Remember when everyone was upset that Amazon threatened to pull their warehouses out of CA to avoid collecting sales taxes? Now everyone is upset because Amazon is collecting sales taxes in CA according to CA state law...
Have a look at this FAQ entry on the California Board of Equalization website:
Are delivery and handling charges taxable? Delivery charges. You have the property delivered directly to your customer using a common carrier, the U.S. Mail, or an independent contractor
Tax does not apply to the delivery charges under these conditions if the charges are clearly stated as a separate entry on the invoice or other bill of sale. If the delivery charges are not stated separately, they are taxable.
Example.
You sell a refrigerator and have it delivered by an independent contract carrier. On the invoice, you show a $750 charge for the refrigerator plus a separately stated $50 charge for delivery (the amount charged you by the carrier). Since the delivery charge is stated separately, tax applies only to the charge of the refrigerator ($750). If the invoice had shown a single charge of $800, tax would apply to the entire amount.
Note: If you charge more for delivery than your actual costs, the added amount is subject to tax. In the example above, if you had charged your customer $60 for delivery, but your actual delivery cost was $50 (the amount charged by the independent contract carrier), tax would apply to the additional $10 charge. You use your vehicle to make the delivery
Tax applies to the delivery charges if you use your own vehicle, whether or not those charges are separately stated on the invoice.
Example. You sell a refrigerator and deliver it to your customer using your own vehicle. On the invoice, you show a $750 charge for the refrigerator plus a separately stated $50 charge for delivery. Tax applies both to the delivery charge and the charge for the refrigerator.
Note: Tax does not apply to delivery charges using your own vehicle if there is a written contract of sale, signed before delivery, that transfers ownership of the property to the purchaser prior to delivery.
Handling charges. Handling charges are generally taxable.
Combined charges. If you charge a single amount for delivery and handling (for example, the invoice shows a single amount for "postage and handling" or "shipping and handling"), the portion of the charge that represents handling is generally taxable, while the portion that represents delivery may or may not be taxable.
Note: It is important to use terms such as "delivery," "shipping," or "postage" on the invoice to represent delivery charges. A separately stated charge that says only "handling", for example, is not considered a delivery charge and the entire handling charge is taxable--even if postage or shipment charges are indicated on the package.
For more information on delivery charges, or information on how tax may apply to a specific transaction, please see Regulation 1628, Transportation Charges or publication 100, Shipping and Delivery Charges. You can also contact the Board's Information Center 800-400-7115 or your nearest Board office.
He didn't say decade old iPhone stories, he said computer - and using an iPhone as a computer terminal isn't really revolutionary. Many hams used the HP pocket dos computers at least 15 years ago.
You really haven't thought this through, have you?
Remove all deduction except RnD Why spare R&D? Why is that so special?
Tax companies that make under 250K 10% On every dollar of profit?
over 250K 30% That's a huge chunk of a company's profits. . Tax monies over a 5 billion at 100% So no company will ever earn more than $5BN? Congratulations, you've killed the stock market, and all those 401Ks
Raise the top 3% taxes to 36%, raise the top.1% taxes to 50% So you are taxing individuals at a higher rate than corporations?
Remove deductions to non profits. You've just taken a 10-30% "cut" off the top of every successful charity (based on your previous corp. tax rates)
Churches pay taxes just like companies. So now the gov't is entitled to 10-30% of every church donation?
Remove the child credit. This will hurt low-income families way more than the wealthy - is that your goal?
Institute a Tobbin's tax,.05% on every trade. Why?
Put the increase in revenue into Education, NASA , Infrastructure and Darpa.
Let me guess, you are college student studying either science or engineering, have no children, no relation to a religious organization, and you've never met anyone that started their own business...
romney wants to re-allocate to the wealthy through top-tier and corporate tax cuts
Uhm, lowering tax rates for the wealthy (and everyone else that actually pays federal income taxes) isn't a "re-allocation" - it's allowing them to retain more of what they earned. In order to "re-allocate" you have to take from one and give it to another...
Where do the 'rich' hide their money and avoid having it finance other activities?
It's not in tax-free bonds. (They directly fund work)
It's not in a bank account. (They fund banks that loan money for business loans and home mortgages)
It's not in the stock market. (By investing in the stock market the 'market cap' of public companies increase, allowing companies to fund expansion, individual incestors see their portfolios increase allowing investors to buy an expensive car, house, fund a child's education, act as seed money for starting their own business, etc)
Please, where do the rich 'hide' their money from building the economy? (BTW, foreign banks fund the same activities as domestic banks, sometimes in America, sometimes overseas)
There are only one set of tax rates in America, and they apply equally to all Americans.
The next time an A-List celebrity/performer suggests the rich need to pay more, dig into it a little bit and see how they are paid. Most high earners have a personal services company that takes their ONE employee's pay not as income but as a fee for services rendered, then their personal services company buys their house, cars, invests their money, etc. as a corporation and are taxes as a corporation. Do you think when Brad Pitt takes a $20M fee to be in a film he turns around and writes Uncle Sam a $7M check for income taxes? ($7M is 35% of $20M)
Also, don't confuse the tax rate on the last dollar earned to someone's overall tax rate.
Obama, Romney, Buffett, and Buffett's secretary all pay the same income tax rates on their income, and pat the same capital gains tax on their long-term investments - the difference is that each of them has a different mix of earnings and investment income.
The purpose of the Tax Code is to fund the operation of the federal government, not to balance out inequities in individual income levels...
You have to deal with the realities of our current tax code:
47% of tax FILERS pay no net INCOME TAX (yes, they pay taxes on their cellphones, auto tires, gasoline, etc)
The top 1% of incomes earn 20% of all income and pay 40% of all COLLECTED income taxes. (Rounded for my convienience)
Now, how do you propose to 'cut' taxes for the lower incomes without also benefiting the higher income people? Raising the thresholds before the tax rates kick in does nothing for the lowest 47% (since they already pay nothing), and disproportionately benefit the higher income earners because they are the ones paying taxes.
If lowering taxes in higher income individuals doesn't stimulate the economy by making more investment capital available (money not spent is typically invested), are you prepared to defend the idea that increasing taxes on higher income individuals will somehow stimulate the economy?
Let's not forget the very computers your local school rejected were being disposed of by your employer.
If you take a good look at your local school budget you'll likely see that about 70-75% goes towards teacher salaries and benefits (as it should), and as much as 1-2% goes towards technology per year - I seriously doubt that your district's technology policies are causing the taxes to rise.
Dip them in chocolate, wrap them up in a colorful wrapper, and call them something like "Computer Memory dipped in chocolate" (include the quotes - the kids will think it's a joke name, then when they take a bite, the joke's on them!)
It is really quite simple - because the kids were able to figure out the GUI without formal training it is the logical conclusion that they will someday find Khan Academy, learn english, and teach themselves enough advanced math to propel their country into the 21st century./sarcasm
I strongly suspect your statistic relates to UNION teachers - I have two nieces that both teach in North Carolina - one in a union district, one in a non-union district. The niece in the non-union district barely makes a livable (as opposed to "Living") wage, the one in the union district is better compensated (under $40K starting).
Teachers contracts have a number of steps defined, in my district is it 1-18. Each step corresponds to years of service - there is no achievement required other than remaining in the district. When you hear about 4% pay raises what you are really doing is increasing every number in the "step" chart, but a teacher that is step 1 will be step 2 next year and so on. The actual increase in an individual teacher's pay is more like 6%.
Here's a link to my school district contract, this was sold as an average 2% pay increase going forward, but the actual take-home increase is over 4%.
Please, share the other side of the story - as best as I can tell they had over-paid teachers working too few hours and the children were among the poorest-performing in the country. When the Mayor increased the school day, and also increased the amount of work each teacher had to do, the teachers insisted in a proportional pay increase to maintian their status as among the highest-paid in the nation.
They should move to a school district that values their teaching skills. If they are unable to find a new job in a better-paying district, there's a good chance their teaching skills aren't all that phenomenal.
