“Far more interesting is this question: Why does our tax code remains so obviously, so grotesquely unfair?” Carlson asked, his brow deeply furrowed. “Billionaires should not be paying a lower rate than your are paying, no matter who they are, no matter who the president is. The main problem with America right now is that a shrinking group of people controls a growing share of our nation’s wealth of power. It’s lopsided and getting more lopsided every year. It makes the country more unstable.”
他说了床铺做的是全美富豪利用税法loophole的普遍现象，公平不公平，没有直接批，说是留给大家评判。 Carlson looked past these headlines, however, to focus on deeper implications of the Times story. “The second takeaway from the piece is that, in some years, Donald Trump paid a strikingly low effective federal tax rate, probably lower than the rate you are playing.Trump’s accountants took advantage of the many provisions in the tax code to make it possible. What the president did was legal and all but universal for the affluent who earned their money from investments rather than from salaries,” Carlson explained.“Should the president use the conventional tax loopholes to his own benefits?” Carlson then asked, before notably refusing to answer his own question or from passing any judgment on Trump’s actions. “We’ll leave that question to the professional hyper-ventilators on the other channels, who are probably talking about it right now.” “Of course they are,” Carlson then added, the acid in his tone unmistakable.
他说了床铺做的是全美富豪利用税法loophole的普遍现象，公平不公平，没有直接批，说是留给大家评判。 Carlson looked past these headlines, however, to focus on deeper implications of the Times story. “The second takeaway from the piece is that, in some years, Donald Trump paid a strikingly low effective federal tax rate, probably lower than the rate you are playing.Trump’s accountants took advantage of the many provisions in the tax code to make it possible. What the president did was legal and all but universal for the affluent who earned their money from investments rather than from salaries,” Carlson explained.“Should the president use the conventional tax loopholes to his own benefits?” Carlson then asked, before notably refusing to answer his own question or from passing any judgment on Trump’s actions. “We’ll leave that question to the professional hyper-ventilators on the other channels, who are probably talking about it right now.” “Of course they are,” Carlson then added, the acid in his tone unmistakable. 平明寻白羽 发表于 2020-09-29 13:40
Pre-Reform Tax SystemYou save $0 Your federal tax bill: $2,716,088 We calculate that you DO itemize to get state/local income tax deductions -- Detailed calculations --Deductions "Personal exemption" deduction: $0 Total State And Local Tax (SALT) deduction: $3,290,543 -- State income (or sales) tax deduction: $1,290,543 -- Local income tax deduction: $0 -- Property tax deduction: $2,000,000 Your other deductions: $0 Your standard deduction is: $0 Pease limits REDUCE deductions by: $290,400 Your total deductions: $3,000,143 Your taxable income is: $6,999,857 Tax rates In $0 - $19050 bracket, you pay 10%. Cost: $1,905 From $19050 - $77400, 15%. Cost: $8,752 From $77400 - $156150, 25%. Cost: $19,688 From $156150 - $237950, 28%. Cost: $22,904 From $237950 - $424950, 33%. Cost: $61,710 From $424950 - $480050, 35%. Cost: $19,285 From $480050 and above, 39.6%. Cost: $2,581,844 Total federal tax bill: $2,716,088 新税法 Tax Reform BillYou lose $914,411 Your federal tax bill: $3,630,499 We calculate that you DO itemize to get state/local income tax deductions Rate cuts end in 2025 unless extendedDeductions "Personal exemption" deduction: $0 Total State And Local Tax (SALT) deduction: $10,000 Your other deductions: $0 Due to the bill''''s changes, you should SWITCH to taking the increased standard deduction ($24000) rather than itemizing (now worth $10,000). With switch: Your total deductions: $24,000 Your taxable income is: $9,976,000 Tax rates In $0 - $19050 bracket, you pay 10%. Cost: $1,905 From $19050 - $77400, 12%. Cost: $7,002 From $77400 - $165000, 22%. Cost: $19,272 From $165000 - $315000, 24%. Cost: $36,000 From $315000 - $400000, 32%. Cost: $27,200 From $400000 - $600000, 35%. Cost: $70,000 From $600000 and above, 37%. Cost: $3,469,120 Tax credits None Total federal tax bill: $3,630,499
