|America's independent, non-partisan advocate for overburdened taxpayers.||Home | Donate | RSS | Log in|
The Late Edition: May 28, 2013
Today’s Taxpayer News!
NTU’s Pete Sepp voices concern over the lack of transparency in public-private partnerships between the investment branch of the CIA and various for-profit companies. Read the full story from CRN News.
In the wake of Apple’s talking-to last week over its tax practices, it’s worth taking a look at the rates companies pay in corporate income taxes. See this interactive graph from the New York Times indicating the taxes paid by S.&P. 500 companies from 2007 to 2012.
Congress had a productive weekend, forming four separate investigation teams to dig to the bottom of the IRS scandal, says the Daily Caller.0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Internet Sales Tax Would Be Bad for Small Businesses
Our former Director of Government Affairs, Paul Gessing, penned a great op-ed about the so-called “Marketplace Fairness Act,” which is better known as the internet sales tax bill. Opponents of this massive expansion of government power have claimed it is necessary to help the small business community. Paul, however, notes that some small businesses would actually be devastated by the legislation:
One Albuquerque-based business owner has stated he would no longer sell his product online under an Internet taxation regime as set up under the Marketplace Fairness Act. The issue is not an unwillingness to have his consumers “pay their fair share,” but the compliance costs that involve submitting documentation, often on a monthly basis even if his company has no sales in that particular jurisdiction.
He is by no means the only small business owner to face negative repercussions from Congressional overreach on Internet sales. It is one big reason why Ebay, Etsy, and their small, but numerous sellers oppose the Act while the online behemoth Amazon has become one of its primary advocates.
The “Marketplace Fairness Act” isn’t about helping small businesses. Paul pegs the bill for what it really is: an attempt by state tax collectors to get their hands on as much of your money as they possibly can. You can read more about the issue here, here, and here.0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
The Late Edition: April 24, 2013
Today’s Taxpayer News!
NTU joined a host of fiscal conservative organizations in support of the Helping Sick Americans Now Act, which offers market-based alternatives to some ObamaCare provisions.
Minnesota is considering adding a fourth-tier income tax bracket that would raise the rate from 7.9 percent to 9.4 percent for individuals beginning at the $80,000 income level.0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
The Late Edition: April 22, 2013
Today’s Taxpayer News!
A roundup of last week’s "Tax Week" blogs:
In case you haven’t heard, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to ram a controversial Internet sales tax bill through the Senate. The bill could come to the floor at any time! It is very important that we stop this abuse of power and urge Senators to oppose the so-called “Marketplace Fairness Act" (MFA).
Want to learn more about the MFA? Here are some great resources:
If the Marketplace Fairness Act was such a good deal for taxpayers, there would be no need for the underhanded tactics Senator Reid is using. We need to stand up to his legislative bullying. Your urgent help is needed!0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
The Late Edition: April 17, 2013
Today’s Taxpayer News!
NTU recently urged the Arkansas senate to reject the Governor’s costly Medicaid expansion plans.
Minnesota seeks more revenue through a proposal to raise the alcohol excise tax by as much as $2 dollars per 12-pack, says the San Francisco Chronicle.0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Being an American taxpayer is always a chore, but for those who may live abroad or have some foreign connection, their status as American taxpayers allows the U.S. government to further invade their lives. This continuing advance of the IRS on foreign residents is a major reason, in addition to high rates, that we’ve seen a rise in Americans renouncing their citizenship.
What is making this situation so, pardon the pun, taxing? Americans abroad have already been subject to a uniquely unfair double-taxation system, where they can owe the IRS income taxes even if they made no U.S.-based income. Now, new regulations, like those in the FATCA law, add to the pain and fear felt by taxpayers outside our borders.
There are many stories about the travails of taxpayers in these situations. A New York Times piece from 2012 highlights a variety of them. One typical example is a Canadian man who has never resided in the U.S., but who could lose his inheritance from his American-born parents because he had not been filing U.S. tax returns (of course making up the returns includes thousands in fees).
That type of difficulty is just the tip of the iceberg, but very much worth noting because it demonstrates how the double-tax standard affects people who are below the threshold for owing income tax but still (unbeknownst to many of them) must make out tax returns.
It is the 2010 FATCA regulations added on top of the 1970 Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts requirement that subject taxpayers abroad to an even more invasive IRS than U.S. residents. And, it goes both ways. As Andy Quinlan of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity put it in a recent Daily Caller piece:
Included as a provision to help pay for the 2010 HIRE Act, FATCA essentially conscripts foreign financial institutions (FFIs) as deputy tax collectors for the IRS, and even expects them to pay for the privilege. FFIs are required to identify all of their American clients, spy on their financial activities, and report their information and activities to the IRS. …
It is this tag team that body slams taxpayers, requiring the full revelation of all foreign bank accounts if one has at least $10,000 total in non-U.S. banks. As a Reason article discusses, this can mean you are responsible for disclosing all your accounts to the IRS if your spouse has an old overseas account with $10,000 in it. Just one example of how easy it is to become subject to these laws that always seem to have been sought in the name of chasing down evil tax evaders.
It is FATCA that has gone so far as to cause foreign-based banks to even refuse to take Americans seeking accounts, even expelling American customers! The law requires the banks to provide the IRS with information on their customers who are “U.S. persons or foreign entities with substantial U.S. ownership.” Otherwise, most FATCA rules take effect in 2014, and with them the beginning of serious penalties non-compliant banks will face:
(paying the IRS) 30-percent of any payments of U.S. source income, as well as gross proceeds from the sale of securities that generate U.S. source income, made to (a) non-participating FFIs, (b) individual accountholders failing to provide sufficient information to determine whether or not they are a U.S. person, or (c) foreign entity accountholders failing to provide sufficient information about the identity of its substantial U.S. owners.
