It is impossible to escape the constant talk about extending the Bush Tax cuts. On the Income side, the tax increases are going to be rather significant. On the Estate Tax side they may be even higher. I never thought I would be praising George Steinbrenner but when you look at the potential consequences to his heirs, he timed his death rather well. By dying July 13th, it is estimated he saved his family between $350,000,000 and $500,000,000 in Estate Taxes. Actually prompting a couple of members of Congress to call for re-imposing what some of us call the death tax rates at last year’s rate for all of this year. Simply because they think that this missing money is the government’s share of the deceased wealth.
In Ohio the Republican candidate for Lt. Governor was chided in the press for admitting that when she was a practicing CPA, she advised wealthy clients to move to Florida, a state without an Income tax or a Death tax. Of course, the press ignored the fact that she was simply doing what she was being paid to do, provide advice on how to legally save taxes.
Now we hear from the President and some members of Congress that continuing the tax rates which we presently have would cost too much. But don’t they actually mean that the Federal Government will simply collect less Revenue? I guess they must be speaking of the opportunity cost to the Federal Government. I mean if balancing the budget is such a big deal just cut spending, its what you and I do when our revenue falls.
I do have a suggestion that should allow both sides of this debate to do what is right for the American people. For the one side extending the current rates for top earners isn’t fair to the lower earners. In other words the successful have a responsibility to bail out those less successful. On the other side we hear that you will hurt small companies which have chosen to be taxed at their owners personal Income Tax rates rather than Corporate Income Tax rates. A former client and I last year went through an analysis of how many people they would have to lay off as a result of the potentially higher taxes since they were a Partnership and taxed at the partners personal Income Tax rates.
So here is my compromise, extend the tax cuts for all but the highest bracket, BUT EXEMPT ALL INCOME from Schedule C, E page 2, and F from the higher brackets. This would protect those small businesses that transfer their income to their owner’s tax returns through Schedule C (sole proprietors), Schedule E page 2 (Sub-S Corporations & Partnerships) and Schedule F (Farmers).
© Strategic Financial Leadership, Inc. 2010
Must Be Present to Win.
-
One observation that I make while attending networking events throughout
the week is that half the battle is just showing up. Many business owners
or sales...
13 years ago