纽约时报说的清清楚楚，就标题党而已。 2016 2017各交了100万和420万。后来又用了970万的business investment。所以只用补交750. 这连避税都不算，避税是把盈利放进慈善基金。这里是把盈利用于商业投资，不但不是避税，还是政府应该鼓励的行为。 Each time, he requested an extension to file his 1040; and each time, he made the required payment to the I.R.S. for income taxes he might owe — $1 million for 2016 and $4.2 million for 2017. But virtually all of that liability was washed away when he eventually filed, and most of the payments were rolled forward to cover potential taxes in future years. To cancel out the tax bills, Mr. Trump made use of $9.7 million in business investment credits, at least some of which related to his renovation of the Old Post Office hotel, which qualified for a historic-preservation tax break. Although he had more than enough credits to owe no taxes at all, his accountants appear to have carved out an allowance for a small tax liability for both 2016 and 2017. When they got to line 56, the one for income taxes due, the amount was the same each year: $750.
纽约时报说的清清楚楚，就标题党而已。 2016 2017各交了100万和420万。后来又用了970万的business investment。所以只用补交750. 这连避税都不算，避税是把盈利放进慈善基金。这里是把盈利用于商业投资，不但不是避税，还是政府应该鼓励的行为。 Each time, he requested an extension to file his 1040; and each time, he made the required payment to the I.R.S. for income taxes he might owe — $1 million for 2016 and $4.2 million for 2017. But virtually all of that liability was washed away when he eventually filed, and most of the payments were rolled forward to cover potential taxes in future years. To cancel out the tax bills, Mr. Trump made use of $9.7 million in business investment credits, at least some of which related to his renovation of the Old Post Office hotel, which qualified for a historic-preservation tax break. Although he had more than enough credits to owe no taxes at all, his accountants appear to have carved out an allowance for a small tax liability for both 2016 and 2017. When they got to line 56, the one for income taxes due, the amount was the same each year: $750. chali1234 发表于 2020-09-29 14:24
华人可能接触GOP的时间短 GOP的slogan是party of personal responsibility, party of virtue 讲的就是缴税 有道德 还有balance the budget 这些其实都是红线 有些老GOP会叛变 梅干茶泡饭 发表于 2020-09-29 15:13
你的信息有误 How much does Berkshire Hathaway pay in taxes? Warren Buffett''s Berkshire Hathaway paid 1.5% of all U.S. corporate taxes collected in 2019. Berkshire Hathaway, the $560 billion conglomerate owned and run by billionaire Warren Buffett, itself paid 1.5 percent of all corporate income tax collected by the federal government in 2019. https://disrn.com/news/warren-buffets-berkshire-hathaway-paid-15-of-all-us-corporate-taxes-paid-in-2019 另外特朗普公司是他独资的，与巴菲特完全不同。我的理解是他的公司税和个人税是合一的。
没看错吧。狐狸台啊https://www.mediaite.com/news/tucker-carlson-highlights-nyt-tax-return-story-to-warn-about-power-of-billionaires-and-tyranny-of-selfish-oligarchs-but-never-criticizes-trump/“Far more interesting is this question: Why does our tax code remains so obviously, so grotesquely unfair?” Carlson asked, his brow deeply furrowed. “Billionaires should not be paying a lower rate than your are paying, no matter who they are, no matter who the president is. The main problem with America right now is that a shrinking group of people controls a growing share of our nation’s wealth of power. It’s lopsided and getting more lopsided every year. It makes the country more unstable.” 平明寻白羽 发表于 9/29/2020 1:32:30 PM
https://www.mediaite.com/news/tucker-carlson-highlights-nyt-tax-return-story-to-warn-about-power-of-billionaires-and-tyranny-of-selfish-oligarchs-but-never-criticizes-trump/
“Far more interesting is this question: Why does our tax code remains so obviously, so grotesquely unfair?” Carlson asked, his brow deeply furrowed. “Billionaires should not be paying a lower rate than your are paying, no matter who they are, no matter who the president is. The main problem with America right now is that a shrinking group of people controls a growing share of our nation’s wealth of power. It’s lopsided and getting more lopsided every year. It makes the country more unstable.”
