Quantcast
Opinion

Letters: Dismantle IRS

Comments

Return To Article
  • cpafred SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    May 24, 2013 10:11 a.m.

    @ UltraBob

    "We are doomed by our inability to talk the same language. You speak the language of Sales Tax and I am trying to speak Income tax."

    Not so UltraBob. When you suggest that a business should be "required to pay an amount equal to the flat rate on every outgoing payment", you are not talking about an INCOME tax. I have been reading your exchanges on this and other boards regarding taxes, and I believe the real problem here is, although you seem to be really good person, you just do not know what you're talking about in this area. It is the same as if I were to continually suggest on these boards that we can cure cancer by replacing everyone's blood with ketchup. Eventually a medical doctor (with some training and medical knowledge) is going to chime in and try to correct me (as Taxman tried to do on this board). And he and I probably will be speaking different medical "languages", but only because I don't know what I'm talking about.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    May 24, 2013 9:28 a.m.

    This whole IRS investigations begs one question - why?

    Why were converstive groups targeted more than liberal groups?

    I can only assume their motives.

    Conservative groups tend to hate all dealings with the Government, have more extreme views, want to wreck havoc on the enviroment, put business ahead of people, rob and plunder other coutries for cheaper resources, and threaten inserrection and the over-throw America.

    Liberal groups tend to want cleaner water and air, stop devestation of forests and federal lands for oil, want to get out of foreign countries, and push for Healthcare and equal rights and the general welfare of ALL citizens.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 24, 2013 9:15 a.m.

    Taxman.

    We are doomed by our inability to talk the same language. You speak the language of Sales Tax and I am trying to speak Income tax.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    May 24, 2013 7:56 a.m.

    For a national sales tax t be fair, one of he things that would have to happen first is to ensure companies are not allowed to pay corporate executives hundreds of times more than the common workers. So long as this is the case, a progressive income tax is right and proper.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    May 23, 2013 6:42 p.m.

    re:MikeRichards
    cont'd

    #5 I do not think nor did I condone wrongdoing. I believe Lois Lerner should be relieved of her duties at the IRS. If there were employees who disregarded instruction by their superiors, they should go too. This area of the tax code needs work and direction from Treasury, and/or changes by Congress.

    #6 As has been said the items which land on any Pres. desk are those which no one else can handle. Obama's staff made the calculation that interference in an IG investigation would by Obama would not be appropriate AT THAT TIME.

    #7 Every corporation--including large churches--rely on layers of people to carry out various functions. Sometimes things go awry. More often than not the "problems" get taken care of--or ignored--by those on lower levels and those at the top are unaware. Should we start holding pres. responsible for all the foibles of those many layers below?--or responsible for divisions of companies that don't even report to the president?

    What matters is, now that the investigation is complete and Pres. Obama is aware of what happened, what actions he takes.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    May 23, 2013 6:16 p.m.

    re:MikeRichards
    I realize this is going to be a futile exercise but here goes:

    You could search the internet "IRS Inspector General Report" and read the report yourself.

    #1 Sometime late in 2010, IRS employees started using an "expanded" criteria which resulted in more scrutiny of conservative applications. The IG report stated: "Specifically, only first-line management approved references to the Tea Party in the BOLO listing criteria before it was implemented. As a result, inappropriate criteria remained in place for more than 18 months." In June 2011, the "Director" became aware of the expanded criteria and directed the criteria to be changed. In Jan. 2012 the employees reverted back to the "expanded" criteria. When discovered again, the Director required any BOLO changes to be approved at the executive level.

    #2 The Inspector General of the Treasury launched an investigation in June-July 2012 and notified the Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, R-Darrell Issa with periodic updates.

    #3 WH staff became aware of the IRS investigation in 4/2013 and didn't pass the information to Obama. The IG investigation was not completed and released until 5/14/2013.

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    May 23, 2013 5:10 p.m.

    @UltraBob

    I guess the more important questions, UltraBob, are why would any foreign buyer purchase a US built airplane (from Boeing, Lockheed etc.) if it is going to cost so much more than the same plane sold by a foreign vendor, and how are you going to force foreign buyers (with no U.S presence) to collect and remit the tax to the United States when they buy form U.S. companies?

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    May 23, 2013 5:03 p.m.

