Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, December 10, 2017

In most places, a dollar is a dollar. But in the tax code envisioned by Republicans, the amount you make may be less important than how you make it. Consider two chefs working side by side for the same catering company, doing the same job, for the same hours and the same money. The only difference is that one is an employee, the other an independent contractor. Under the Republican plans, one gets a tax break and the other doesn't. That's because for the first time since the United States adopted an income tax, a higher rate would be applied to employee wages and salaries than to income earned by proprietors, partnerships and closely held corporations.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The House and Senate bills vary in detail, but both end up linking tax rates to a whole new set of characteristics like ownership, day-to-day level of involvement, organizational structure or even occupation. These rules, mostly untethered from income level, could raise or lower tax bills by hundreds or thousands of dollars for ordinary taxpayers and millions of dollars for the largest eligible businesses.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"For the first time, earning a wage is penalized by taxation"

Boy, that has never happened before. My wages have never been taxed by the gov. Who are you trying to BS with that headline?

#1 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-09 04:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Lot of misinformation out there, especially since they have not even finalized the bill.

#2 | Posted by MSgt at 2017-12-09 06:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1


@#2 ... especially since they have not even finalized the bill. ...

Most of the information I've seen is based upon the two bills, one from the House and one from the Senate, currently working their way through Congress.

I think it is good to provide feedback, even at this stage of bill-making.

Are you asserting that no one is allowed to comment on a bill unless and until it becomes finalized by both Houses of Congress and signed into law by the President?

#3 | Posted by LampLighter at 2017-12-09 07:23 PM | Reply

The only thing that will happen to the bill is that it will become even more unfavorable to the wage earning American.

#4 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-09 08:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

That much is known.

#5 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-09 08:48 PM | Reply

Boy, that has never happened before. My wages have never been taxed by the gov. Who are you trying to BS with that headline?

#1 | POSTED BY SNIPER AT 2017-12-09 04:57 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Did not read the article or summary, I see.

#6 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-09 09:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

The summary is still B.S.

It smacks of class warfare and jealousy. It's like you are made because one employee is 1099 and the other is W2. It's like democrats are mad when someone else negotiates a better situation that they didnt.

#7 | Posted by boaz at 2017-12-10 10:47 AM | Reply | Funny: 6

#7 strawman argument Boaz.

Do you have any other feelings that you would like to share today? Get them out of the way. Then we can talk about tax policy and how it attacks wage earners.

#8 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-10 11:02 AM | Reply

How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?

#9 | Posted by boaz at 2017-12-10 12:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?

Posted by boaz at 2017-12-10 12:44 PM | Reply

We haven't had a progressive president in a long time. OOPSIE DAISY.

#10 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-12-10 01:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Advertisement

Advertisement

Boaz with the Whataboutism.
Straight out of the Kremlin playbook, Comrade Boaz!

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-10 01:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?

#9 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2017-12-10 12:44 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Who was that? Before Clinton?

#12 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-10 01:04 PM | Reply

Play stupid if you want. I dont care..

Obama was the worst president for business ever.

#13 | Posted by boaz at 2017-12-10 01:26 PM | Reply | Funny: 5

#9 yeah their low profits really make that apparent, don they?

Jesus you're a gullible fool.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-10 01:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"Obama was the worst president for business ever."

Not if your business is guns. Then he was the best.

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-10 01:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#15

Agreed.

#16 | Posted by boaz at 2017-12-10 02:32 PM | Reply

Play stupid if you want. I dont care..
Obama was the worst president for business ever.

#13 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2017-12-10 01:26 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

The sp500 disagrees with you. My retirement funds disagree with you. Corporate profits disagree with you. Unemployment numbers disagree with you. And many more.

#17 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-10 03:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

"It smacks of class warfare and jealousy."

It is class warfare, the rich are winning. But the pendulum will swing the other way and pay backs will be a bitch.

""Obama was the worst president for business ever.""

Such stupidity. How was business doing when Obama took office? How was it doing when he left office stupid?

#18 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-10 03:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 9

"How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?"

Quite simply you don't know what the hell you're talking about. Do yourself a favor stupid, take off one week from listening to right wing wackos and read some honest news. You can't, you won't. That's why you're simply an idiot.

#19 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-10 03:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?

Posted by boaz at 2017-12-10 12:44 PM | Reply

We haven't had a progressive president in a long time. OOPSIE DAISY.

#10 | Posted by LauraMohr

Were you just born in the last 8 months?

#20 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-10 04:28 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#9 yeah their low profits really make that apparent, don they?

Jesus you're a gullible fool.