光看文字还以为是Bernie Sanders，哈哈哈.
对“誓死捍卫”的华人川粉来说，可能七百五不叫个事儿，但是对于某些川普ｂａｓｅ来说，还是挺震撼的。
他说了床铺做的是全美富豪利用税法loophole的普遍现象，公平不公平，没有直接批，说是留给大家评判。
Carlson looked past these headlines, however, to focus on deeper implications of the Times story. “The second takeaway from the piece is that, in some years, Donald Trump paid a strikingly low effective federal tax rate, probably lower than the rate you are playing. Trump’s accountants took advantage of the many provisions in the tax code to make it possible. What the president did was legal and all but universal for the affluent who earned their money from investments rather than from salaries,” Carlson explained. “Should the president use the conventional tax loopholes to his own benefits?” Carlson then asked, before notably refusing to answer his own question or from passing any judgment on Trump’s actions. “We’ll leave that question to the professional hyper-ventilators on the other channels, who are probably talking about it right now.” “Of course they are,” Carlson then added, the acid in his tone unmistakable.
https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1310772722142777344
这事究竟Trump是合法避税还是非法逃税，IRS还没定呢，谁敢一口咬定呢？ bottom line: 即使是税法漏成筛子，他这么利用也是不ethical的。
这个是毫无疑问的。
寡廉鲜耻。
你这句话很有意思。 第一，你说“750如果是真的，” 纽时号称拿到了文件，但文件是非法得到的。如果是税表，纽时公开的话，那是有人要坐牢的。不公开，要别人信纽时，它的公信力在起码一半美国人里面跟狗的poo poo 差不多吧。 第二，你说 “要么是税法漏洞太大” 这个说得好。那就赌漏啊。怪得到川普吗，有不是他写的税法。 第三，你说 “要么是川普偷税漏税，” 这个也说得很对。IRS在查他的税，还没结果。查出来，该怎么办怎么办。还没结果呢，一帮人鸡冻什么? 查出来他非法偷税漏税， 我第一个要送他进监狱。
你又问，为啥他就不能公开税表？川普是米国第一个富豪总统。有钱人的税表跟那些当了议员之后才发财的，比如，sanders， 比如，拜登，比如，warren， 那是不一样的。人家猛的贪污捞钱，也就是几十万一年，跟川普的几千万多少亿的生意不能比的。给你看，估计你也看不懂。还暴露生意秘密，还能给政敌呼呦愚民的机会，换我，也不给你看。
为什么750就是有问题？没交过税吗你？有很多种情况都是合理的
赚1亿，business loss 9999万。 自己公司都交给信托，个人所得税和旗下的酒店资产分开报税。总统工资50万，捐掉大部分。 前几年交estimated tax，今年只要补这么多
有几年交了几千万，后来全都退回去refund，最后补交了750.