Mediocre teachers deserve mediocre pay, just as spectacular teachers deserve spectacular pay.
Slashdot Mirror
How did they account for multiple racists tweets from one "tweeter"?
One racist sending 100 racist tweets is not the same as 100 different racists each sending one racist tweet each.
Remember when everyone was upset that Amazon threatened to pull their warehouses out of CA to avoid collecting sales taxes? Now everyone is upset because Amazon is collecting sales taxes in CA according to CA state law...
It's nice that you found a way to not pay "your fair share" to the state you live in.
Have a look at this FAQ entry on the California Board of Equalization website:
http://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/faqpurch.htm#10
He didn't say decade old iPhone stories, he said computer - and using an iPhone as a computer terminal isn't really revolutionary. Many hams used the HP pocket dos computers at least 15 years ago.
With a tax rate of 80% the incentive to find loopholes is great, when the tax rate is 15 or 20%, the incentive is much less.
Faced with a 95% tax on his income, John Lennon left England for the US as a tax exile.
Faced with a similar tax rate, U2 moved out of Ireland, for tax purposes.
The idea of "geting the rich to pay through the nose" relies on the mistaken belief that the rich have no alternative...
You might want to take a look into this administration's handling of a terrorist attack in Libya...
You really haven't thought this through, have you?
Remove all deduction except RnD Why spare R&D? Why is that so special?
Tax companies that make under 250K 10% On every dollar of profit?
over 250K 30% That's a huge chunk of a company's profits.
.
Tax monies over a 5 billion at 100% So no company will ever earn more than $5BN? Congratulations, you've killed the stock market, and all those 401Ks
Raise the top 3% taxes to 36%, raise the top .1% taxes to 50% So you are taxing individuals at a higher rate than corporations?
Remove deductions to non profits. You've just taken a 10-30% "cut" off the top of every successful charity (based on your previous corp. tax rates)
Churches pay taxes just like companies. So now the gov't is entitled to 10-30% of every church donation?
Remove the child credit. This will hurt low-income families way more than the wealthy - is that your goal?
Institute a Tobbin's tax, .05% on every trade. Why?
Put the increase in revenue into Education, NASA , Infrastructure and Darpa.
Let me guess, you are college student studying either science or engineering, have no children, no relation to a religious organization, and you've never met anyone that started their own business...
What do the Swiss and Cayman Island banks do with thier deposits? If they are paying interest, they must be investing that money somewhere...
There are a whole lot of people caught up in-between $200/250K/yr and the folks that can justify Swiss/Cayman Island bank accounts.
When has anyone actually proposed tying job creation to tax breaks?
Uhm, lowering tax rates for the wealthy (and everyone else that actually pays federal income taxes) isn't a "re-allocation" - it's allowing them to retain more of what they earned. In order to "re-allocate" you have to take from one and give it to another...
Where do the 'rich' hide their money and avoid having it finance other activities?
It's not in tax-free bonds. (They directly fund work)
It's not in a bank account. (They fund banks that loan money for business loans and home mortgages)
It's not in the stock market. (By investing in the stock market the 'market cap' of public companies increase, allowing companies to fund expansion, individual incestors see their portfolios increase allowing investors to buy an expensive car, house, fund a child's education, act as seed money for starting their own business, etc)
Please, where do the rich 'hide' their money from building the economy? (BTW, foreign banks fund the same activities as domestic banks, sometimes in America, sometimes overseas)
As you cut taxes for the middle class you are also cutting them for the rich.
Please define 'middle class' - politicians seem to place it between 2x and 8x the Federal Poverty Level... (That's around $40-150K/yr)
There are only one set of tax rates in America, and they apply equally to all Americans.
The next time an A-List celebrity/performer suggests the rich need to pay more, dig into it a little bit and see how they are paid. Most high earners have a personal services company that takes their ONE employee's pay not as income but as a fee for services rendered, then their personal services company buys their house, cars, invests their money, etc. as a corporation and are taxes as a corporation. Do you think when Brad Pitt takes a $20M fee to be in a film he turns around and writes Uncle Sam a $7M check for income taxes? ($7M is 35% of $20M)
Also, don't confuse the tax rate on the last dollar earned to someone's overall tax rate.
Obama, Romney, Buffett, and Buffett's secretary all pay the same income tax rates on their income, and pat the same capital gains tax on their long-term investments - the difference is that each of them has a different mix of earnings and investment income.
So if your boss lowers your wages, your natural reaction is to work more to make up the shortfall?
I've not seen that particular response when gov't/employers try and worker's cut wages... They seem to get indignant and talk about striking...
The purpose of the Tax Code is to fund the operation of the federal government, not to balance out inequities in individual income levels...
You have to deal with the realities of our current tax code:
47% of tax FILERS pay no net INCOME TAX (yes, they pay taxes on their cellphones, auto tires, gasoline, etc)
The top 1% of incomes earn 20% of all income and pay 40% of all COLLECTED income taxes. (Rounded for my convienience)
Now, how do you propose to 'cut' taxes for the lower incomes without also benefiting the higher income people? Raising the thresholds before the tax rates kick in does nothing for the lowest 47% (since they already pay nothing), and disproportionately benefit the higher income earners because they are the ones paying taxes.
If lowering taxes in higher income individuals doesn't stimulate the economy by making more investment capital available (money not spent is typically invested), are you prepared to defend the idea that increasing taxes on higher income individuals will somehow stimulate the economy?
I'd like to see that defense.
Let's not forget the very computers your local school rejected were being disposed of by your employer.
If you take a good look at your local school budget you'll likely see that about 70-75% goes towards teacher salaries and benefits (as it should), and as much as 1-2% goes towards technology per year - I seriously doubt that your district's technology policies are causing the taxes to rise.
Dip them in chocolate, wrap them up in a colorful wrapper, and call them something like "Computer Memory dipped in chocolate" (include the quotes - the kids will think it's a joke name, then when they take a bite, the joke's on them!)
It is really quite simple - because the kids were able to figure out the GUI without formal training it is the logical conclusion that they will someday find Khan Academy, learn english, and teach themselves enough advanced math to propel their country into the 21st century. /sarcasm
Obviously a reward for inspiring the students to become self-reliant.
Then again, her lawyers probably argued that being able to speak intelligable english wasn't listed as a job requirement in the contract.
I strongly suspect your statistic relates to UNION teachers - I have two nieces that both teach in North Carolina - one in a union district, one in a non-union district. The niece in the non-union district barely makes a livable (as opposed to "Living") wage, the one in the union district is better compensated (under $40K starting).
Let me introduce you to the "step" system.
Teachers contracts have a number of steps defined, in my district is it 1-18. Each step corresponds to years of service - there is no achievement required other than remaining in the district. When you hear about 4% pay raises what you are really doing is increasing every number in the "step" chart, but a teacher that is step 1 will be step 2 next year and so on. The actual increase in an individual teacher's pay is more like 6%.
Here's a link to my school district contract, this was sold as an average 2% pay increase going forward, but the actual take-home increase is over 4%.
For many inner-city school students the "government minders" you describe would be an improvement.
Please, share the other side of the story - as best as I can tell they had over-paid teachers working too few hours and the children were among the poorest-performing in the country. When the Mayor increased the school day, and also increased the amount of work each teacher had to do, the teachers insisted in a proportional pay increase to maintian their status as among the highest-paid in the nation.
You wouldn't imaigne the new developments year in, year out, in Algebra, History, and English are staggering.
Imagine the innumerable hours of prep time that were worked re-working astronomy classes once it was determined that Pluto is no longer a planet...
In my district, teachers are paid $50/hour for curriculum development - teachers don't willy-nilly re-work curricullums every year, that's insane.
They should move to a school district that values their teaching skills. If they are unable to find a new job in a better-paying district, there's a good chance their teaching skills aren't all that phenomenal.
Mediocre teachers deserve mediocre pay, just as spectacular teachers deserve spectacular pay.