Why is the tax code giving special treatment to corporate jets?

  • News
  • Thread starter Jimmy Snyder
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Jets Taxes
In summary, the President said that if we choose to keep tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires, if we choose to keep a tax break for corporate jet owners, if we choose to keep tax breaks for oil and gas companies that are making hundreds of billions of dollars, then that means we’ve got to cut some kids off from getting a college scholarship. From the point of view of the jet manufacturers and their customers, the tax break is better than a check."
  • #71
mheslep said:
Because Obama gets elected? Most of those people so far seem to be left leaning
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/leave.asp

I think you missed the point of the joke. That's okay, it'll probably hit you soon. Also, that WAS a typo... it meant to say "re-elected"
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
Char. Limit said:
I always laugh at the people who say they'll leave the country if we raise taxes/Obama gets elected/they don't win. It's funny because they're always the same people who say that we have the "single greatest country that God has ever given man on the face of the Earth". Well, if it's so great, then why are you so eager to leave?

Sorry, might be unrelated. But still funny.

It's no more silly than President Obama talking about an accounting adjustment of $300Million(roughly?) when faced with a maxed-out $14Trillion credit limit - sort of like buying a can of beer instead of a bottle when your $10,000 credit card is about to be maxed-out - doesn't help much.
 
  • #73
mheslep said:
The point is some left. I doubt you thought I was stating that the income loss was because all millionaires left Md. Consider: how many millionaires have to pay the ~10% or whatever increase to existing Md income taxes to make up for those that are now paying none because they left the state altogether, taking some property taxes and likely some jobs with them?

Note that http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/01/keith-richards-we-left-england" is feasible as well should taxes climb high enough.

Look, you made the claim that some people left Maryland because of the tax situation. Moreover, you implied that there was a net loss in tax revenue, because so many left the state that it wiped out more than the extra taxes those who stayed payed.

You have provided no evidence of this. Can you at least find ONE millionaire who states that the primary reason they left Maryland was because of the tax hike? Not that that would prove your case, but so far, you haven't shown anything.

I'm not making any claims, I think it's quite possible that enough millionaires left Maryland to cancel out the tax hike, but it's up to you to support your argument.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #74
Jack21222 said:
Look, you made the claim that some people left Maryland because of the tax situation. Moreover, you implied that there was a net loss in tax revenue, because so many left the state that it wiped out more than the extra taxes those who stayed payed.

You have provided no evidence of this. Can you at least find ONE millionaire who states that the primary reason they left Maryland was because of the tax hike? Not that that would prove your case, but so far, you haven't shown anything.

I'm not making any claims, I think it's quite possible that enough millionaires left Maryland to cancel out the tax hike, but it's up to you to support your argument.

There is an alternative to 'millionare's dissapearing' - they didn't make money.

I've posted a few articles on this in other threads, and for some reason I can't find it by quickly googling - but there was evidence that CA's big budget shortfalls were because the top 1% contributing 80% of the income tax revenues in the early 2000s in CA stopped making money in the late 2000s. The rich, while rich, can also afford to lose money for a year or two and not blink too hard. Since we tax on income, if they stop making money - that means less for the state. Since the start of this discussion, I wonder if that's more of the case in MD than actual millionare's leaving.
 
  • #75
mege said:
There is an alternative to 'millionare's dissapearing' - they didn't make money.

I've posted a few articles on this in other threads, and for some reason I can't find it by quickly googling - but there was evidence that CA's big budget shortfalls were because the top 1% contributing 80% of the income tax revenues in the early 2000s in CA stopped making money in the late 2000s. The rich, while rich, can also afford to lose money for a year or two and not blink too hard. Since we tax on income, if they stop making money - that means less for the state. Since the start of this discussion, I wonder if that's more of the case in MD than actual millionare's leaving.

The real question should be "what is the impact on jobs creation and growth in Maryland - is capital flowing in or out"?

Aside from Government contractors and the DC suburbs - what are the business trends in Maryland?
 
  • #76
Jack21222 said:
Look, you made the claim that some people left Maryland because of the tax situation...
From my original response:
WSJ said:
The Maryland state revenue office says it's "way too early" to tell how many millionaires moved out of the state when the tax rates rose. But no one disputes that some rich filers did leave...

Christopher Summers, president of the Maryland Public Policy Institute, notes: "Marylanders with high incomes typically own second homes in tax friendlier states like Florida, Delaware, South Carolina and Virginia. So it's easy for them to change their residency."

Jack21222 said:
Moreover, you implied that there was a net loss in tax revenue, because so many left the state that it wiped out more than the extra taxes those who stayed payed.

You have provided no evidence of this.
WSJ said:
Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates.
This still doesn't provide a forensic accounting proof, but my original statement is a very reasonable conclusion given the the macro facts we do know, including the well established correlation between high earners and the shunning of high tax venues. If I feel inclined I'll attempt to dig up more information on the Md. case.

Edit:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...114241782001262.html?mod=djemEditorialPage_h":
WSJ said:
... the state comptroller's office [of Md] now has the final tax return data for 2008, the first year that the higher tax rates applied. The number of millionaire tax returns fell sharply to 5,529 from 7,898 in 2007, a 30% tumble. The taxes paid by rich filers fell by 22%, and instead of their payments increasing by $106 million, they fell by some $257 million.

Yes, a big part of that decline results from the recession that eroded incomes, especially from capital gains. But there is also little doubt that some rich people moved out or filed their taxes in other states with lower burdens. One-in-eight millionaires who filed a Maryland tax return in 2007 filed no return in 2008. Some died, but the others presumably changed their state of residence...
One-in-eight paying zero tax to Maryland. And as I posted before, the $257 million decline from state income taxes doesn't account for the lost property taxes, lost jobs provided by the millionaires, or the income that the millionaires may have shifted into less productive tax shelters shrinking their taxable income.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #77
More anecdotes regarding high earners fleeing high taxes:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/budget/5219642/Sir-Michael-Caine-warns-further-tax-rises-will-force-him-to-move-abroad.html"
Michael Caine said:
"I will not pay the Government more than I get. No way, ever. So they've reached their limit with me. That's the lot."...
"That's what will happen to a lot of people," he said. "You know how much they [the government] made out of that high taxation all those years ago?
"Nothing and they sent a mass of incredible brains to America. Yes they did. The most stupid act you've ever seen in your life.
"We've got three and a half million layabouts laying about on benefits and I'm 76 getting up at six o'clock in the morning to go to work to keep them.
"Let's get everybody back to work so we can save a couple of billion and cut tax, not to keep sticking it on

The new 50% income tax could stifle enterprise and drive risk takers overseas
The Sunday Times UK said:
Thanks to Alistair Darling’s 50% tax rate, announced in the budget, the co-founder of Hargreaves Lansdown, Britain’s biggest firm of financial advisers, is expected to cough up an extra £500,000 a year in income tax. “I won’t pay. I’ll leave,” said the 63-year-old entrepreneur, echoing the words of hundreds of businessmen.

“Why wouldn’t I? If I stay I’ll pay half a million more a year in tax. If I leave the country I can save £3m a year. It’s almost like the government is offering me a bribe worth £3m a year to go and live abroad.”
"[URL Me Google That For You: businesses leave california
[/URL]103,000,000 results (0.20 seconds)"[URL Top Ten Reasons Why California Companies Are Calling the Moving Companies
[/URL]#9 – Severe Tax Treatment: The Tax Foundation in their 2011 State Business Tax Climate Index lists California at No. 49 for tax fairness. CFO Magazine ranked California the worst state for tax treatment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #78
Somebody should get the Whitehouse a DVD pack of old West Wing episodes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=716qbOv3a4M
 
  • #79
mheslep said:
Somebody should get the Whitehouse a DVD pack of old West Wing episodes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=716qbOv3a4M

nice
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
69
Views
8K
  • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
46
Views
7K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
103
Views
13K
Replies
17
Views
6K
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
74
Views
16K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Back
Top