虽然最高税率降了，但是SALT有limit。但交税是增加了。 比如1个1000万收入的加州富人，房子2000万，州税129万，房产税200万. 房贷就不算了，对富人毛毛雨。 新税法虽然最高税率从39.6%降到37%但由于大部分房产税和州税不能抵税，要多交91万的个税。 就算他没有房产，用公司买的房子自己住， 由于绝大部分州税不能抵税，在新税法下也要多交12万的税。 只看最高税率降了就说是给富人降税纯属不懂税法。
Pre-Reform Tax System You save $0 Your federal tax bill: $2,716,088 We calculate that you DO itemize to get state/local income tax deductions -- Detailed calculations -- Deductions "Personal exemption" deduction: $0 Total State And Local Tax (SALT) deduction: $3,290,543 -- State income (or sales) tax deduction: $1,290,543 -- Local income tax deduction: $0 -- Property tax deduction: $2,000,000 Your other deductions: $0 Your standard deduction is: $0 Pease limits REDUCE deductions by: $290,400 Your total deductions: $3,000,143 Your taxable income is: $6,999,857 Tax rates In $0 - $19050 bracket, you pay 10%. Cost: $1,905 From $19050 - $77400, 15%. Cost: $8,752 From $77400 - $156150, 25%. Cost: $19,688 From $156150 - $237950, 28%. Cost: $22,904 From $237950 - $424950, 33%. Cost: $61,710 From $424950 - $480050, 35%. Cost: $19,285 From $480050 and above, 39.6%. Cost: $2,581,844 Total federal tax bill: $2,716,088
新税法
Tax Reform Bill You lose $914,411 Your federal tax bill: $3,630,499
We calculate that you DO itemize to get state/local income tax deductions Rate cuts end in 2025 unless extended Deductions "Personal exemption" deduction: $0 Total State And Local Tax (SALT) deduction: $10,000 Your other deductions: $0 Due to the bill''''s changes, you should SWITCH to taking the increased standard deduction ($24000) rather than itemizing (now worth $10,000). With switch: Your total deductions: $24,000 Your taxable income is: $9,976,000 Tax rates In $0 - $19050 bracket, you pay 10%. Cost: $1,905 From $19050 - $77400, 12%. Cost: $7,002 From $77400 - $165000, 22%. Cost: $19,272 From $165000 - $315000, 24%. Cost: $36,000 From $315000 - $400000, 32%. Cost: $27,200 From $400000 - $600000, 35%. Cost: $70,000 From $600000 and above, 37%. Cost: $3,469,120 Tax credits None Total federal tax bill: $3,630,499
他有个屁良知，估计是自己交的税太多了气不过， “尼玛我怎么没write off七万美刀做头发呢”
洗地，只能说已经没有正常的价值观了。
那也比已经write off 七万做头发的好
那肯定不对。合不合法的，至少不适合选总统吧。这是爱国吗？
川粉总是喜欢把合不合法拿来说事 法是什么，那是道德的最低标准 你用这个标准选总统，good luck
然后呢，用法律标准要求自己人，用道德标准要求政治对手，双标也就是这么玩的
爱国？你怎么讲话像个党委书记。 我们米国是法治国家，我们没别的义务，只要守法就成。 我守法。你也守法。你也没有说，为了爱国，我这个donation的deduction就不要了，多交点税，爱国嘛。 所以我也不要求川普做得跟圣人一样。 选总统不是选圣人。 圣人也说了，己所无欲，勿施于人。 你想想，你做到了哪一条？
纽约时报说的清清楚楚，就标题党而已。 2016 2017各交了100万和420万。后来又用了970万的business investment。所以只用补交750. 这连避税都不算，避税是把盈利放进慈善基金。这里是把盈利用于商业投资，不但不是避税，还是政府应该鼓励的行为。
Each time, he requested an extension to file his 1040; and each time, he made the required payment to the I.R.S. for income taxes he might owe — $1 million for 2016 and $4.2 million for 2017. But virtually all of that liability was washed away when he eventually filed, and most of the payments were rolled forward to cover potential taxes in future years.
To cancel out the tax bills, Mr. Trump made use of $9.7 million in business investment credits, at least some of which related to his renovation of the Old Post Office hotel, which qualified for a historic-preservation tax break. Although he had more than enough credits to owe no taxes at all, his accountants appear to have carved out an allowance for a small tax liability for both 2016 and 2017.
When they got to line 56, the one for income taxes due, the amount was the same each year: $750.
