Those damn Bush tax cuts

[Highwayman]

And check out how much came from those evil corporations.


US Treasury Sets New 1-Day Tax Receipt Record Of $85.8 Billion

Tuesday September 19th, 2006

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. government recorded record-high overall and corporate tax receipts on Sept. 15, which was a quarterly deadline for tax payments, the Treasury said Monday.

Total tax receipts were $85.8 billion on Friday, compared with the previous one-day record of $71 billion on Sept. 15 of last year, the Treasury said.

Within the overall figure, corporate tax receipts Friday were $71.8 billion, up from $63 billion in September of last year.

Treasury Undersecretary for Domestic Finance Randal Quarles said Friday's numbers provided a "continuing demonstration of the strength of the U.S. economy."

"In fact, Friday's gross receipts were the largest in a single day in the nation's history - 20% higher than receipts on the same quarterly tax payment date last year," Quarles said in a statement.

-By Benton Ives-Halperin, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-9255; Benton.Ives-Halperin@dowjones.com

[Army_of_One]

Damn those tax cuts all to hell..... IT"S TIME FOR CHANGE! Lets destroy our economy, raise taxes, increase unemployment...vote Demokrat.

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Army_of_One

Lets destroy our economy, raise taxes, increase unemployment...vote Demokrat.

You're hitting .500, .750 if you factor in the state/local changes in taxes rates which often offset the piddly *middle class* tax deductions.

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

And check out how much came from those evil corporations.


US Treasury Sets New 1-Day Tax Receipt Record Of $85.8 Billion[snip]
Treasury Undersecretary for Domestic Finance Randal Quarles said Friday's numbers provided a "continuing demonstration of the strength of the U.S. economy."

Thank kind of news headline being trumpeted as a sign the Bush Tax Cuts are working is kind of like a bible thumper picking one verse out of scripture to prove his/her point.

The highest one day collection of taxes does not support economic strength nor does it suggest the lack thereof. What it more likely signals is that IRS efforts to have large $$ taxpayers file and pay via electronic transfer is bearing fruit. Think about for just a minute. Well run corporations manage cash flow therefore if they could, they would mail their quarterly payments and let the float take over. The IRS standard is not that the money is recieved on the 15th, it's that the money is submitted by the 15th with a USPS postmark serving as proof of submission. Since those checks would be floating through the mail then there would be no way for the checks to arrive in time to be counted on that day.

Also bear in mind those are estimated quarterly payments for the most part. The fruit will be born out as the full year returns are recieved and processed.

As to the corporations, while it may make one feel good that them darn multi-billion dollar guys got to pay up, those guys are going to get their margin one way or another. Corp taxes just serve to drive wholesale and retail prices upward. But for some reason people feel better paying, let's say 10% more for their blue jeans instead of paying 3% income taxes just do they know XYZ corp is paying income taxes too.

(Disclaimer- the 10% and 3% used in illustration are suppostions only and have no basis in fact. I believe the argument in total to be valid and thought I could better illustrate it this way)

[Highwayman]

OoD, I think we’ll both agree that big business will squeeze a dime till the last minute before paying it out because of the interest. You’re right about the full year returns but I’m confident that will be higher than last year as projected. Unless a big win for the Democrats scares the Hell out of investors and tanks the market. The uncertainty of change does that you know. The “evil corporations” comment was sarcasm because we both understand that businesses do not pay taxes, they only collect them from us as pass them on.

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

OoD, I think we’ll both agree

I think we could argree on more stuff than just this. Presentation and labeling on the other hand..............

Originally Posted by Highwayman

Unless a big win for the Democrats scares the Hell out of investors and tanks the market. The uncertainty of change does that you know. .

As much as I think we need a separation in parties between the exec and legislative branches, I don't see a large scale shift until 2008. I'm sure you don't want to agree with it but right now the Democratic party has assumed the fiscal responsiblity mantra-even if it was done by accident and will be addressed more on the revenue side than the cost side (translate-raise tax rates, not cut spending)

Originally Posted by Highwayman

The “evil corporations” comment was sarcasm because we both understand that businesses do not pay taxes, they only collect them from us as pass them on.

Agree, I saw the evil comment for just what it was-sarcasm.

Out of Dodge
Sarcasm-r-us

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Outofdodge

You're hitting .500, .750 if you factor in the state/local changes in taxes rates which often offset the piddly *middle class* tax deductions.

If there is a 10% tax cut across the board obviously the wealthy will save more in taxes, they make more and spend more. I had a lady in my office the other day complaining about the Bush "tax refund" that was given out a couple of years ago. She works for a non profit gov't organization and doesn't make much money. I had to show her that she really doesn't pay any taxes so she wasn't entitled to a tax refund. She left kind of irritated. Obvioulsy if you make 600,000 as opposed to 60,000 a year and have the same in investments and get a 10% tax cut the person that makes more will obviously benefit. What's wrong with that?

[lurker]

Any earned dollar is better used (spent) in the private sector compared to being taken as a tax dollar and used as a power tool by CONgress.

[Outofdodge]

Originally Posted by Army_of_One

She works for a non profit gov't organization and doesn't make much money.

Like an Army NCO doing recruiting duty in sw kansas?

Originally Posted by Army_of_One

Obvioulsy if you make 600,000 as opposed to 60,000 a year and have the same in investments and get a 10% tax cut the person that makes more will obviously benefit. What's wrong with that?

Odds are, if you make 600K as opposed to 60K, you won't have the same investments.

You have to take the tax cuts/raises in light of the overall economic picture. Odds are Bill Gates is not going to create another Microsoft, but some middle class person with drive, desire, capital, and a good idea is going to try. Fine if you want to give the richest Americans tax cuts do it. But control spending. Your boy is out there saying he can cut taxes and spend at will. And this was BEFORE the Iraq jaunt, the 9/11 murders, and Katrina. (Worse part for me is his then budget director is now the Indiana governor).

We have escalating debt and at some point soon the ability to cover the debt is going to seriously impact the amount of capital availabe for the above average Joe or Josephine to build the next Microsoft. And it's going to require your middle class offspring to have to pay a higher portion of their wages to cover the debt service. So why wait?

[Highwayman]

Originally Posted by Outofdodge

....We have escalating debt and at some point soon the ability to cover the debt is going to seriously impact the amount of capital availabe for the above average Joe or Josephine to build the next Microsoft. And it's going to require your middle class offspring to have to pay a higher portion of their wages to cover the debt service. So why wait?

No one can deny the growing debt. But as an accountant OoD I’m sure you understand the difference between debt and deficit. I also assume you understand the concept of growing out of deficit and eventuality out of debt. So have you been watching the deficit as a percentage of GNP? Last time I heard anyone bring that up we are doing better than the previous administration.

I’m with you on controlling spending. There’s not enough of that going on to suit me. But can you show me where the Democrats have ever shown restraint in spending when they had the opportunity? Normally any place they cut is offset by increases of their pet programs in excess of any saving they make.