A Gun-Nut Win On Health Reform

[foxpaws]

So, you do or you don't want me to do this? You seem to be saying both things.

You really don't know anything about me, faux. So mind your own business. I understand that you like to hear yourself talk, but this really doesn't concern you. Your condescension is not easily masked.

Buh-bye now.

No I don't Foss - I don't know anything about you. But I do know car people, and we help each other. I actually called my tax friend to find out if this way of protesting was a viable way to protest. It appears that it isn't (protesting by not paying taxes has notoriously failed when tried in the past). I did take the 'tongue and cheek' route and say 'go ahead and do it if you want to get in trouble' to try to drive home a point, and maybe that wasn't the best way to illustrated why this isn't a great idea, but I do help car people. I am a car person, and often I have received help from people in various car communities. I give back. You might not understand this Foss - maybe you aren't 'car people'. I figured you were, since you are active on a car forum.

 

[fossten]

No I don't Foss - I don't know anything about you. But I do know car people, and we help each other. I actually called my tax friend to find out if this way of protesting was a viable way to protest. It appears that it isn't (protesting by not paying taxes has notoriously failed when tried in the past). I did take the 'tongue and cheek' route and say 'go ahead and do it if you want to get in trouble' to try to drive home a point, and maybe that wasn't the best way to illustrated why this isn't a great idea, but I do help car people. I am a car person, and often I have received help from people in various car communities. I give back. You might not understand this Foss - maybe you aren't 'car people'. I figured you were, since you are active on a car forum.

Yes, your insincere and admitted "tongue in cheek" help. Like I said - "thanks."

Making it all about you again...Tsk tsk, fox, you're such a drama queen.

 

[Joeys Lincoln]

Well Fox logic says let Foss moan about you saying something on a public forum. I'm actually excited to see what happens on his I'm withholding taxes with 5,000 other people plan.

 

[Calabrio]

Why is it illegal or punishable to change that amount of money you volunteer for them to withhold so long as you file properly and make up the difference at the end of the year? So long as you file in April properly, paying the difference, there should be no issue.

Besides being a silent form of protest, that's just good sense for someone who's employed to do. There's no point in giving the government an interest free loan for 12 months- provided you have the discipline to save the money necessary to pay the taxes in the Spring. The rules are different for business owners paying quarterly.

 

[fossten]

Why is it illegal or punishable to change that amount of money you volunteer for them to withhold so long as you file properly and make up the difference at the end of the year? So long as you file in April properly, paying the difference, there should be no issue.

Besides being a silent form of protest, that's just good sense for someone who's employed to do. There's no point in giving the government an interest free loan for 12 months- provided you have the discipline to save the money necessary to pay the taxes in the Spring. The rules are different for business owners paying quarterly.

Quite right. I've done it before. No penalties accrue. There is also an agreement you can file with your employer so that no taxes are withheld at all. In such cases, you become responsible for filing quarterly.

“Strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means.”

-Thomas Jefferson

 

[Calabrio]

Besides the message is could send in large numbers, I think it's a good idea to limit the with holdings right now.

I also think tax protests could be very effective.
Though, given the environment, they'd need to be formally organized with lawyers and accountants.
The money "owed" going into escrow and such.

 

[foxpaws]

Why is it illegal or punishable to change that amount of money you volunteer for them to withhold so long as you file properly and make up the difference at the end of the year? So long as you file in April properly, paying the difference, there should be no issue.

Besides being a silent form of protest, that's just good sense for someone who's employed to do. There's no point in giving the government an interest free loan for 12 months- provided you have the discipline to save the money necessary to pay the taxes in the Spring. The rules are different for business owners paying quarterly.

It is illegal to not have enough taxes withheld throughout the year if you have had taxes withheld the year before, and you are employed similarly. It is also why you get penalized if you are self employed and you don't file and pay quarterly estimates. The taxes are due at the time you make the money. Not at the end of the year when you file, unless your total tax bill is less than $1000. It is pay as you go. If at the end of the year you owe more than 10% you will probably pay penalties - it is up to the IRS... Some people who are not self-employed try to pay very little throughout the year and make up it up the last couple of months by paying in extra. The IRS, if they want to be nasty, can fine you for this as well.

If you did not pay enough tax, either through withholding or by making estimated tax payments, you will have underpaid your estimated tax and may have to pay a penalty.

Oh, Cal - just in case - your whole tax protest thing - won't work - they got that covered as well...

If you willfully provide false information on your W-4 (such as claiming 99 exemptions) the IRS can get you for that as well... purposefully created to thwart tax protesters... heck, not only penalties, but prison time as well...

Life, Death, Taxes -

And, once again - you are guilty in the eyes of the IRS unless you can prove your innocence. It isn't like everywhere else where you are innocent until you are proven guilty.

 

[Calabrio]

http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj14n3-1.html

EVOLUTION OF FEDERAL INCOME TAX WITHHOLDING: THE MACHINERY OF INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE
Taxes are the backbone of any politico-economic regime. Constraints on a government's power to tax are constraints on its power to act. Focusing on the legalization of mandatory federal income tax withholding through the Current Tax Payment Act of 1943, this article examines forces that have eroded constraints on the U.S. government's power to tax.

The central questions this article seeks to answer are how, why, and to what effect--despite preponderant public opposition to universal income tax withholding between 1914 and 1942--mandatory withholding was established in 1943, and sustained thereafter. It is an important question, for withholding is the paramount administrative mechanism enabling the federal government to collect, without significant protest, sufficient private resources to fund a vastly expanded welfare state. U.S. government officials themselves now view withholding as ``the cornerstone of the administration of our individual income tax'' (U.S. House Ways & Means Comm. Hearings 1982: 162, 165). This article explores (1) historical conditions that led people to accept withholding of federal taxes on wage and salary income; (2) the politico-economic function of income tax withholding; and (3) the consistency of the U.S. income tax withholding experience with a more general economic model of institutional and ideological change.

A systematic transaction-cost framework for understanding the evolution of withholding will be suggested as a way of integrating this critical episode with other U.S. policy experiences. Historical circumstances facilitating adoption and expansion of income tax withholding will be seen to reflect broader incentives of government officials to alter political transaction costs facing the public. Equally important, the willful alteration of political transaction costs will be viewed as supporting institutional and ideological changes that, over time, expand the publicly accepted scope of government authority.

Government manipulation of political transaction costs contributed significantly to the institutional changes and subsequent ideological transformation supporting income tax withholding. Though in 1943 the withholding mechanism was sold politically as a benefit to taxpayers, government officeholders even then widely regarded it as a means of extracting greater tax revenue. Senators and representatives spoke candidly in congressional hearings (U.S. Senate Hearings 1943: 43) of the revenues that needed ``to be fried out of the taxpayers.''

This article is organized as follows. I first develop a theoretical framework for analysis of federal income tax withholding. After discussing the early evolution of income tax withholding in the United States, I then consider how changing institutional contexts have influenced attempts to expand withholding. The final section of the article ponders the reversibility of current withholding mechanisms in light of the paper's theory and evidence.


http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj14n3-1.html

 

[foxpaws]

You and CATO might not like withholding laws Cal, and you might want to take on the IRS and the feds regarding this - but, people need to know it is against the tax code (read law) to falsify information on your W4 - they might not want to battle the IRS.

Fight to have the laws changed... but, perhaps in the meantime, you might want to abide by the law. The IRS is quite good, has almost unlimited resources, and isn't above sending agents to where you work or live.

 

[Calabrio]

You're right.

In practical terms, and in principle, everyone should set up their with holdings to retain the legal minimum. If you're getting a rebate check at the end of the year because you overpaid, then you've made a mistake.

The idea of "getting a check back" means you've overpaid and gave the government a free loan. And based on the state and federal economies, or just looking at California, there's no guarantee you'll get that money back in a timely manner.

And, I wrote a lengthier response that was lost do to a glitch in my connection, but any time you grief the IRS, you're inviting trouble. Any kind of protest would NOT be consequence free. The amount of power we've permitted the IRS is terrifying.

 

[foxpaws]

I am always happiest when I owe a couple of hundred dollars - which means, the government didn't have scads of my money interest free for the whole year.

And 'griefing' the IRS can mean hassles now, but, who knows for how long in the future as well. I know they say they don't place people on audit lists just because you have had problems in the past - but it sure seems like they do. I know people who get audited year after year, and often those people had run-ins with the IRS in the past.

 

[fossten]

Limbaugh gets audited by the state of New York every year, despite the fact that he hasn't lived there in years.

 

[fossten]

You and CATO might not like withholding laws Cal, and you might want to take on the IRS and the feds regarding this - but, people need to know it is against the tax code (read law) to falsify information on your W4 - they might not want to battle the IRS.

Fight to have the laws changed... but, perhaps in the meantime, you might want to abide by the law. The IRS is quite good, has almost unlimited resources, and isn't above sending agents to where you work or live.

Fox, you're just WRONG on this, and your fear tactics propaganda won't fly here. Sorry.

The IRS does not know how much tax you are supposed to pay until you file your W2 and your 1090.

Ever notice overtaxation of bonuses or overtime? It's because the IRS assumes that this "windfall" is your new income.

They have no clue.

Audits are most commonly triggered by red flags.

 

[foxpaws]

Fox, you're just WRONG on this, and your fear tactics propaganda won't fly here. Sorry.

The IRS does not know how much tax you are supposed to pay until you file your W2 and your 1090.

Ever notice overtaxation of bonuses or overtime? It's because the IRS assumes that this "windfall" is your new income.

They have no clue.

Audits are most commonly triggered by red flags.

Nope, they don't have a clue - but when you file your taxes and you have underpaid them, by the guidelines in the links to the IRS I gave earlier, they can fine you. They know then how much you should have been paying in taxes, and will get you then. And if you have underpaid because you have intentionally misrepresented your exemptions on your W-4, they can also get you for that.

They hold all the cards foss - and they know how to stack the deck. The IRS has seen plenty of tax protesters, and they know how to squash something as simple as lying on your W-4.

And certainly claiming a bunch of exemptions on your W-4, when in the past you claimed 3, isn't going to raise a red flag - well - duh....

 

[ford nut]

Life, Death, Taxes -

And, once again - you are guilty in the eyes of the IRS unless you can prove your innocence. It isn't like everywhere else where you are innocent until you are proven guilty.

You're right.

In practical terms, and in principle, everyone should set up their with holdings to retain the legal minimum. If you're getting a rebate check at the end of the year because you overpaid, then you've made a mistake.

The idea of "getting a check back" means you've overpaid and gave the government a free loan. And based on the state and federal economies, or just looking at California, there's no guarantee you'll get that money back in a timely manner.

And, I wrote a lengthier response that was lost do to a glitch in my connection, but any time you grief the IRS, you're inviting trouble. Any kind of protest would NOT be consequence free. The amount of power we've permitted the IRS is terrifying.

I was audited for 2007 in 2009.
The information I had to give the IRS was insane.
You are guilty until you prove other wise.
It was 4 months of pure hell, the amount of personal info I had to provide should be against the law.
Cal is correct the power they have to make you life miserable is terrifying.

I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
Everything on my return was correct, I didn't have to pay any more taxes, but I paid in a whole different manner.

I think it would be foolish to screw around with the IRS.

 

[fossten]

You're all correct. It's better to be a slave.

Let's all just live on our knees. It's over. No way to live free in this country.

Time to surrender.

In fact, in light of this, I think we should surrender in Iraq and Afghanistan as well.

