bitrex wrote:> On 4/6/2021 12:12 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote: >> Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in >> news:7ff76f0d-bacd-de94-8559-e8cc0a499618@electrooptical.net: >> >>> jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> >>>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolut >>>> ionize-corporate-taxation >>>> >>>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>> >>> Why not reincorporate as an LLC? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Phil Hobbs >>> >> >> That would certainly limit his liabilities. >> > > My first reaction to the text of a large number of contract work > solicitations/proposals I see by Somecompany, LLC is "Well I see why > they're limiting their liabilities."Such as Amazon LLC? -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 http://electrooptical.net http://hobbs-eo.com
OT Tax Rant
Started by ●April 6, 2021
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 16:12:19 +0000 (UTC), > DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote: > >> Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote in >> news:7ff76f0d-bacd-de94-8559-e8cc0a499618@electrooptical.net: >> >>> jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> >>>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolut >>>> ionize-corporate-taxation >>>> >>>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>> >>> Why not reincorporate as an LLC? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Phil Hobbs >>> >> >> That would certainly limit his liabilities. > > A C corp protects shareholders from corporate liabilities. > > >So does an LLC, and has flow-through taxation. An S corp does too, but is limited to 100 shareholders. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 http://electrooptical.net http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
John Robertson wrote:> > On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >> >> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >> >> >> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >> > > You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal > corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is > devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, > ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, > trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go > bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... > > Can't have your cake and all that! > > John :-#)# > PS, my businesses are incorporatedYou might do a search on "LLC" before you spout stuff like that. Cheers Phil Hobbs -- Dr Philip C D Hobbs Principal Consultant ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 http://electrooptical.net http://hobbs-eo.com
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 11:32:24 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> wrote:> >On 2021/04/06 11:22 a.m., John Larkin wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 13:00:25 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: >> >>> On 4/6/2021 12:54 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:36:46 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>>>>> >>>>>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >>>>> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >>>>> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, >>>>> ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, >>>>> trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go >>>>> bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >>>>> >>>>> Can't have your cake and all that! >>>>> >>>>> John :-#)# >>>>> PS, my businesses are incorporated >>>> >>>> The greater good of the population should be the goal of government. >>>> Companies create jobs and stuff, but don't consume for pleasure; >>>> people do that. If we had no corp taxes but taxed people, we'd have >>>> more industries and jobs here and *more* tax revenue. >>> >>> Consume for pleasure? No one consumes only for pleasure, consumption is >>> the sine qua non of industrialized society, you must do so. Or you will die. >> >> People in pre-industrial societies die of starvation a lot more than >> we do. So much food in developed countries is unprecedented in >> history. Our biggest health problem is obesity. >> >> It takes communism to create famines. >> >> Corporations don't eat much, so don't compete with people for food. >> > >Fascists have their share of famines too. > >Any form of autocracy does not work for the common person. Democracy is >the only solution that has fed the planet so well. > >Corporations that only are concerned about the next quarter are the >major danger right now IMHO. They have no plans for the future (much >beyond six months) and no desire for being responsible to take care of >anyone but their major shareholders. If the shareholders develop a >conscience, then the company does too. If not, then rape and pillage is >the rule of the day.Rape and pillage? Where?> >Corporations are not democratic... > >JohnThey are required by law to honor the votes of shareholders. To do the greatest good, they should be efficient and competitive. It's crazy that states will make enormous concessions to get a car plant or an Amazon warehouse, to create a few hundred jobs. Why don't they make concessions for the thousands of businesses that are already there? Texas makes sense, which is why so many people and companies are moving there.
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
In article <58bp6g5stcv4jql9nmfcgfvgbt4utgaqiq@4ax.com>, jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com says...> > It's crazy that states will make enormous concessions to get a car > plant or an Amazon warehouse, to create a few hundred jobs. Why don't > they make concessions for the thousands of businesses that are already > there? > >AOC proved that a state could save millions by not giving concessions to the large companies. They did not give any , save millions of dollars and the company built in another state. Probably costing many jobs and more millions of dollars due to the company building out of state.
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 20:12:32 +0200, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:>On 06/04/2021 17:38, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >> >> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >> >> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >> > >Why not start your own religion, like L. Ron Hubbard? He too had lots >of fanciful ideas with no grounding in reality, and felt he didn't make >enough money from his normal work. Someone suggested he started his own >religion - no restrictions on what you can say and do, no taxes, no >limits. Tell the tax man you believe electronics works by trapping >little pixies inside boxes, and you'll get state subsidies and can start >your own university in Alabama. >If creating businesses and jobs and food and stuff is religion, I'm a believer. Tax consumption, not production. There's nothing mystical about that.