#14 | Posted by jpw

How much of their work was sent off shore because of taxes and regulations?

#21 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-10 04:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Such stupidity. How was business doing when Obama took office? How was it doing when he left office stupid?

#18 | Posted by danni

About the same. We never did have a year of goth over 2%.

#22 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-10 04:31 PM | Reply

How much of their work was sent off shore because of taxes and regulations?

#21 | POSTED BY SNIPER AT 2017-12-10 04:29 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

GOP tax plan brings taxation on foreign profits down to zero percent. Could you imagine a better reason to offshore?

#23 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-10 04:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The Republican's tax bill is a crime against humanity and our economy, as experienced by 99% of the population. But it is part of a larger 40 year pattern of class warfare which is shifting wealth from the 99% to the 1%. A Princeton Study recently documented that we live in an Oligarchy, not the Democracy we pretend to have. The tax bill is disliked by 61% of the population and consistent with a political system which doesn't give a ---- about popular opinion.

The U.S. government is poised to push millions of people out of their medical insurance, while lowering the top tax rate for millionaires. This is part of a more general U.S. disdain for ensuring its populace has access to the basics of human dignity: medicine, food, shelter, education, and a sustainable income.

This class warfare is growing inequality and has even infected our Universities where only 17% of its professors are tenured, so even their power to speak the truth and effect meaningful change is vanishing. Without tenure you dare not speak the truth.

#24 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-12-10 09:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"This class warfare is growing inequality and has even infected our Universities where only 17% of its professors are tenured, so even their power to speak the truth and effect meaningful change is vanishing. Without tenure you dare not speak the truth."

I know very little about the environment college professors work in.

What truth are they unable to speak about?

#25 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-10 09:33 PM | Reply

"talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?"

The economy was melting down when Obama took over. Businesses were hemorrhaging, we were losing a half-million jobs a month, and the Dow was tanking.

When Obama handed off the economy, businesses were reporting record profits, we had full employment, and the Dow had more than doubled.

Had Romney produced the same results, you would be lauding him night and day. But because it's Obama you see fit to lie about how "toxic" he was.

You're either clueless, or purposefully misrepresenting the truth. If the latter, you're the problem.

#26 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-10 09:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#25 I could tell you a few things that you don't want to hear.

#27 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-10 09:57 PM | Reply

"Consider two chefs working side by side for the same catering company, doing the same job, for the same hours and the same money. The only difference is that one is an employee, the other an independent contractor."

Consider the company is breaking the law by treating one as an independent contractor, when the company controls where, when, and how BOTH chefs work...so both chefs are employees.

And neither get to deduct ANY of their expenses starting in about three weeks.

#28 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-11 12:52 AM | Reply

The central problem, however, is correct: Employees will never be able to deduct work expenses again, whereas self-employed people are considered business owners, and get to deduct all the ordinary and necessary expenses.

If taxes are taken out before your boss gives you your paycheck, you're an employee. If that $2000 job pays you $2000, you're self-employed.

The downside for self employed person in, say, the 20% marginal Fed/State bracket, is he has to pay almost 28% more in taxes than the employee, since employees get half of their payroll taxes (7.65%) paid by the boss.

#29 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-11 01:03 AM | Reply

"Boy, that has never happened before. My wages have never been taxed by the gov."

No, that's happened before. The difference this time is business expenses borne by employees will no longer be deductible.

Did you know there are industries where workers are expected to bear a large portion of overall costs?

For example, take a concertmaster client of mine. He's paid handsomely (~$125K), but is expected to play a high-end violin. His cost over $200K, and we were depreciating it over 20 years. The $10K.yr deduction returned him about $3000 in taxes, which he budgeted to help pay for the violin.

Starting in 2018, he'll get no more deductions. Why is it fair for the tax code to pull the rug out from under him?

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-11 01:11 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"especially since they have not even finalized the bill."

Assuming anything passes, any items both bills agree on--like eliminating deductions for W-2 workers--can safely be discussed, especially the effects.

We know, for example, casualty losses over and above insurance reimbursements will no longer be deductible. And since both bills eliminate medical expenses, we can safely assume medical expenses will no longer be deductible.

#31 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-11 01:15 AM | Reply

"The summary is still B.S."

Just because the differences go over your head, doesn't mean the summary is BS.

"It smacks of class warfare and jealousy."

Not at all. It suggests--correctly-- business expenses will be deductible for one person, but not another, depending on whether the person is performing that work as the boss, or as an employee.

"It's like you are (mad) because one employee is 1099 and the other is W2. It's like democrats are mad when someone else negotiates a better situation that they didnt."

