[Rhodes22-list] 2007 Tax Return

[Hank]

Brad, et al.

I have to say that I would most definitely vote against your plan as it
would cost me a lot of money.  I am not wealthy by most standards and would
probably be considered in the upper middle class.  Living in DC where
housing is exorbitantly expensive, I have a big mortgage, 2 kids and I
attend college.  With the current tax laws, I pay about 6-8% of my income as
Fed Tax and another 2-3% as state.  I don't have any tax shelters or
anything else, but your proposal would more than double my taxes.  No
thanks, not interested.

Hank

On 5/26/06, brad haslett <flybrad at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Stan,
>
> We are in agreement.  The devil is in the details.
> You are correct on corporate income taxes, companies
> pass taxes on to consumers.  Here's how we, to quote
> you, "tax the hell out of the rich".  We have a flat
> income tax rate on all income, say about 17%.  We
> eliminate that sacred cow, the home interest
> deduction, and other things like tax-free bonds.  The
> rich won't be subsidized by the taxpayers to live in
> their McMansions or shelter income with muni-bonds.
> In the end, the distribution will be about the same -
> 20% of the taxpayers (the so-called rich) will pay
> about 80% of the tax burden.  Selling this idea to
> those whose real goal is income re-distribution is
> another matter.
>
> Brad
>
> --- stan <stan at rhodes22.com> wrote:
>
> > Ah, we are in agreement.  There should be no taxes
> > on corporations, no toll
> > roads, no sales taxes, no phone taxes etc. and etc.,
> > not even on cigarettes
> > or playing cards.  Only an income tax, nothing else
> > - and there we should
> > tax the hell out of the rich.  The bureaucratic
> > savings from not having all
> > those other tax collecting departments would make
> > the income tax increase,
> > needed to make up for the short fall (if any),
> > small.
> >
> > Join the EC party.
> >
> > ss
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "brad haslett" <flybrad at yahoo.com>
> > To: <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
> > Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 12:13 AM
> > Subject: [Rhodes22-list] 2007 Tax Return
> >
> >
> > > Good news folks.  The IRS threw in the towel on
> > the 3%
> > > Federal excise tax on long distance calls.  This
> > tax
> > > was started in 1898 during the Spanish-American
> > war as
> > > a "luxury tax" because only rich people had
> > > telephones.  Think about this the next time you
> > hear
> > > the the "tax the rich" trumpet blow. It took what,
> > a
> > > 108 years to correct this? Here's the US Treasury
> > link
> > > and the IRS and their press releases:
> > >
> > > http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js4287.htm
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=157706,00.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > May 25, 2006
> > > js-4287
> > >
> > > Treasury Announces End to Long-Distance Telephone
> > > Excise Tax
> > >
> > > WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Treasury Department
> > today
> > > announced it is conceding the legal dispute over
> > the
> > > federal excise tax on long-distance telephone
> > service.
> > > The Department of Justice will no longer pursue
> > > litigation and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
> > will
> > > issue refunds of tax on long-distance service for
> > the
> > > past three years. Taxpayers will be able to apply
> > for
> > > refunds on their 2006 tax forms, to be filed in
> > 2007.
> > >
> > > Treasury Secretary John Snow states, "Today is a
> > good
> > > day for American taxpayers; it marks the beginning
> > of
> > > the end of an outdated, antiquated tax that has
> > > survived a century beyond its original purpose,
> > and by
> > > now should have been ancient history.
> > >
> > > "The Federal Appeals courts have spoken across the
> > > board.  It's time to `disconnect' this tax and put
> > it
> > > on the permanent `do not call' list.
> > >
> > > "In addition to ending the litigation, I would
> > like
> > > to call on Congress to terminate the remainder of
> > this
> > > antique tax by repealing the excise tax on local
> > > service as well."
> > >
> > > Key Facts Regarding Tax Refunds:
> > >
> > >  No immediate action is required by taxpayers.
> > > Refunds will be a part of 2006 tax returns filed
> > in
> > > 2007.
> > > Refund claims will cover all excise tax paid on
> > > long-distance service over the last three years
> > (time
> > > allowed given statute of limitations). Interest
> > will
> > > be paid on refunds.
> > > The IRS is working on a simplified method for
> > > individuals to use to claim a refund on their 2006
> > tax
> > > returns.
> > > Refunds will not include tax paid on local
> > telephone
> > > service, which was not involved in the litigation.
> > > Originally established in 1898 as a "luxury" tax
> > on
> > > wealthy Americans who owned telephones, the
> > federal
> > > excise tax on telephone calls is not compatible
> > with
> > > today's modern information-age society.
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help?
> > www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>