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 2021/04/06 11:52 a.m., Phil Hobbs wrote:> John Robertson wrote: >> >> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>> >>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>> >>> >>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>> >> >> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with >> copyrights, ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a >> 'person' status, trademark protection, import controls, clean up after>> companies go bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >> >> Can't have your cake and all that! >> >> John :-#)# >> PS, my businesses are incorporated > > You might do a search on "LLC" before you spout stuff like that. > > Cheers > > Phil Hobbs >A LLC is not always a corporation. He didn't want to pay corporate taxes, nothing about LLC taxes, and taxes are still paid; https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/llc.asp LLCs may elect not to pay federal taxes. Instead, profits and losses are listed on the personal tax returns of the owner(s). Or, the LLC may choose a different classification, such as a corporation.  If fraud is detected or if a company hasn't met legal and reporting requirements, creditors may be able to go after the members. John --
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 4/6/2021 11:41 AM, John Robertson wrote:> > On 2021/04/06 11:24 a.m., Don Y wrote:>> People see/hear what they want to see/hear.-----^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>> I had a friend who was a staunch advocate for nationalized health care. >> He lived in an affluent area, had "all the best" doctors, etc. I simply >> offered: >> >> "Of course, then ANYONE willing to drive to this area should be able >> to avail themselves of these (your!) best doctors! Right? And, there >> would be no DISincentive for those (your!) doctors to provide their >> services to these folks; even if it came at the cost of making it harder >> (less convenient) for YOU to get an appointment to see them!" >> >> "No, they should use the doctors in THEIR areas!" >> >> "Why? Why wouldn't I want to have access to The Best? After > all, >> my taxes are paying for healthcare regardless of where I *consume* it!" > > You don't live in a country with Universal Health Care so don't know what you > are talking about. Here in Canada people do not go bankrupt due to medical > bills, and have a longer lifespan than you do south of our border.You've missed my point. My friend wants *his* healthcare -- at his current income standard -- to be subsidized. Yet, doesn't want his access to that level of care to be impeded by competition with "any old Joe" (who currently can't afford access to those providers). You can't have it both ways -- wanting the access that money can buy WITHOUT having to spend the money! Pick one. If you're upset with what you are paying for health care -- but not the quality of that care AVAILABLE TO *YOU* -- then why would you expect others to contribute to a solution that locks in your "privileged" access/care to their exclusion? Why would "your" (his) interpretation of how that health care should be distributed be any more valid than anyone else's? If I don't like the care available locally, I can drive to the Mayo in feenigs. But, that's at *my* inconvenience; why should I be limited to the care that's available down the street if I know of better care (outcome) elsewhere?> It isn't perfect here, but what is? My ex-wife had no costs associated with the > birth of our children back in the 80s. I had open heart surgery last May at no > cost to me, other than my regular taxes. > > Yes, our feds screwed up the Covid vaccination rollout somewhat, but our death > toll is less than 5% of yours (23K). More deaths than it should have been even > so... > > John >
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
In article <s4i90o$rpe$1@dont-email.me>, blockedofcourse@foo.invalid says...> > I make a similar argument to clients when they cringe at my hourly rate. > They look at it as "salary" and compare it to what they "pay" *their* > employees. > > "OK, and what about your share of their FICA? And, unemployment insurance > to cover for 'loss of business' layoffs?" > > "And, what about the ~10 paid holidays that you likely give them? And > another 10+ days (for new hires) of paid vacation? Any 'personal days'?" > > "What's your contribution to their health insurance? And 401k? Company > christmas party? Bonuses?" > > "What about their share of the rent, liability insurance, utilities?" > > Suddenly, the ~125K they're paying their employee (salary) looks like > $250k! And, their employees are "guaranteed" some work, tomorrow. > > >About 3 months after I retired the company wanted me to come back to work for several months for a special project. Before I retired they claimed they were giving almost as much in benifits as the wages. So I asked for twice my wages as I was not getting any benifits. They did not want to pay that, so I turned them down. I did not really want to work any way as I was retired. I woud probably have lost some of my SS pay if I did go back to work.
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 11:24:10 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:>On 4/6/2021 10:09 AM, amdx wrote: >> No one has mentioned that the corporation adds the taxes into it's price so >> when you buy your Clorox. > >Exactly. As property taxes are paid by *renters* (not property owners).Only if the renters have no options. If they can commute over a county line, from a place with lower property taxes, the local landlords have to compete. "The customers pay the taxes" concept is wrecked by imports.>And, the property owners usually benefit more from the services that those >taxes provide (as their *building* is not likely to get up and move to >a different town/state)Their tenants sure can.> >Duties on Chinese imports come out of US customers' pockets. It rarely >moves business onto US companies' ledgers -- cuz they often raise their >prices to follow the new "effective" price of their now penalized competitors.Chinese companies don't pay the many many US taxes, and we even subsidize their shipping costs. It's a big job and dollar export program.