Negotiation isn't supposed to have anything to do with it. If the hirer treats you like an employee, and has control over your day-to-day work, he doesn't get to talk you into being an independent contractor.

BTW, employees are covered under worker's comp. ICs aren't. Employees can get unemployment if the job ends. ICs can't. Employees often get fringe benefits. ICs don't.

#32 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-11 01:21 AM | Reply

#25, Eberly,

The two biggest fairy tales in our post WWII American world is that US foreign policy is designed to help disadvantaged third world countries and Capitalism has provided the greatest prosperity for the greatest number of people. Anybody that has ever played Monopoly should understand that is not how Capitalism works. The labor movement shifted the balance of power and with that prosperity became widespread. But today organized labor is on the ropes, college tuition has gone through the roof with the proceeds being swallowed by a massive growth in administrations and privatizations. US foreign policy uses diplomacy and military force to maximize US Corporate profits at the expense of third world nations. Trade policy is designed to crush US labor.

Some areas of study are fairly immune from this dishonest, inhumane, nonsense; such as math, physics or engineering; but not history or economics. You need to be tenured before you point out that Marx was right about some things. In primary schools this rule is sacrosanct, less so in higher education.

The constitutional mandate to promote the general welfare is being ignored. Politicians require schools to teach a sanitized history of the United States (with regional variations) instead of the legitimate history of the United States such as "A People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn. In general the higher the education level the more honest and complete the understanding, but eliminating tenured positions works against that rule.

Tenured Professor positions in Universities and Colleges in 1975 was 57% of all teaching positions, today it is 17%. This is consistent with a broader war to keep working people insecure, worrying about their jobs and reluctant to protest about how anything works in this country. The Oligarchy made a domestic war on education and job security a clear objective after widespread protests undermined their foreign policy during the Vietnam War. This lowers the cost of teaching even as the cost of attending school skyrockets, creating a windfall for administrators and private owners. The owner of the University of Phoenix is a billionaire. A powerful Oligarchy wants these economic outcomes. Misinformation is their most powerful tool to achieve this end result. We are back in perpetual war, highly profitable for the 1%.

#33 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-12-11 07:29 AM | Reply

"The two biggest fairy tales in our post WWII American world is that US foreign policy is designed to help disadvantaged third world countries and Capitalism has provided the greatest prosperity for the greatest number of people."

So, it's a "fairy tale" that there are billions of people now in the middle class that weren't before, and that they are there because of trade policy with the US and other countries? That's another subject, and quite frankly an issue with you, so I'll leave that alone.

I still don't see why it's not possible for an untenured professor to speak candidly about economics and foreign policy. I get your point about how fewer tenured professors are tenured but the sun rises and sets on that status?

Tenure matters and nothing else does? I don't remember anything like that when I was in college. I don't remember professors being held back because of tenure. But.....I probably didn't care either so I'll concede I was oblivious.

I consider myself a moderate but I wasn't while in college...I was much more right leaning then.

#34 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-11 08:51 AM | Reply

"Negotiation isn't supposed to have anything to do with it. If the hirer treats you like an employee, and has control over your day-to-day work, he doesn't get to talk you into being an independent contractor."

we constantly battle that issue. Our clients always have an IC that's really not one when you apply the smell test you're referring to. It's a work comp issue. I've cut through all of it. Here is my rule with my clients......if your contractor can provide either a certificate of insurance illustrating they have workers comp or an affidavit acknowledging they don't have to carry it....then expect the auditor to put all of that expense down as an "uninsured sub" and you'll pay work comp for it.

#35 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-11 08:56 AM | Reply

"I've cut through all of it."

Good for you. I've seen some awful abuse of it, all to avoid liability and payroll taxes.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-11 09:11 AM | Reply

36

Thanks....helping those accounts do that can put you in jeopardy with an insurance carrier you value a relationship with.

It's never worth it. If I have to choose between the relationship with a carrier or an individual insured.....I'll take the carrier.

#37 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-11 10:23 AM | Reply

"For the first time, earning a wage is penalized by taxation"
Boy, that has never happened before. My wages have never been taxed by the gov. Who are you trying to BS with that headline?

#1 | POSTED BY SNIPER

It boggles the mind the level of stupidity you post here. I mean, all you had to do was read the excerpt at the top to understand what they were talking about and even that was too much work.

Honestly, it might be time for you to take a break from the DR for a while until you can sort yourself out.

#38 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-11 10:57 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?

#9 | Posted by boaz

So toxic that it lead to a strong economy and record stock market, right stupid?

