to take it off beginning or ending inventory - the former = lower COGS, the latter = higher COGS.
"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [Bretom]
[ In reply to ]
Bretom wrote:
windywave wrote:
Bretom wrote:
windywave wrote:
Thom wrote:
tyrod1 wrote:
Claim that new bill violates pledge not to raise taxes on folks making less than 400k. CBO says new agents will get $20billion out of tax cheats in the less than $400k class. What a bunch of dumarses.If a retailer cracks down on shoplifting, are they raising prices? I guess that's sort of technically true.
The inverse is actually true since lower COGS.
However depending on the jurisdiction shoplifting isn't prosecuted
?? Shoplifting lowers revenue not COGS.
Isn't losses part of COGS? Shoplifting is no different than breakage?
Unfortunately, upon further review, I think you're half-right. At the risk of embarrassing myself twice I think it actually does go to COGS but the impact depends on whether you choose to take it off beginning or ending inventory - the former = lower COGS, the latter = higher COGS.
I see that as a win for everybody
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [schroeder]
[ In reply to ]
schroeder wrote:
It's not unlike republicans claiming democrats are cutting medicare because negotiating drug prices will reduce costs. It's been know for years that increasing the IRS budget will be a net $ win but the IRS is one more agency republicans want to eliminate.So the powerful can reap that much more. You think those folks storming the Capitol were in the high income tax brackets?
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [tyrod1]
[ In reply to ]
The vast majority of the people storming the capital were people with wheels on their house.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [tyrod1]
[ In reply to ]
tyrod1 wrote:
Try that before a judge:)Shoplifting is alternative buying.
I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [tyrod1]
[ In reply to ]
Yeah doubling the number of agents after having to walk back this " The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) removed the requirement that special-agent applicants carry firearms and "be willing to use deadly force" from a job listing." The history of political targeting. The cost and disruption to a business and the fear of targeting that can destroy a business or organization that are working on the margins month to month. Nothing to be to be considered about.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [NormM]
[ In reply to ]
NormM wrote:
Yeah doubling the number of agents after having to walk back this " The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) removed the requirement that special-agent applicants carry firearms and "be willing to use deadly force" from a job listing." The history of political targeting. The cost and disruption to a business and the fear of targeting that can destroy a business or organization that are working on the margins month to month. Nothing to be to be considered about.I'm confused by your post. Removing the requirement for the tax man to be prepared to kill someone is a bad thing and is also somehow related to the targeted destruction of struggling businesses? Said destruction in an unspecified manner, since businesses that are operating within the law, even if audited, don't really have anything to worry about. Unless you're suggesting that they're gonna start shutting down law abiding businesses?
Help me out here.
ETA I purposefully glossed over the first part but in the interest of not perpetuating myths I'll just leave this here.
https://time.com/...nts-factcheck-biden/
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [NormM]
[ In reply to ]
Unfortunately tax recording is pain in arse. Hope they carve out some money for ombudsman types to prevent political or overly punitive examination of low to moderate income taxpayers, corporate or individual. Go after big money tax cheats. Wisselberg, trumps accountant, should be in jail for instance. He knew he was getting compensation not taxed.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [NormM]
[ In reply to ]
NormM wrote:
Yeah doubling the number of agentsThis is a lie
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [Nutella]
[ In reply to ]
Nutella wrote:
NormM wrote:
Yeah doubling the number of agentsThis is a lie
It is. But what if it wasn't? Are we supposed to allow people to cheat on their taxes while honest people pony up? I'm having a real hard time understanding this one.
And this is example #4957 of showing people how the whole basis for their outrage and beliefs is a lie and yet they continue with the outrage and believing the same things. Drives me nuts. (maybe I should put this in the how angry do you get thread)
I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [j p o]
[ In reply to ]
j p o wrote:
Nutella wrote:
NormM wrote:
Yeah doubling the number of agentsThis is a lie
It is. But what if it wasn't? Are we supposed to allow people to cheat on their taxes while honest people pony up? I'm having a real hard time understanding this one.
And this is example #4957 of showing people how the whole basis for their outrage and beliefs is a lie and yet they continue with the outrage and believing the same things. Drives me nuts. (maybe I should put this in the how angry do you get thread)
They literally want to defund law enforcement. I'm sure this is somehow different than what they've been bitching about for 2 years.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [j p o]
[ In reply to ]
Low to moderate income Repubs are dumarses to follow Repubs policy, where their bosses and investors passively earn larger rewards. Add carried interest, what a scam. How that female for Arizona justiesv5his is hard to believe. Guess a bunch of retirees will boot her.
Re: Fox hot to trot on new IRS agents [Thom]
[ In reply to ]
Thom wrote:
j p o wrote:
Nutella wrote:
NormM wrote:
Yeah doubling the number of agentsThis is a lie
It is. But what if it wasn't? Are we supposed to allow people to cheat on their taxes while honest people pony up? I'm having a real hard time understanding this one.
And this is example #4957 of showing people how the whole basis for their outrage and beliefs is a lie and yet they continue with the outrage and believing the same things. Drives me nuts. (maybe I should put this in the how angry do you get thread)
They literally want to defund law enforcement. I'm sure this is somehow different than what they've been bitching about for 2 years.
Yup.
Of course the folks who spent the last couple of years spewing the lie that the DNC wants to "Defund the police!" are silent today. They will be silent tomorrow. They will never question the cult.
southpaw wrote:
NormM wrote:
Yeah doubling the number of agents after having to walk back this " The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) removed the requirement that special-agent applicants carry firearms and "be willing to use deadly force" from a job listing." The history of political targeting. The cost and disruption to a business and the fear of targeting that can destroy a business or organization that are working on the margins month to month. Nothing to be to be considered about.I'm confused by your post. Removing the requirement for the tax man to be prepared to kill someone is a bad thing and is also somehow related to the targeted destruction of struggling businesses? Said destruction in an unspecified manner, since businesses that are operating within the law, even if audited, don't really have anything to worry about. Unless you're suggesting that they're gonna start shutting down law abiding businesses?
Help me out here.
ETA I purposefully glossed over the first part but in the interest of not perpetuating myths I'll just leave this here.
https://time.com/...nts-factcheck-biden/
Are you a small business owner? Do you have any understanding of the cost and time of going through an audit if you are not a W2 kinda guy, and the threat of the State and burying you with the power to crush you?