胡说八道。 道德不能用来当任何的标准。连最低标准都不能用。 因为道德是个胡说八道的破烂东西，谁都可以变一套出来骗人。文明国家都是要法制，不要道德的。野蛮国家都是道德不离口的。别有居心的人最喜欢讲道德，因为阿猫阿狗都可以胡编乱造猫狗的道德。
咔咔，想起我以前有钱的时候，看到税表，一年赚的白花花的银子，看1040，我竟然在亏钱。心里都有那么一丢丢不好意思。
川粉真牛逼，法律和道德没关系，是川粉拍脑袋想出来的呗
川粉这满嘴跑火车的功力，真是人间一绝啊
应该说法律是社会行为的最低标准 道德是社会行为的最高标准 不管怎么说法律是最低标准就是了，哈哈
ann coulter最近也没什么影响力啊
属实。老百姓不在乎总统搞个婚外恋，说点混话。但是要是贪污腐败或者少交税，小民的心态会崩了。
谁说美国人民不务实!
🚢粉以前爱说trump太有钱了，因为爱国才会风尘仆仆劳心劳力放弃安逸的富豪生活，是不会为五斗米折腰的。lol
奇怪，是你说的要用道德来选总统的啊。 所以，我认为，有道德的人是要主动多交税，有deduction都不要，不光不要，还要主动加钱进去。 你做不做得到？我是做不到的。不过，不妨碍我说你没有道德，是个小人。至于圣人说的，己所不欲，勿施于人。那也是道德。也可以不管，对吧? 对于你这种只讲道德，不讲道理的小人，其实也是很说得通的。
有一个极右跳水，大概会有其他的极右也跳。。其实cult里的各色川粉确实无论现在爆什么出来都不会改变他们的热爱，能被影响到的大概就是有些左右摇摆或者开始决定不投票的人
我个人其实不太相信750这个数字的，这个数字太整了，反正我每年报税都是有零有整的，感觉也不可能有这么整的数，而且两年一样？.....但如果NYT的数据是编撰，事情发酵成这样，川普很容易直接证伪，不仅NYT名誉扫地，估计还会获得很多中间选民的同情票。所以NYT乱编感觉也不像，除非NYT是高级黑，要搞拜登。逻辑说到这里就是阴谋论范畴了。
750这事，就看川总怎么回应了把。如果只是fake news叫叫，不扔点证据出来，对他肯定会有不利因素的。毕竟中间选民有不少在乎基本的 ethics, integrity & honesty。还有很多人的会被750这个数字刺激，觉得自己被rip off了。
道德当然要讲的，特别是公务员。我们这有个例子，一个City manager。某年发生水灾大批周边人员疏散到城里体育馆旅馆，然后我们很多人都响应号召出时间出力气去志愿服务灾民。城里的商店也给灾民免费吃饭。结果年底发现这个city manager在此期间号称自己忙于组织，overtime claim了小十万块钱。这个不犯法，但是没道德，引起众怒。
就跟这个trump supporter一样啊
系统提示：若遇到视频无法播放请点击下方链接
https://www.youtube.com/embed/kAgTZSJ4jo8
华人可能接触GOP的时间短 GOP的slogan是party of personal responsibility, party of virtue 讲的就是缴税 有道德 还有balance the budget 这些其实都是红线 有些老GOP会叛变
选总统难道是选圣人？
川普跟老gop半点儿关系也没有。。。
他的经济基本还是搞房地产借贷玩资本那套。。。
情况不一样，不能套用。现在是选战，讲道德实际上就变成了两边对扔泥巴。扔上瘾了，都忘了正事了。 现在就是这样的。一个没有公开的税表，一个没有公信的媒体，一个没有完成的IRS查税，一个胡编乱造的750块，看一帮人都嗨上天了。 其实就是小屁孩扔泥巴。 当然，有土工在后面当推手的话，这扔泥巴的活也是有钱拿的。
就按我的标准去要求别人，我也比他多交几十倍的税啊。 他和合理开豪车领救济的龙虾党有区别吗？ 这是common sense, 不幸川普是以common sense 起家的。call it what it is.
