Tax Guru – Ker$tetter Letter

Helping real people win the tax game.

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 675 other subscribers
  • Blog Stats

    • 372,410 hits
  • Posts By Day

    November 2026
    M T W T F S S
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    30  
  • Subscribe

  • Special Pages

Posted by taxguru on January 10, 2003

Eliminating Taxes On Dividends

As was entirely expected, the lefties are playing the class envy card in their hysteria against the possibility of Bush proposing eliminating the double taxation on corporate dividends. “Tax cuts for the evil rich” is their mantra. Some recent examples of these anti-capitalism rants:

Washington Post Editorial

John M. Berry

Kenneth R. Bazinet

Assuming Bush can resist the desire to make his leftist critics like him, and dividend income becomes tax free to stockholders, it will change tax planning slightly. As I have explained for decades, using a C corporation allows you to reduce your taxes by tens of thousands of dollars each year. To avoid the double taxation, it has been my policy to never take out money from the corporation as dividends. We use expenses that are deductible by the corporation, such as wages, commissions, leases, interest and royalties. If dividends become tax free, these will be added to the equation and used when appropriate.

Shifting income to a C corp will still make a lot of sense. For example, if you are in the 35% bracket on your 1040, you can shift $50,000 to your C corp, where it is taxed at 15%. You will then be able to to have the corp pay you tax free dividends. That would save you $10,000 in Federal income tax alone ($50,000 X 20%). Since most business income would also be subject to the 15.3% Self Employment tax, by running $50,000 of profit through a C corp would save at least another $7,650 in that tax. The actual reduction in SE tax is normally much larger.

KMK

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 10, 2003

Computer Problems

We’ve all experienced computer bugs, both in software and hardware. In fact, 100% bug-free computers are a figment of our imagination. However, this is the first time I have heard of a computer snake. From the URL, it looks like this was in Australia.

KMK

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 10, 2003


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 10, 2003

Another Bogus Argument

The opponents of capitalism are grasping at straws in their propaganda campaign to rally opposition to the elimination of double taxation of corporate profits. The class warfare strategy has been exposed. Now, they are claiming that we can’t make dividends tax free because it would be too difficult to keep track of that on corporate books and 1099 forms. That is absolute hogwash. Nothing could be easier in the world of corporate accounting. Of course, these same people on the left are the ones opposing any military actions because someone might get hurt. Their brains just aren’t hooked up right.

KMK

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 10, 2003

As someone who is overly right-brained, with no artistic capability, I always appreciate finding examples where others can illustrate my points and save me the standard thousand words. It’s especially good to locate comics that tell the right story. For every one I find that is truthful, there are at least a dozen by the left trying to portray tax cuts and Bush as evil.

I’m sure many people can relate to this situation.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 9, 2003

Bogus Numbers

As I’ve said on countless occasions, all official numbers describing the effects of changes in the tax law are 100% completely bogus. The numbers are fabricated by morons in DC who don’t have a clue as to the real life effects of changes in tax laws. Then, to make the numbers sound even scarier, they use a multi-year bogus total, such as $600 billion over ten years. It’s more inflammatory that way, rather than saying $60 billion per year. It would be just as accurate to rail against a $1,000,000 annual tax cut as a trillion dollars over the next million years. Either way, the numbers are absolute B.S. and anyone who cites them as valid is either a liar or an idiot and not to be trusted in the least.

KMK


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 9, 2003

Time for the standard JackAss Party playbook.


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 8, 2003

Hatred Of the Rich

Jonah Goldberg and Ilana Mercer each have excellent pieces on how the left’s intense hatred for the successful people in our country clouds their vision of what’s good for the nation as a whole. They continue to be adamantly opposed to any kind of tax break for the wealthy, even if the overall benefits accrue to everyone, just out of pure vitriolic spite.

It’s sick that our rulers would be so obsessed with this hatred, which is in a way a kind of self loathing since they themselves, with their huge salaries and lucrative perks and side incomes, are in the top income brackets. This attitude borders on mental illness. Keep that in mind when you listen to the sickos rail against Bush’s tax cut for the rich, such as described here by William F. Buckley.

KMK

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 8, 2003

States Fear Double Whammy From Tax Plan

Boo Hoo

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on

Posted by taxguru on January 8, 2003

Loophole In Tax Code Means Big Tax Breaks For SUV Buyers

In typical incompetent fashion, this reporter implies that SUVs receive huge tax credits, making the cost to purchase almost zero. As I have been pointing out since this law was enacted in 1984, there is a very lucrative extra deduction for vehicles weighing over 6,000 pounds; but the actual taxes saved are based on your tax brackets. I have always advised against buying new vehicles just for their tax deductions. However, when already in the market for a new (to you) vehicle, the extra deductions for a heavier one may be the deciding point.

Since I last commented on this issue, I have received some questions as to whether or not the vehicle has to be brand new to qualify for the lucrative Section 179 expensing election. The vehicle only needs to be new to you to qualify for the Section 179, as long as you buy it from an unrelated party. This gives you the best of both worlds, if you buy a one or two year old truck or SUV. The bulk of the real world depreciation is gone and you can deduct up to $24,000 of the cost immediately.

If you buy it from a close relative or a corporation you own, IRS will treat that as churning and force you to continue the depreciation schedule that had been used by the previous owner.

KMK

Posted in 179 | Comments Off on