Is there something they won't tax?

Rob Lister said:
How does this differ from a sales tax? In effect, it is a tax on gross receipts. It's just passed off to the customer overly rather than covertly.
Click to expand...
It sounds to me like he wants to tax services, which currently are exempt from sales taxes in Illinois.

And Illinois, btw, already has very high sales taxes. 9% in Cook County.
 
clarsct said:
http://www.pjstar.com/stories/021807/DOU_BCDIQ7UM.046.php

Our state is, apparently, rumored to do a gross receipt tax. Yet another tax on businesses. This seems like taxing abusiness twice in its income, unless I am missing something.

Fair or unfair?
Click to expand...
Yes.

They have not begun to tax coitus yet, though they likely will if prostitution is legalized.

Thus far, no in(fasterbabyohmigodImGonna)come tax, just income tax. 'Tis easier for a camel to hump the eye of a needle . . .

DR
 
Michael Redman said:
Texas also taxes business property. I had to go down to the assessor's office twice to argue that my office furniture and equipment didn't appreciate, just because the real estate it was located in did.
Click to expand...

As a property owner I hate Real Estate tax ... no, not in principle -- how it's established. The amount of money I paid for my home (including the lot) should be the value the tax is based, not on how much it would sell for. If I sell it, or will it away, then the property tax on the new owner can be assessed accordingly. Of course, if I make major improvements (add a level, expand the square footage, put in a pool, etc.) that's a different issue. It's absolutely ridiculous to expect people with established homes to cough up huge increases in property taxes just because a development becomes more desirable to buyers. You want to raise the taxable rates, fine -- just don't reassess my home for double and raise the rates!
 
Last edited:
Just thinking said:
As a property owner I hate Real Estate tax ... no, not in principle -- how it's established. The amount of money I paid for my home (including the lot) should be the value the tax is based, not on how much it would sell for.
Click to expand...
Well, that's the dilemma of property tax. They're taxing wealth, not cash flow. Your property value goes up, your worth goes up, and therefore your tax.

If you're going to tax assets, it isn't fair to tax the young couple that just bought a $200,000 house at 10 times the rate the old folks next door pay, just because they bought their house for $20,000 many years ago. If property tax is fair, reassessing and increasing the tax as values go up is fair.

I would be happy to see property tax abolished altogether, replaced with taxation of realization events (income tax, capital gains, inheritance/gift tax, etc.) Personally, I would treat all these sources of income as identical, and get rid of almost all exemptions and deductions. I would also exempt business from taxation completely, putting more taxable income into the hands of individual owners and employees, while freeing up business to make better long-term financial plans.
 
Michael Redman said:
Well, that's the dilemma of property tax. They're taxing wealth, not cash flow. Your property value goes up, your worth goes up, and therefore your tax.
Click to expand...

There are a good many things that increase in value (wealth) that do not get taxed -- unless of course you sell them for a gain. Some examples are jewelry and gems, precious metals, rare coins, some cars, collectible items, stocks (which in many cases can far exceed the value of most homes) -- none of these are taxed until a gain (profit) is realized. Why should a house be any different? Living in a home does not increase my net gain (income) -- selling it does.

If you're going to tax assets, it isn't fair to tax the young couple that just bought a $200,000 house at 10 times the rate the old folks next door pay, just because they bought their house for $20,000 many years ago. If property tax is fair, reassessing and increasing the tax as values go up is fair.
Click to expand...

Just a moment, there. It is perfectly fair to tax the young couple more -- they paid more. You seem to have no issue with them paying $200,000 for a house that originally sold for $20,000 -- so why not tax them on what they paid? ... that's how some other taxes work. Go and buy an item for 50% of what your neighbor paid, and guess what -- you pay 50% of the sales tax he did. Plus, as I have mentioned above, I have little issue with raising the tax rates when needed -- but don't double whammy me with an increase in assessed value and a higher rate -- many folks (especially in New Jersey) just can't take it. Besides, there are always people buying and selling homes -- a good fraction are lived in by folks that paid close to current selling rates.

I would be happy to see property tax abolished altogether, replaced with taxation of realization events (income tax, capital gains, inheritance/gift tax, etc.) Personally, I would treat all these sources of income as identical, and get rid of almost all exemptions and deductions. I would also exempt business from taxation completely, putting more taxable income into the hands of individual owners and employees, while freeing up business to make better long-term financial plans.
Click to expand...

I pretty much am in full agreement with your last paragraph.
 
Just thinking said:
Just a moment, there. It is perfectly fair to tax the young couple more -- they paid more. You seem to have no issue with them paying $200,000 for a house that originally sold for $20,000 -- so why not tax them on what they paid? ... that's how some other taxes work. Go and buy an item for 50% of what your neighbor paid, and guess what -- you pay 50% of the sales tax he did. Plus, as I have mentioned above, I have little issue with raising the tax rates when needed -- but don't double whammy me with an increase in assessed value and a higher rate -- many folks (especially in New Jersey) just can't take it. Besides, there are always people buying and selling homes -- a good fraction are lived in by folks that paid close to current selling rates.
Click to expand...

Why does it make sense to tax a house an annual rate based on what the current owner paid for it instead of its value? If it was a one time sales tax, it would make sense, but as an anual tax I think it makes more sense to tax on current market value.
 
The point of property tax is to tax a held asset, not income. If you are going to tax held assets, it is only fair to tax everyone at the same rate. That's why I think we shouldn't tax property. You're sort of saying the same thing, but if we base property tax on purchase price, then it really isn't a property tax, but a sales tax (that you keep paying over and over). That ignores the purpose of property tax, which is to tax wealth held, not income gained. And, yes, it is double taxation.

We do not tax the value of jewels, coins, etc. We tax the income realized by a sale for profit. The tax is based on the amount of profit, the actual value of the object is irrelevant.
 
Darth Rotor said:
Yes.

They have not begun to tax coitus yet, though they likely will if prostitution is legalized.

Thus far, no in(fasterbabyohmigodImGonna)come tax, just income tax. 'Tis easier for a camel to hump the eye of a needle . . .

DR
Click to expand...

If they structure it as an income tax and and outgo tax, there might be an epidemic of premature ejaculation.

IXP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom