Gary Johnson Believes He Deserves to Debate

[Nathan Hale]

Where did you hear that? Just because you do not use your corporation as a tax shelter does not mean it doesn't happen. During the last Congressional hearing on tax policy one of the points of unanimous agreement among tax experts was that corporations are used as tax shelters, and that reducing corporate taxes rates significantly below individual income taxes would create even more incentive for them to be used as tax shelters.

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, only that when it happens it probably happens as a result of convoluted loopholes rather than the structure of a C-Corporation. Unfortunately the c-corporation status is what triggers the tax, and that disinfranchises mom and pops all over the country.

If you want to purchase a jet, fuel it, insure it, pay various support entities and people, etc., you can do that through a corporation, and expenses become a write-off, reducing the taxes. Create multiple corporations to keep them all small. The IRS generally doesn't question Corporate expenses. Try writing off the cost of your pilot or gardener on your personal income taxes, and you will hear from the IRS.

Sure, you can attempt that, but corporate expenses are a huge IRS red flag. You have to itemize them on your 1120s and I have numerous personal examples of their scrutiny.

 

[Nathan Hale]

ad hominim attacks are pretty unpersuasive. The entire thesis of this thread is that there is bias against Gary. Yet you consider it 'tinfoil hattish' to point out bias against Ron, and favoring Gary.

People who want to take this on certainly should. I would if we were fighting for a real structural change to fix the problem, like sending the debates back to the league of women voters. Otherwise I personally don't see the difference between Gary being left out and Roemer being left out, except that Gary but not Roemer was at least let into the last one, where neither made the polling requirements, either. I don't think the debate organizers should be able to just pick and choose, but I don't see why you would only raise one of the candidates excluded in making that point.

It's tin foil hattish to assume conspiracy when coincidence makes more sense.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

C-Corp, but I'm familiar with S-Corp as well.
Well, the employer side of SS and medicare is deductible, it's not that. It's profit bonuses and dividends - often given to workers.

OK, so salaries are not double taxed. Is a bonus not a deductible expense for a C-Corp just like salary? (I am more familiar with S-Corp, where you only get taxed once when profits are passed through. Of course that is at the higher personal income tax rate). If you pay out all corp profits as salary, doesn't that result in single taxation? Dividends are another story, which, interestingly, once again points to a way to use a corporation as a tax shelter via the dividend exclusion rule (where "corporations" can avoid taxes on dividends when investing in other companies, an exclusion that can not be used by individuals).

But to legislate that way is to argue for prohibition of drugs and a host of other infringements because of the small minority that abuses the liberty. I thought the libertarian way was to not legislate to the lowest common denominator. If somebody is really using a corporation as a tax shelter I don't see how they could do this unless their class of corporation is receiving a specific special treatment by the government that could be addressed outside of leveling an income tax.

Who said anything about prohibition or legislating? Once again, I am saying that the personal income taxes need to be eliminated first. What is not "libertarian" about that? Ron Paul talks more about getting rid of the personal income tax than eliminating corporate taxes. That has always been a major difference between Ron Paul and most other politicians and pundits.

 

[MozoVote]

When Ron Paul was excluded from the Iowans for Tax Relief exposition, he got mileage out of that by discussing it with local radio hosts, not to mention the horde of RP supporters who showed up there anyway. When Rick Beltram in Greenville threatened that Paul was unwelcome, enough people demanded that Paul come and speak that Beltram reversed his position and held a fundraiser with Paul as the principal guest.

Gary needs to milk the situation. And he needs the support of enough bodies to cause a ruckus.

If not... drop out and endorse RP.

 

[Crystallas]

The more supporters GJ can gain, the more that will listen to his endorsement.

 

[Jim Casey]

The more supporters GJ can gain, the more that will listen to his endorsement.

Gary Johnson, come on down! Take the plunge off Mount Everest and crowd surf the revolution love.

 

[Nathan Hale]

OK, so salaries are not double taxed.

No, I didn't mean to make it sound like they were, sorry. Just that a few forms on income from corporations were:

Is a bonus not a deductible expense for a C-Corp just like salary? (I am more familiar with S-Corp, where you only get taxed once when profits are passed through. Of course that is at the higher personal income tax rate). If you pay out all corp profits as salary, doesn't that result in single taxation?

Bonuses are like salary, but if you're going to base bonuses on profits, you're technically talking about an expense for the following year, which requires the profits to pass the end of year date and thus be taxed on the 1120. You could probably dance around it, but you're dancing around it.

Dividends are another story, which, interestingly, once again points to a way to use a corporation as a tax shelter via the dividend exclusion rule (where "corporations" can avoid taxes on dividends when investing in other companies, an exclusion that can not be used by individuals).

Investing in other companies is not a tax shelter, it's a deductible expense. You're purchasing assets. But I agree with you that the legal structure that creates this is flawed because it encourages companies to buy up other companies rather than report profits - if anything, it's a sign that we should do away with the tax.

Who said anything about prohibition or legislating? Once again, I am saying that the personal income taxes need to be eliminated first. What is not "libertarian" about that? Ron Paul talks more about getting rid of the personal income tax than eliminating corporate taxes. That has always been a major difference between Ron Paul and most other politicians and pundits.

Okay, so we're on the same side here. I agree with you that eliminating the personal income tax, all things being equal, is the better way to go. But all things aren't equal. In my humble opinion, elimination of the corporate income tax is far closer to the overton window, more palatable to the electorate, and more possible to become policy. That's why I support Gary's position on it. But hey, I back the elimination of the income tax too!

 

[dsentell]

Gary... drop out and endorse RP.

Yep, we could use those 8 votes!