750这事有没有影响？我认为是有的，看看华人，Twitter，FB就知道了。
怎么能消除影响并反击？澄清啊。证据是最好的反击武器。
扯法律道德啥的，用处不大。即使NYT违法获取的数据，把NYT告到破产，那也是以后的事情，现在不澄清事实，要挽回影响有点难。
就是楼上有说nyt标题党的，那就说数字啊，不看税表也行，就说我交了10million的税，这句话很难吗？
城堡宝宝装了很多年了啊，和他的种族歧视，满嘴跑火车一样前后一致
系统提示：若遇到视频无法播放请点击下方链接
https://www.youtube.com/embed/RNineSEoxjQ
我没看过川普的税表，不过，隔壁有人说，不是他只交了750块，而是他用了什么投资免税的名堂，让16 和17年只补交750块。不是只交了750块。这两年，他实际上是交了几百万的。 我不关心这个，你可以查清楚了，再回来讲是不是你比他多交几百倍的税。 我猜，你不会。
？？？左棍你是说建立了170年信誉，和严格factcheck机制的主流媒体吗？偏偏就这4年非要做fake news，怎么这么想不开呢唉
狐狸台的律师可不是你这么说的，人说了：他们的观众不期待事实，没有reasonable person会把fox当正经新闻
你有common sense吗？先不说纽约时报的标题党数字750. 就算真的他当年只交了750，也是因为他有970万美元的business investment credit。 拿挣的钱全部去投资当然财政年的收入为0. 他的投资雇佣了大批工人，你的龙虾除了吐壳拉屎还能创造什么？
川粉的智商啊，你不要put words in my mouth 我不认为应该用最低法律标准来选，不表示说就要用最高道德标准来选 及格线就在somewhere in between，你懂了没？
这就是news reporting 和 opinion piece的区别啦 有头脑的成年人，还是多看news reporting，少看opinion piece
哇，川粉现在spin成两年交了几百万的税，然后又补交750。所以大家都是傻子，这么大的数字出入，从上（报社，媒体）至下（读者）都搞不清，这乌龙太大了。
满嘴跑火车没一句真的，川粉都这样，吐习惯就好了
你这是完全不懂税法。 巴菲特600亿身价，都在股票里，只要不卖股票，就不产生capital gain。不用交税。 你看巴菲特一年才交几百万。
你是号被盗了吧？
trump 那税表摞得不山还高。还750。 报过税的人都有能分辨的能力吧。
你的信息有误 How much does Berkshire Hathaway pay in taxes? Warren Buffett''s Berkshire Hathaway paid 1.5% of all U.S. corporate taxes collected in 2019. Berkshire Hathaway, the $560 billion conglomerate owned and run by billionaire Warren Buffett, itself paid 1.5 percent of all corporate income tax collected by the federal government in 2019. https://disrn.com/news/warren-buffets-berkshire-hathaway-paid-15-of-all-us-corporate-taxes-paid-in-2019 另外特朗普公司是他独资的，与巴菲特完全不同。我的理解是他的公司税和个人税是合一的。
这下该学会了吧，明年可以有样学样了
热 税法有漏洞，所以床铺有洞就钻，他是狗么？
拿盈利去投资是税法漏洞？这是所有资本主义国家都应该鼓励的行为。
我们已经知道你没有道德了，也知道川粉粉头是什么货色了，不用再露底了
这个 6 ft 怎么是1.854m?
（这位是大外宣五毛）。真相看图
舔的好辛苦呀。写这么多。
当年收入为零，紧巴巴的花七万做头发是吗？不说合法不合法，前面肉圆的id说的好，这是广大纳税人投票人很难理解的行为。it’s not fair, 你再说一百段经济学，投票的人听说billionaire 交750的税，第一反应还是一样的， it’s not fair.
你自己报过税吗？你上班挣10万，股票损失10万，税表上最后收入0，所以你当年没挣钱？连菜都不能买了？ 49%的人不交税。交税里有投资经验的更少，当然大多数人不能理解。
你太厉害了，上班挣十万write off 十万股票loss, 用的唐人街保税的？
是啊，已经这么惨了，还要给我们加税，谁受得了