Taxes Do Affect Behavior

Walter Williams has a good illustration of how ridiculous those people are who claim that changes in taxes have no effect on behavior. Unfortunately, almost all of our rulers use the unrealistic static analysis when setting policies, which is why they are never accurate in any of their predictions.

KMK

Facing Reality

Can it be true that people in the PRC are finally realizing that their rulers don’t have the foggiest idea of what they are doing when they predict future revenues? Maybe there is hope for the rest of America because the bean counters in DC are no better at it.

KMK

The Other Washington

It looks like another of the few states without an income tax, Washington, is now considering adding one. If that happens, what are the odds that Microsoft moves to Nevada?

KMK

They Still Don�t Get It

The Democrats try to come to grips with the tax issue.

Normally people such as Rush Limbaugh and Neal Boortz are on the same page as I am when discussing the tax system in this country. However, I have to take exception with how they, along with some in the editorial section of the Wall Street Journal, have been improperly categorizing people who pay no income taxes as freeloaders. They admit that many of those people pay in a lot of payroll taxes, but consider those to be different because they are technically premiums for retirement and medical insurance programs.

These same people (Rush, Boortz, et al) on other occasions, are the first to acknowledge that these government programs (Social Security and Medicare) are shams and that most working people will never see any of their so-called premiums returned to them as benefits or services. In my book, money that you are forced to pay to the government for which you will never receive any future benefits, is no different from income taxes. It is just plain wrong to say that just because someone pays no income tax that they are not paying taxes.

While I know that it is nothing more than an insincere gimmick by the DemonRats to propose a reduction in payroll taxes, and it pains me immensely to agree with them, I have to say that this is an idea that is long overdue.

I intend to expand on this issue in future postings.

KMK

Taxation Games

Government is getting your money in unseemly ways.

Dynamic scoring at a crossroads

Outer limits of class warfare

Quality Giving

It’s always a good idea to help out charities by donating cash or things they can use or sell to raise cash. However, it really goes against the charitable spirit to use the Goodwill or Salvation Army drop-off spot as a place to take your worthless garbage. Many of these charities end up having to pay a fortune in hauling and dump fees to get rid of crap that is unusable and unsalable.

This brings up the issue of how much you can deduct for used things donated to charities. When I was answering questions on the AskMe.com site (now out of operation), there were several from people asking which they should do: sell their car for $1,000 or donate it to a charity and claim the $2,500 Blue Book value on their tax returns. I had to burst their bubble and explain that if the car could only be sold for $1,000, that is the value that can be claimed on your Form 8283, which is attached to your 1040.

People were totally unclear on their terms. They would claim that something was worth $1,000; yet they could only sell it for $300. I had to point out that they were contradicting themselves. An item is only worth what an unrelated party would be willing to pay for it. Guides such as the famous Kelley Blue Book are just that, guides. If you check out their valuation techniques, which you can do online nowadays, they base their valuations on all kinds of things beyond one flat amount for everyone. Such things as accessories, condition, and the number of miles are all important aspects in determining a realistic market value, which is what has to be used for tax deductions. It shouldn’t be any higher than what you could sell the car for through a classified ad.

KMK