    @ UltraBob

    Congratulations, you have just put Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and every other US manufacturer out of business by making foreign manufactured goods cheaper than U.S. manufactured goods (by the amount of the flat tax). In addition, you have destroyed the U.S. commercial banking business by taxing (and thereby eliminating) overnight deposits from U.S. corporations.

    This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard.

    So you're saying, if I (and a group of investors) decide to start an small airline and buy a few $1 billion airplanes from Boeing, we have to pay a tax totaling $450 million (assuming a 15% tax rate) before we've even sold our first ticket (but if we bought the same planes from Airbus we would pay zero)? Brilliant!

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    May 23, 2013 5:02 p.m.

    Truthseeker,

    If what you say is true, then that should seal Obama's fate. Why did the Administration NOT correct errors caused by the I.R.S. when it knew about since at least July 2012?

    Obama claimed that he knew nothing about the I.R.S. violating the law, but you said that Darrell Issa knew about the abuse since July 2012. Are you telling us that Republicans were privy to I.R.S. abuses and that Democrats knew nothing about those abuses? Are you telling us that Darrell Issa was the only person in America who knew about that abuse? Are you telling us that no one inside the I.R.S. knew that the I.R.S. was actively using its power against Republicans? Are you telling us that using the acing director taking the 5th Amendment against prosecution was justification for abusing the rights of Americans?

    What you said shows that Obama had better resign rather than face impeachment.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    May 23, 2013 3:14 p.m.

    I have a better idea...

    Dismantle the GOP.

    They haven't had much interest in actually governing for at least a decade now. Their party is already headed to the junk heap. Lets help them, shall we?

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 23, 2013 3:00 p.m.

    If you buy an investment from a bank the bank doesn’t sit on that money. It is paid out to others as wages, dividends, return on investments, etc. Your business would pay the flat rate on the money you give the bank. The bank would pay the flat rate on their payouts.

    When you “lay down a bid” you are buying something called a “right”, your business would pay the flat rate on the money you pay out. We assume that the right has the value that you pay for it. If your bid money is returned to you is of no consequence to your business as income to the business is not taxed. If you purchase the property your business would pay the flat rate on the purchase price minus the bid money.

    If you buy an airplane from an American business, your business would pay the flat rate on the amount paid. There is no tax if purchased from a foreign business, you are free to buy and sell in the foreign world as you please. If you sell the airplane, the purchaser must pay the flat rate, because you are an American business.

  • HS Fan Salt Lake City, UT
    May 23, 2013 2:05 p.m.

    Ahh, conservatives smell an opening and another chance to shift more capital to the weathly.

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    May 23, 2013 1:58 p.m.

    Nice to see you back in the funny pages, Frank.

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    May 23, 2013 12:56 p.m.

    @ UltraBob
    "Every penny of outgoing money from a business is income to somebody." This is patently false. If I transfer money to a bank as a temporary investment of my working capital, the money transferred to the bank is not income to anybody. If I lay down a bid (say $1 million) on the purchase of a property, my deposit is not income to anybody (because if I am not the winning bidder my money will be refunded). You would need a complicated system of rules to prevent abuses and unintended consequences resulting from this type of tax system.

    Let's say I buy one airplane for $1 billion from Airbus (taking delivery in France) and your flat tax rate is 15%. Who ultimately incurs the $150 million in flat tax and why should anyone pay $150 million in tax when nobody is earning $150 million profit on the plane? What if I buy 10 planes? This type of tax system punishes capital transactions and this one reason is why we don't see it in the world.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 23, 2013 10:44 a.m.

    The proposal for a flat tax on every sort of income without exception and without deduction in the best way to make support for the government fair and honest. And easy to collect.

    Every penny of outgoing money from a business is income to somebody. If the business was required to pay an amount equal to the flat rate on every outgoing payment, then everyone is paying, the owner, the supplier, the employee, and even the foreign worker and owner no matter where they are.

    No more individual tax returns.

    No more tax year. The tax is paid to the government at the same time as paid to the receiver.

    No more taxes on business income retained. Only the outgoing money is taxed.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 23, 2013 10:32 a.m.

    The retail sales tax is a terrible way to finance government.

    It is not equally applied to products. It is applied to the retail price paid for the product. Retail prices can vary greatly in the same town. The alternative to allowing them to vary is called price fixing.

    It is not applied to all consumption. Not to business, not to charity, not to used products, not to most services, not to investments, not to speculation, not to capital gains, not to inheritances, not to foreign products.