 

[foxpaws]

No it isn't better to be a slave foss - but it is good to know the price of your protest and weigh it against what you feel the results of your protest will be. I know, heck us liberals have been protesting for years - right?

If you feel that the price you may pay by protesting via a 'tax protest' is justifiable, then you should do it, but it would be foolish to advise people to protest this way without also letting them knowing what the cost could be.

Our Founding Fathers knew the cost of their actions - it was at the cost of their lives. They chose to proceed with their actions. However they weren't doing it blindly. They were educated men who were willing to pay the price. If you are willing to pay the price, then you should protest how you see fit, but you can't tell others to do the same as you, without disclosing what the true costs could be.

If you are found guilty of falsifying information on your W-4 you then deal with having a criminal record. Criminal records affect your credit rating, your ability to look for work, even things like the rates you pay for car insurance and life insurance. If you want to pay that price, then that avenue of protest could be the one you want to explore. But, you need to be informed about the costs and weigh them against what you feel you can achieve by protesting in this manner. Will the results be greater than the cost? I doubt it. Tax protest is often a silent protest, and can be a very costly protest. Results are not readily visible to the public, and there often isn't that feeling of accomplishment that you should have when you are protesting something.

 

[fossten]

Save the WOT lecture, fox. Apparently you're not familiar with the phrase "brevity is the soul of wit."

If we can't round up enough people to nail the government's foot to the floor, then we fight another day. But sitting still and whining about it and 'voting' won't change anything, so it's time to test the waters.

Your myopia is noted.

 

[shagdrum]

Frankly, I like this idea, though it will take some doing...

 

[fossten]

Frankly, I like this idea, though it will take some doing...

Agreed. We can petition our state legislatures to nullify certain Acts of Congress.

That's one of the courses of action being discussed on the Strike website.

Note: Nothing has been finalized. All ideas are on the table. So those of you scoffing have nothing to scoff about yet.

 

[foxpaws]

Foss – so you wanted to hit them where it hurts-money?

That is so naïve – when has not having the money made any difference to the government? They will just print more. Just because they don’t have the funds to support their programs doesn’t mean they are going to stop voting them in.

A million people don’t pay their full share taxes until April 15th – hahahaha. They will fine you, and then proceed their merry way, no change involved.

Do work strikes hurt the one you want to hurt – the Government? Will people understand they need to take the day off without pay? Are they just going to take a vacation day or a sick day? 3 million take the day off. Half realizes they need to take it off without pay (or can afford to take it off without pay). 100 million not going to the coffers (which includes your state’s coffers as well). Chump change when you consider that Federal revenue stands at about 2.2 Trillion. However, does it hurt the company that has to deal with the loss of a worker? How tightly strapped is your state government right now? Is that a price that you are willing to pay?

Nullification at state level is perfect. We have legal marijuana in Colorado – it has befuddled the feds to no end. 1/4 million marching on DC has little effect, as seen by the late summer tea party protest, however 10,000 marching on a state capital has a huge effect. Plus, it is relatively easy to do. It is also easier to get the local media mobilized. It is also easier to get local ‘celebrities’ involved. Hopefully you know your local representatives by their first name – you should, and you should be involved in local politics. That is easy, local politicians are accessible, often within a few miles of your location. Your voice is heard locally, but often is lost nationally. This battle can be fought locally. There is your perfect avenue. Plus, then you will know if people in your state don’t want this bill – or is it just a very vocal minority. Remember, the pros will come out as well. You can lose – if you have misjudged the ability of pro-healthcare supporters to also get out and fight for their cause, or if you have misjudged their numbers. However, if it is successful there is also another benefit - more power at state level. Compare the cost of attempting to get this nullified at a state level to the benefits you get. Even if you lose, you still have been involved in politics at a local level, which is a very positive thing, and will help you when the next issue comes along that you feel needs 'protesting'.

