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]
Related Posts
Democrats Ask Republicans to Blow Off Grover Norquist
Top Republican lawmakers have said that increasing revenues was the one approach off the table when it comes to deficit reduction. But Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and 108 other House Democrats, in a letter dated Monday, said that position jeopardized the chances for a bipartisan agreement.
“Revenues must be a component of addressing our deficit and debt problems,” the Democrats wrote to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). “Solving our fiscal problems with spending cuts alone would be devastating to our economy, to the middle class, and to vulnerable populations like seniors and low-income families.” [The Hill]
Study: Rich People Getting the Pleasure of Assisting Governments Increase Revenues Worldwide
The following post is republished from AccountingWEB, a source of accounting news, information, tips, tools, resources and insight — everything you need to help you prosper and enjoy the accounting profession.
The worldwide decline in top personal income tax rates over the past seven years generally appears to have come to an end, as this year’s average rate increased 0.3 percent globally, according to KPMG International’s 2010 Individual Income Tax and Social Security Rate Report, released this we remained static in most locations, including the United States, the finding of an upward moving trend in the KPMG report suggests some governments are beginning to opt for a personal tax rate increase to help combat deficits and raise additional revenue.
“In the current economic environment, as many countries are faced with increasing budget deficits, they need funding for various economic stimulus packages,” said Ben Garfunkel, national partner in charge of KPMG LLP’s (U.S.) International Executive Services practice. “Our study indicates that many of these countries are levying tax increases on their highest earning taxpayers in order to increase revenue. We also see governments becoming increasingly sophisticated and rigorous in the framing and application of their tax rules.”
According to the KPMG report, the majority of rate movement in 2010 originated in Europe. The United Kingdom implemented a 10 percent increase raising its top rate from 40 percent in 2009-10 to 50 percent in 2010-11 — the highest rate increase seen globally this year.
Other Western European governments have followed suit in an attempt to increase tax revenues. Iceland, amid the collapse of the banking sector, replaced its flat tax regime with a progressive approach raising the top personal income tax rate by approximately nine percent.
Greece, in response to public deficit concerns, raised its top rate by five percent. Portugal, and, most recently, France raised top rates by three percent and one percent, respectively, to help address budget shortfalls. Ireland’s top rate also increased by one percent in 2010.
Striking the Right Balance
“Personal tax rates can be a crucial deciding factor when evaluating where to locate workforces or the costs associated with international assignment programs,” said Garfunkel. “Tax authorities are trying to strike the right balance as they face increasing pressure to identify and secure greater revenues, while also trying to attract businesses to set up operations in their country.
“High income earners typically have the talent and credentials to migrate to countries that have lower personal income tax rates and a need for skilled labor,” added Garfunkel. “Attracting such individuals — including their tax revenues and disposable income — using a competitive personal tax rate, while also trying to address budget deficits, is a challenge, especially in the current economic environment.”
Top Rates Decrease in Some Countries
Some countries are decreasing their top personal income tax rates. Denmark opted to introduce a stimulus package in hopes of increasing consumer spending and as a result, decreased its top rate by almost seven percent. Croatia, this past July, also dropped its top rate by five percent.
Other report findings include:
• The low flat tax initiatives of Eastern European governments have stagnated. Estonia has abolished its plan to reduce its flat tax rate to 18 percent by 2012, while Latvia increased its flat tax from 23 percent in 2009 to 26 percent in 2010.
•Average top rates in Asia-Pacific declined by 0.4 percent in 2010. New Zealand and Malaysia dropped their rates by five percent and one percent respectively.
•Although the average rates for Latin America jumped 0.8 percent in 2010, personal income taxes continue to remain relatively low in Latin America.
What Is the Most Difficult Sentence to Understand in the Tax Code?
[caption id="attachment_19691" align="alignright" width="260" caption="It\'s in there somewhere"]
[/caption]
[/caption]
The IRC is probably the last thing many of you want to think about right now but, yes, I’m going there.
David Foster Wallace’s posthumous novel, “The Pale King“, is set in an IRS office in Peoria, Illinois and you’ll be shocked – SHOCKED! – to learn that the protagonist is fighting extreme boredom at his job. Wallace did extensive research prior to writing his final book including taking accounting classes at Illinois State University and carrying on “lively correspondence with tax lawyers and C.P.A.’s, peppering them with questions about the Tax Reform Act of 1986, compliance studies, I.R.S. office furniture, and an exotic tax shelter called ‘the Silver Butterfly,'” the Times reports.
One of the accountants Wallace corresponded with was Stephen Lacy who wrote this about Section 509(a):
“[L]egendary as the most difficult sentence to understand in the tax code,” adding: “I find that although I can never quite understand what it says, after I read it several times and concentrate, I can actually get into a kind of weird Zen-type meditation high! (Then again sometimes it provokes a profound anxiety attack.)”
“Legendary,” not only because its Mr Lacy’s drug of choice, but because Ronald Reagan quoted this passage back in June of 1986 when he set forth on his divine mission of reforming the tax code. A mission he ultimately achieved and thereby canonizing himself in the hearts and minds of many (can’t you picture the shrine in Grover Norquist’s house?). Anyhoo, here it is, in all its glory:
For purposes of Paragraph (3), an organization described in Paragraph (2) shall be deemed to include an organization described in Section 501(c) (4), (5), or (6) which would be described in Paragraph (2) if it were an organization described in Section 509(a)(3)
Not exactly Stieg Larsson is it? Anyway, if any portion of the code is still haunting your dreams and you feel as though it tops 509(a), you’re invited to exorcise it out now and your conscience will finally be clear.