#39 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-11 11:29 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?
#9 | Posted by boaz
So toxic that it lead to a strong economy and record stock market, right stupid?
#39 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

No one ever accused Boaz of having a clue what he was talking about...

#40 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-11 12:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

No one ever accused Boaz of having a clue what he was talking about...

Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-11 12:00 PM | Reply

AMEN HONEY AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#41 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-12-11 12:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

How about we talk about how toxic the last Progressive administration was on taxing businesses?

#9 | Posted by boaz at 2017-12-10 12:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

How?

By making immediate expensing of equipment permanent at $500,000 indexed for inflation?

By making the R&D credit permanently offsetting AMT taxes?

By allowing a credit against income taxes for health insurance for employees?

By pushing tax credits for wages paid to veterans?

Proposing to lower the corporate tax rate to 28%?

#42 | Posted by 726 at 2017-12-11 12:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"How was business doing when Obama took office? How was it doing when he left office stupid?
#18 | Posted by danni"

"About the same.
#22 | POSTED BY SNIPER"

Good god, Sniper is one stupid mother effer.

#43 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2017-12-11 04:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Good god, Sniper is one stupid mother effer.

#43 | Posted by mOntecOre

That's why trump loves the poorly educated. They're the only ones dumb enough to repeat his lies.

#44 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-11 05:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

They're going to tax earned income? Inconceivable!

#45 | Posted by visitor_ at 2017-12-12 12:27 AM | Reply

I, like many others on this thread, never learned to read.

#45 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Fixed.

#46 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2017-12-12 05:10 AM | Reply

"The only difference is that one is an employee, the other an independent contractor. Under the Republican plans, one gets a tax break and the other doesn't."

That's the way it is now!! One example: if you are a contractor you can deduct mileage to and from your work place, if you are an employee you can't. especially if you are an "S" Corp. you can draw a salary (what ever salary you want to pay yourself) have the normal taxes taken out............and you can still draw out money from the "company" without paying taxes on that money

been that way forever

just another liberal spin

#47 | Posted by Maverick at 2017-12-12 08:53 AM | Reply

"That's the way it is now!! One example: if you are a contractor you can deduct mileage to and from your work place, if you are an employee you can't. especially if you are an "S" Corp. you can draw a salary (what ever salary you want to pay yourself) have the normal taxes taken out............and you can still draw out money from the "company" without paying taxes on that money"

Yeah, cus Uber drivers are making so much money they can afford accountants to create their S Corp. and handle all the tax issues. Wake up in the real world Maverick. Using people as contractors benefits the corporations which "employ" them and denies them little things like minimum wages, etc. F**k corporations like Uber! Burn in hell Uber executives. In Great Britain the employees sued and now can't be treated like second class citizens, same thing should happen everywhere. Their business model is just to undermine the taxi industry and pay drives less to drive their own cars, maintain their own cars, pay for their own fuel, etc. I wouldn't take an Uber ever, I have too much disdain for their business model. It's flat out disgusting and unAmerican, inhuman.

#48 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-12 09:17 AM | Reply

"That's the way it is now!!"

No it's not. Current law lets my concertmaster depreciate his violin, even though he's a W-2 worker. New law won't allow it.

"One example: if you are a contractor you can deduct mileage to and from your work place"

Not if it's your commute...just like an employee. Commutes are not deductible, period. Going from one workplace to another is deductible for both types now, but only for independent contractors starting January 1st.

"if you are an "S" Corp. you can draw a salary (what ever salary you want to pay yourself) "

Not true. You must pay at least market wages. Profits over that are (usually) paid as dividends.

"and you can still draw out money from the "company" without paying taxes on that money"

Only if it's return of principle. If it's dividends, or bonuses, taxes are due. Dividends are (usually) taxed as LTCGs, while bonuses are taxes as wages.

"been that way forever just another liberal spin"

You're dead wrong. And you clearly don't have a clue what's in the new tax code, or what's in the current one.

#49 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-12 09:24 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I'm a contractor now and have been for 13 years. I know how the tax code works

"if you are an "S" Corp. you can draw a salary (what ever salary you want to pay yourself) "

Not true. You must pay at least market wages. Profits over that are (usually) paid as dividends

define "Market Wages". you can't put an LLC or an S Corp in a box. Many, if not most are in many markets and offer many services and products.

And, yes you can deduct mileage. "Home office" to client work is mileage that can be deducted

#50 | Posted by Maverick at 2017-12-12 09:48 AM | Reply

Is maverick admitting publicly (sort of...) to tax fraud?

#51 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-12 09:53 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort