Earlier this month, Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) released a report titled “How Tax Pros Make the Code Less Fair and Efficient.” Prior to publication, the report’s working title was “I Think Accountants Will Still Vote for Me Even if I Tell Them to Go Fuck Themselves.”
What’s really weird is that, apart from the title, the report never even mentions tax professionals; he indirectly shits on tax professionals through his derision of sophisticated tax-planning tools. He thinks (rightly so) that vehicles like collars, wash sales, derivatives, basket options, and deferred compensation help wealthy people avoid taxes. These strategies are generally unavailable to schmucks like you and me due to prohibitive transaction costs and professional fees for the lawyers and accountants needed to execute the transactions and babysit them over time.
What Sen. Wyden is really pissed about is that a highly-paid, well-trained army of smart people have found and exploited the weaknesses of a tax code that was made unnecessarily complex by a highly-lobbied, perversely-incentivized horde of politicians.
A U.S. Senator blaming the inequity and complexity of the tax code on tax professionals is like Chris Martin blaming Coldplay’s shitty music on his fans’ ability to detect shitty music.
Some great comments emerged on the Internet in reaction to the report. For instance…
In the words of Judge Learned Hand, one of the most influential judges in U.S. history, "Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes."
Interestingly, Judge Learned Hand is a real person and not a co-conspirator with Boss Hogg to get those Duke boys. Learned’s parents hated his brother even more and showed it by naming him Invisible. From 1924 to 1961, Learned Hand was a U.S. District Court judge. That was one of many jobs he had in his lifetime. District Court Judge was just one specific Learned Hand job.
Another commenter had a great idea.
If you want to simplify the code, make members of Congress prepare their own returns.
Perfect! Of course that will never happen, but it feels good to think about it.
So Senator Wyden, when you shit the bed, it’s not okay to say that accountants snuck into your house and shit your bed. And maybe if we made you spend the rest of the night sleeping in that bed, you and the rest of Congress would figure out a way to un-shit a bed.
One of the biggest problems with Texas Governor Rick Perry’s optional flat tax may be the choice it gives taxpayers. Perry says you can either pay his new tax or pay under today’s system, whichever results in a lower bill. That sounds great, but it is a policy disaster. This is the tax code we’re talking about, not some TV game show. [TaxVox]
The Iowa State Fair is going strong and because Election 2012 is in full throttle, the GOP Presidential candidates have been posing for photo-ops and making statements with varying degrees of stupidity.
One of the most logical things uttered, I dare say, was done so by Mitt Romney. By now you’ve probably heard that ol’ Mitt, in between corndogs, got into a bit of a verbal joust with a few of the fair goers. Here’s the soundbite:
The statement has been examined and debated with most intelligent people coming down on the side of Romney. That is, human beings – whether it’s shareholders, employees or customers – eventually bear the cost of the taxes paid by corporations. So while a whole host of humans, including the majority Supreme Court of the United States, are stuck on this “people” thing, it’s worth noting (mostly for the sake of stupid fun) that corporations are definitely not “humans.” Maybe that’s overstating the obvious but English is complicated language and this exercise is not without its merits.
Humans, at their best, are capable of being compassionate, loving, generous and all that crap. Corporations are not. At worst, humans are disgusting, vile creatures capable of ridiculous behavior and we know this to be true mostly because of reality TV. Corporations are certainly capable of deplorable behavior but this behavior is usually at the behest of a human being’s decision.
Accordingly, let’s examine some thing that demonstrate that don’t make corporations “human.”
• Corporations don’t flash women who aren’t the age of consent.
• Corporations don’t use your bathroom and help themselves to the Goldbond Medicated Powder to an extent that you wonder if someone left the window open during a snowstorm.
• Corporations don’t “try out” 18 year-old women, take them over state lines and then take money in order to “protect” them.
Feel free to volunteer other examples of “human” versus “people” below but what’s important to note here is that while both humans and corporations may be people, all humans are people and it’s clear that corporations are not humans.
And if that still doesn’t help you understand the difference, just remember this – no matter the situation, for better or worse, humans are the ones who get screwed. Got it?
The Exuberant Accountant isn’t the spamming type so when he sent out an email to, presumably, all of his blog’s email subscribers as a warning about new estate tax rules in 2010, it was clear this wasn’t a casual tax issue. Scott Heintzelman was kind enough to give me a few minutes to break down what this means for estates and why we should care.
Disclaimer: I took an estate tax class no less than two months ago and have since forgotten everything I learned so I needed a refresher anyway. As always, if you need advice on actually planning your estate, don’t listen to me and get yourself a CPA and/or tax lawyer. “We are accountants, ultimately we don’t draft agreements,” says Scott and he’s absolutely right. Get a trained mine-sniffer on that particular cluck mission.
Scott pointed to a recent post from his firm’s McKonomics blog called “No Estate Tax is a Good Thing, Right?” and it goes without saying he doesn’t believe this “no estate tax thing is good” by any means.
He gave the example of getting hit by a bus (awww, don’t run over the Exuberant Accountant!): If he walks out of his office tomorrow and dies, certain language in his will might leave a trust with $0 for poor Mrs Exuberant Accountant. What about the little Exuberant Accountant Jrs?! The humanity! Don’t worry, we’d start a charity drive.
[M]any estate planners wrote wills with such language that the bypass trust would be funded with an amount equal to “the current lifetime exemption amount.” Since we currently have no estate tax, and no lifetime exemption amount, if a spouse dies in 2010, we could potentially have an unfunded bypass trust. This is especially alarming since we can all assume the estate tax will come back and we may have a taxable estate once the second [spouse passes] away.