Is it any wonder Marylouise Serrato is quoted in the Daily Mail saying, “Americans abroad are terrified. We've had people pay tens of thousands of dollars in fines… Now…we're seeing a lot of people speak openly about it (renouncing citizenship) and come to us for information.”
These struggles for our compatriots abroad highlight a couple disturbing trends in tax complexity. First, that no power is too invasive for the IRS; and second, that Congress’ pursuit of “the rich” continues to ensnare the decidedly non-rich in red tape and tax obligations that are completely unfair.0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Even Members of Congress Can't Figure Out Tax Code
For taxpayers, NTU’s annual tax complexity report released yesterday wasn’t exactly full of surprises. Anyone who spent the last few days and weeks sorting through financial documents and trying to interpret the dead-language of the Internal Revenue Service in order to simply comply with 16th amendment can attest to the enormous burden imposed by this annual rite. In fact, tax compliance has become so onerous that 9 out of 10 returns filed are now done by paid preparers or tax software – a clear sign that more and more are simply throwing in the towel.
And it would seem that our legislators in Washington also feel the pain – yesterday, TheHill.com reported that “tax forms are too complex for members of Congress to fill out on their own.”
Coming from the very people with the power to overhaul the system, the tales of tax-preparation woe seem almost quaint:
In fact, when broached with the question, “Do you fill out your own tax forms?” most members burst out laughing before admitting it was just too complicated.
“I’m a former business lawyer,” Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) said, adding that he’s served on tax-writing committees during his time in Congress. “I know a lot about tax policy as a result, but I would not dare to do my own taxes.”
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said: “I did taxes for other people for a long time. I could not possibly do taxes now for myself.”
It may be a sign of reforms to come when even lawmakers can’t figure out the laws, or it could be that people who don’t have to face down the mountain of forms and receipts in person might not realize the incredible cost mounting tax complexity is imposing both on individuals and our economy.
Either way, this is a good reminder that the current Tax Code is broken and needs to be scrapped. Luckily, the Ways and Means Committee is well underway on major reforms that will simplify things and hopefully help spur economic growth. But it will be an uphill battle and reformed-minded legislators need all the grassroots help they can get. Please take a minute to send a message to your legislators by clicking here and tell Washington we need to Scrap the Code!
0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Maryland's "Rain Tax" Will Soon Fall On Property Owners
Maryland property owners may not feel like singin' in the rain when they see forecasts for showers and storms this summer.
On July 1, local governments in ten of the largest counties in Maryland -- including Baltimore, Howard, and Prince George's, as well as Baltimore City -- will begin collecting a so-called "rain tax." The fee will be charged to residents according to the square footage of "impervious surface" they own. As explained in The Gazette:
"In 2010 the Obama administration's Environmental Protection Agency ordered Maryland to reduce stormwater runoff into the Chesapeake Bay so that nitrogen levels fall 22 percent and phosphorus falls 15 percent from current amounts. The price tag: $14.8 billion.
The Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in the United States and has long been a point of focus for environmental agencies' protection efforts. Now, unfunded "clean up" mandates from the EPA and the State of Maryland have left local county governments with a hefty bill. Affected counties will have to determine the rates they'll charge property owners per square foot of runoff surface. According to the report above, satellite imagery will be used to help determine or substantiate the liability that individuals and organizations are responsible for paying. The state anticipates about 75 percent of the tax revenue will come from individual property owners, and the remaining 25 percent will come from non-residential property owners.
Montgomery County, which borders Washington, D.C., already imposes a "rain tax." Last year it spent the $17 million it collected on various conservation education and training workshops.
The tax will also be levied on buildings and parking lots belonging to non-profit organizations, such as charities, churches, and community service associations. For groups with multiple locations throughout the state, that could mean a significantly higher financial burden than what they've traditionally had to budget for.
Residential property owners in Maryland can expect to pay between $10-200 per year. Non-residential owners, however, could be looking at many thousands of dollars' worth of fees.0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts
Obama Budget Could Call for Massive Tobaccco Tax Hike
Yesterday, my colleague Nan Swift weighed in on some of the leaked information about President Obama’s forthcoming budget. She noted in her blog post, “Among the big-ticket taxes the President is touting is another massive hike in federal tobacco taxes to fund the universal pre-K program the President spoke of during his State of the Union address earlier this year.”
So we know Obama will call for a huge increase in the tobacco tax. But just how big a hike are we talking?
Well if the Republican staffers at the Senate Budget Committee are correct, the President intends to spend an additional $100 billion on the pre-K program and finance all of this new spending with higher tobacco taxes. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) evaluated a hypothetical 50-cent per pack tax increase on tobacco – from $1.01 to $1.51. The analysis estimated that this would net the federal government $38 billion in new tax revenues plus an additional $3 billion in reduced expenditures. So this hypothetical massive tax increase would fail to cover even half the cost of the new pre-K program. Fully paying for it, as the Obama administration has insisted it would do, would likely require at least a doubling of the current federal tobacco tax – presumably pushing it to more than $2 per pack. Keep in mind, this astronomical rate would not include state and local taxes, which can reach almost $6 per pack in some jurisdictions.
In this weak economy, a huge tax hike on tobacco would be particularly troubling for the poor. Lower income Americans are more likely to smoke and spend a much larger percentage of their disposable income on tobacco products. Smokers and non-smokers alike should oppose this steeply regressive tax increase. Remember, as he pushes for a tax that would particularly burden poor Americans it was only a few years ago when President Obama promised he would never raise taxes on those making less than $250,000.0 Comments | Post a Comment | Sign up for NTU Action Alerts