cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: 'Buffet' tax

Well, MY guess would be the CEO.

And the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway would be.......drumroll, please........

 

 

 

 

Warren E. Buffett
<script type="text/javascript"></script>
Warren E. Buffett is the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Berkshire Hathaway.
 
 
 
 

 

 

Or would they go after the chairman of the board?

 

<script type="text/javascript"></script>
Warren Buffett is the company's chairman and CEO. .... The current members of the board of directors of Berkshire Hathaway are Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger, ... More »
Search for: Images · Videos

 

Heck, turns out he is Chairman of the board, as well.

 

Seems to me, while the IRS may first call the accountants, it would be ol' Warren himeslf that would be held most accountable.

Highlighted
Veteran Advisor

Re: How silly!


@kraft-t wrote:

I bought a farm in 1986 $900 per acre. Todays value $6K to $7K $900 paid with after tax income. Balance in capital gains from 5K to 6k,one farm only. I don't know any working class guy that has had his wages multiplied by 7 over the same period of time. He is facing the same inflationary costs but nobody suggest he should get by on a 15% tax rate.

 

I think a workers wages is equally as precious to him as is a return on investment is for and investor. Both contribute to society and the bulk of payroll checks go for living expense. AKA consumers for businesses.

 

I don't know how investors got preferrential treatment. That old saying that the rich create jobs. When in fact they don't. Many times they eliminate jobs in the interest of more profits. I suggest that most in the investment class create no jobs. They merely sit on their wealth and enjoy the benefits while making no effort to hire anyone. Infact they hope the companies downsize and become more efficient.

 

I think they got preferrential treatment by knowing how to get politicians to do their bidding.  Heck, a bunch of them ARE politicians!!!

I agree that the investor class tends to chase money far more than they create jobs.  It is the factory owners that create the jobs.  Many of the investors let the original owner take the startup risk, and then pump in some capital for expansion, to collect the dividends on that.  Remember, it is the business/factory owner that is putting their life on the line.  The investor generally uses 'disposable' money to buy shares in a company where someone else is doing the work, and then demands a dividend.

Now, the trick is how do we give the acutal business owners, who are risking their life's savings and work, a break, so they can hire more workers, and separate them out from the people who just shovel some mad money into the company, and expect a low-tax return?

 

 

And after those windfall profiteers do not want to pay taxes on their gain nor do they want to pay estate taxes. They think they deserve preferrential treatment even beyond the grave. Now $5 million can pass tax free anmd they still want a better deal.

 

The only problem I see in having no amount of low-tax or tax-free estate taxes would be for example a farm, or small business.  Dad owns the place on paper, but Junior worked at it for 30 years, putting in long hours so the banker could get paid, only to have to sell it to pay the estate tax.  However, good estate planning should get around that, if they have the foresight to do it.

 

I doubt Warren Buffet owes a billion in taxes. Perhaps Berkshire Hathaway does.


 

Warren Buffet only gets a 'salary' of about $100,000 a portion of which are 'expenses' the business pays for him, which makes the tax rate lower.  The rest of his net worth is either in tax-exempt trusts, or in unrealized (and un-taxed) capital gains.  While technically BH owes almost all of the billion in taxes, guess who is the biggest shareholder, the CEO, and Chairman of the board, all rolled into one?

Highlighted
Honored Advisor

Re: How silly!

Land today is like tulip mania or a Ponzi scheme. There is alot of if`s and but`s, like "if" I sold 5 years ago, I`d have missed out on a 300% increase.  Politicians with the stoke of a pen end ethanol bringing 4 billion bu of extra corn to market, rate interest rates, a dozen things that that could bring land down to  $3,000/a which would be the equivalent to $400/a land in 1960 accounting for inflation.  At the risk of sounding like the Una-bomber the reason more aren`t employed directly on the farm is ...technology.  Roundup seed=No cultivators.  48 row, EZ-Steer planters= more acres per day per man.  Round balers= no kids stacking hay on the rack.  Maybe we have become too efficient for our own good, in `70 JD built ooodles of 4020`s employing more workers per tractor than today building a 9630, plus some of that tractor`s components were manufactured overseas.  At any rate the midwest economy is one of the few bright spots. Morton bldgs booked solid their carpenters are overtime, while their counterparts California house builders haven`t shot many nails these days.

Highlighted
Senior Advisor

Re: How silly!

It was Warren you don't tax me enough Buffet who was on the receiving end of TARP money. Why doesn't he just go ahead and pay HIS taxes?

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: How silly!

Bruce, you are trying to educate people that, while they may be here physically, their brains have left the building. They are a waste of time. If you've got a dog, go tell him, at least he'll wag his tail like he understands.

Highlighted
Senior Contributor

Re: 'Buffet' tax

If Warren paid 7 million in personal income taxes, I want to apply to be his secretary.  The media is trying to spin the story that his secretary pays more in taxes than he does.  The fact is his secretary pays a higher percentage of her wage than the percent he pays.  This is because he pays capital gains rates rather than ordinary income because he doesn't draw a salary.  One would think if he's all for paying a higher percentage that he would draw a salary so that he could pay ordinary income tax rather than just capital gains.

 

I personally don't have much of a problem taxing investment income as ordinary income, but the only fair way to do this is to allow the investor the ability to deduct the full amount of annual losses rather than a measely 3 grand.  If this would have happened in 2008, the tax receipts would have looked rather dismal considering the amount of money lost in the stocks, etc.