    Collecting the tax adds cost to the product and not all the tax collected is remitted to the government.

    Unscrupulous people use sales tax revenue to bribe government employees by promises of relocation of the business or residence.

    There are probably even more and better reasons to not use Sales Tax for government support.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    May 23, 2013 8:47 a.m.

    Dismantle to GOP.

    They have had enough conspiracies and bad ideas to fill many lifetimes. Dismantle them. It's not like they are proposing anything anyway. They are merely just obstructing governing to make things hard for the President.

  • The Taxman Los Angeles, CA
    May 23, 2013 8:12 a.m.

    A national sales tax alone will not raise enough revenue unless the rate is very high (say 40%-ish). This is why most countries in the world have both an income tax and a consumption tax (like a VAT or GST).

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    May 23, 2013 8:11 a.m.

    "This is not the time for "knee-jerk" reactions to the I.R.S. scandal. Before taking drastic measures, we must first demand full accountablity of those in the I.R.S. who have abused citizens of the United States." Agreed. We probably disagree however in that it seems pretty clear by now what top officials knew and when. However, while it appears even amongst many Republicans that these officials didn't necessarily break the law they certainly committed malfeasance in their jobs and should be held accountable. What we don't know is who at the operational or ground level started this. BTW, a number of liberal groups came under the same scrutiny as the conservative groups. The other telling feature here is that none of the major conservative or liberal players were targeted. So if it was a political tactic instigated from the top of the administration it certainly didn't match the political skills they demonstrated elsewhere in winning two general elections against all odds.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    May 23, 2013 8:09 a.m.

    This area of the tax code is long overdue for overhaul. The law states 501(c)(4) must EXCLUSIVELY be involved social welfare activites. But since the 1950's the Treasury regulations re-interpreted "exclusive" to mean "primarily" which has come to mean up to 49.9% of activity conducted by 501(c) (4) can be political. The Citizens United decision has dramatically increased the use of this statute for political means. The Citizens United decision stated "the Government may regulate corporate political speech through disclaimer and disclosure requirements," however 501 (c) (4)s have provided a curtain of secrecy to the public knowing the sources supporting various political agendas. Utahns and Conservatives may see no problem with keeping large donors secret-- until/unless a hotly contested measure within UT grabs national attention and large influxes of ads etc come flowing from outside UT.

    The campaign finance system in the U.S. is eroding the public's faith and trust in elections. At a minimum, disclosure should be required of those injecting large amts into campaigns.

    Re:MikeRichards

    You do realize that R-Darrell Issa has known about and been in contact with the investigators since July 2012.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    May 23, 2013 7:59 a.m.

    Yeah, dismantle government! That's the real (and really simplistic) answer! Why not just work constantly for honest and even handed government?

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    May 23, 2013 7:08 a.m.

    I suppose we should 'dismantle';
    the Military for their scandals,
    Congress [including Republicans] for their scandals,
    Utah State AG John Swallow for his scandal,
    etc., etc.

    The IRS needs to be tweeked, and the problems fixed -- not dismantled.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    May 23, 2013 7:01 a.m.

    This is not the time for "knee-jerk" reactions to the I.R.S. scandal. Before taking drastic measures, we must first demand full accountablity of those in the I.R.S. who have abused citizens of the United States. We must demand full accountability of the administration that allowed those abuses to continue for more than a year. We must prosecute those who use the I.R.S. for political purposes.

    After all who have participated in the I.R.S. scandal have been prosecuted, then we should look at the tax system and change it so that our economy can grow.

    I agree with Frank that we need a flat tax. Whether that flat tax is levied via a national sales tax or whether it is levied as a percentage of income doesn't matter to me, but, I would prefer a national sales tax because that would encourage saving money instead of spending money. Money in a savlngs account helps the economy grow when the bank lends that money to grow businesses.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    May 23, 2013 3:17 a.m.

    Sales tax? Yeah, give the rich tax cuts while increasing taxes on the poor and middle class. That'll help us...

    Oh, and by the way... someones' gotta collect that sales tax... and this changes absolutely nothing with regards to the current situation anyway since switching from income tax to sales tax doesnt stop the notion of tax exempt groups from existing.

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    May 23, 2013 12:17 a.m.

    "No longer will there be bitter disputes between the so-called one percent and the rest of us."

    A national sales tax replacing income taxes would be a huge tax increase for most Americans, and a huge cut for the 1%.