Cal's idea of education is also more feasible at the state level - far more than at a national level. Go to your council meeting - make friends, go to the bar after wards. Go to your local political party meetings - make friends, grab a bite to eat after wards. Bounce around ideas locally - because change can happen quickly and very visibly locally. Positive reinforcement.

Take it from liberal pot heads, or from gays and lesbians - you can change the law, one state at a time.

Oh, I am happy to see that you are forever searching for the perfect 'foxpaws' quote for your signature...

 

[fossten]

Tsk tsk, fox, if printing money is the answer, then why bother having taxes? Why not print all the money needed? Oh, that's right - it would crash the currency. Not very well versed on economics are you. But hey, you've got Ayn Rand down pat, so that's something anyway.

Did you miss my last post? You really should read rather than skim. It would save you from wasting so much time writing these long, ranting...ah, never mind. Vanity, vanity, fox...

By the way, thanks for admitting that the people you helped get elected are spending money that they don't have and will probably never exist. Shall I direct you to the 'bad year for Obama' thread?

Finally, you're the pot calling the kettle black vis-a-vis signatures. How many quotes of mine have have you used again?

Not too bright, but...I'll give you a 'solid B+.'

 

[shagdrum]

I'll give you a 'solid B+.'

You do realize that after The One, a " solid B+" is the new "fail"....

 

[foxpaws]

Tsk tsk, fox, if printing money is the answer, then why bother having taxes? Why not print all the money needed? Oh, that's right - it would crash the currency. Not very well versed on economics are you. But hey, you've got Ayn Rand down pat, so that's something anyway.

Did you miss my last post? You really should read rather than skim. It would save you from wasting so much time writing these long, ranting...ah, never mind. Vanity, vanity, fox...

By the way, thanks for admitting that the people you helped get elected are spending money that they don't have and will probably never exist. Shall I direct you to the 'bad year for Obama' thread?

Foss-the fed prints money when they need too.. when both sides overspend. And people you elected also spent money they didn't have, raising the debt. Heck in last 60 years only one administration actually took in the same amount that they spent, the rest overspent...

Finally, you're the pot calling the kettle black vis-a-vis signatures. How many quotes of mine have have you used again?

Two. I used only one other quote of yours foss, for a very short time, regarding how you think the founding fathers wanted a extremely powerful central federal government ... I switched back to your 'conform' quote because it became sadly apparent that the essay about your conspiracy theory pertaining to the founding fathers crafting a federal government designed to grow and become immensely powerful isn't really forthcoming. Is it?

Not too bright, but...I'll give you a 'solid B+.'

Heck - B+ - above average, almost outstanding? Angling for an apple - teach?

Hey Shag - don't burst the bubble...

 

[fossten]

Foss-the fed prints money when they need too.. when both sides overspend. And people you elected also spent money they didn't have, raising the debt. Heck in last 60 years only one administration actually took in the same amount that they spent, the rest overspent...

Whom did I elect in 2006 again? Fox, your 'tu quoque' is weak and won't work. Obama has set a new standard and you know it. If that's your best argument, I may have to reduce your grade to a semi-solid C+.

Two. I used only one other quote of yours foss, for a very short time, regarding how you think the founding fathers wanted a extremely powerful central federal government ... I switched back to your 'conform' quote because it became sadly apparent that the essay about your conspiracy theory pertaining to the founding fathers crafting a federal government designed to grow and become immensely powerful isn't really forthcoming. Is it?

Listen to yourself. Obsess much? I'm sorry you're so 'sad'. As I said a long time ago back when you were flirting with me - I'M SPOKEN FOR. You'll find somebody someday, fox. Just keep looking. I suggest internet dating, that way you don't have to send a real picture.

Heck - B+ - above average, almost outstanding? Angling for an apple - teach?

Hey Shag - don't burst the bubble...

You're too obtuse to understand mockery. Ah, well, the joke's on you and Obama. At least you have the Ayn Rand thing down.