Herman Cain's Tax Proposal Inspired by SimCity

[Drachen]

The corporate tax is simpler and dividend payouts are a corporate deduction. No longer a double taxation.

Right so instead of spending money on crazy stuff like projects and innovation they can just party it out in dividends. Berkshire, Microsoft, google, and apple they would have long ago distributed their war chest.

[Wild Cobra]

Right so instead of spending money on crazy stuff like projects and innovation they can just party it out in dividends. Berkshire, Microsoft, google, and apple they would have long ago distributed their war chest.

It happens anyway. Do you think people buy stock just so they say they did? No... Some people buy stocks and live off the quarterly dividends. It can make for a nice addition for retirement.

The Dow lost what from it's peak? Went from what, about 14,400 to 11,600, over ten or so years? Lets say a 20% loss. However, if I had a $70 stock that took a 20% loss over 10 years, but paid $1 in dividends per quarter, that's $40 in gain from that stock that is now $56. It's now a $96 value from $70 and still effectively gained 37+%.

I may be wrong, but I believe most stocks used in the DOW indicator pay decent dividends.

[clambake]

It happens anyway. Do you think people buy stock just so they say they did? No... Some people buy stocks and live off the quarterly dividends.

you need to pay attention to this.

I never said they all were. Try again, putz. Trying to do the best for their shareholders..... yeah thats why dividend ratios have plummeted over the last 30 years. You are such a tool in every sense of the word.

the absolute truth.

[Wild Cobra]

Dividend ratios also change with law and corporate health. To be taxed less, does make it more appealing for the voting shareholders to get more.

[clambake]

Dividend ratios also change with law and corporate health. To be taxed less, does make it more appealing for the voting shareholders to get more.

clearly, you do not have much, if any, invested.

[ElNono]

Maybe we need some regression in the tax code. I find it appalling that so many people will vote for what is best for them, and not consider everyone else. Because that is human nature, what happens when those who don't pay federal income tax exceeds 50%? Do they vote to tax everyone above them 50% and the rich 75% or higher, so they can get more of "other people's money?"

[Agloco]

I would disagree with those calculations. Maybe someone else pointed it out. After the 9% income tax, there would be $41k left over. Not all purchases will be taxable, and even is all were, it is only $3,690 in sales tax for a total of $8,690.

I haven't seen the details of Cains idea. Is there no standard deduction or exemption? Aren't necessities and rent not taxed?

No exemptions or standard deductions according to WH's link.

That would negate any benefit realized by axing the payroll tax.

[Wild Cobra]

clearly, you do not have much, if any, invested.

I have tracked my dividends in the past from my 401k funds. I have no individual stocks, but considered investing in them at times. My mutual funds get reinvested into the funds, so even when the fund values decrease, the gross value doesn't decrease as much. Over the long term, it always increases. There was a time I followed various stocks. Even when we discussed Exxon profits, I noted their dividends. Exxon pays quarterly dividends in Feb, May, Aug, and Nov. In 2000, they were paying $0.22/quarter. In Jul '01, they had a split, and payed $0.23/quarter after that. Over the months, it increased to $0.25, $0.27. $0.29.... $0.44, and is now at $0.47/quarter. That's almost $2/years per share for a stock now at $78.11. Why do you think people keep with volatile stocks unless they have reasons to stay? I personally wish dividends would be higher and short term capital gains taxes excessive to help eliminate day traders.

Now if you look at a stock like Teekay Tankers (TNK), you see nice payoffs in dividends. Their latest close was $4.89, and they pay dividends of about 20% annually:

Aug 17, 2011 0.21 Dividend
May 18, 2011 0.25 Dividend
Mar 4, 2011 0.22 Dividend
Nov 12, 2010 0.31 Dividend
Aug 18, 2010 0.34 Dividend
May 19, 2010 0.37 Dividend
Mar 4, 2010 0.26 Dividend

[Wild Cobra]

No exemptions or standard deductions according to WH's link.

That would negate any benefit realized by axing the payroll tax.

True.

If you ask me, it's still a good idea. Not all will, but since the employer is no longer paying payroll taxes, then employees can negotiate for larger incomes as well, to cover the change from 7.45% to 9%..

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Lower taxes on the employer has never led to better employee wages. All it does is put more money in the employer's pocket.

[ElNono]

since the employer is no longer paying payroll taxes, then employees can negotiate for larger incomes as well

[Yonivore]

Lower taxes on the employer has never led to better employee wages. All it does is put more money in the employer's pocket.

Not in a market where you're competing for quality employees. And, if you're in a market where you're competing for employees, damn right you pocket the money.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I have tracked my dividends in the past from my 401k funds. I have no individual stocks, but considered investing in them at times.

You should have just left it there and not gone to Google.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not in a market where you're competing for quality employees. And, if you're in a market where you're competing for employees, damn right you pocket the money.

Supply side economics? Really?

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Not in a market where you're competing for quality employees. And, if you're in a market where you're competing for employees, damn right you pocket the money.

You're going to pay more for quality employees regardless. The amount of taxes paid doesn't change that.

[Yonivore]

You're going to pay more for quality employees regardless. The amount of taxes paid doesn't change that.

That's not true. The amount of taxes directly affects what you pay all employees, quality or not.

Removing that tax will allow competing employers more flexibility in attracting quality employees. The employer that is greedy and wants to pocket his tax savings will lose quality employees to the employer that moves that savings into salaries and benefits.

[Wild Cobra]

You're going to pay more for quality employees regardless. The amount of taxes paid doesn't change that.

I cannot speak for yoni, but I think he meant to say:

Not in a market where you're competing for quality employees. And, if you're not in a market where you're competing for employees, damn right you pocket the money.

[Wild Cobra]

That's not true. The amount of taxes directly affects what you pay all employees, quality or not.

Removing that tax will allow competing employers more flexibility in attracting quality employees. The employer that is greedy and wants to pocket his tax savings will lose quality employees to the employer that moves that savings into salaries and benefits.

You forget that liberals think that such merit ideas don't exist, and believe all jobs need to be union, so the lowest common denominator employee gets equal treatment.

[ElNono]

You forget that liberals think that such merit ideas don't exist, and believe all jobs need to be union, so the lowest common denominator employee gets equal treatment.

Liberals think that? Or Fox News told you that's what liberals think?

[Wild Cobra]

Liberals think that? Or Fox News told you that's what liberals think?

Have you ever worked with union lib s?

I speak from experience of association.

[ElNono]

Have you ever worked with union lib s?

I speak from experience of association.

So your anecdote has to be taken as the general rule... I should've known.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

That's not true. The amount of taxes directly affects what you pay all employees, quality or not.

Prove it.

[Yonivore]

Prove it.

Remove the taxes.

[Wild Cobra]

So your anecdote has to be taken as the general rule... I should've known.

I don't care if you believe me or not. I have worked four different union jobs under four different unions in my lifetime. Sorry I didn't record 24/7 my life so I could direct you to video or audio.

[ElNono]

I don't care if you believe me or not. I have worked four different union jobs under four different unions in my lifetime. Sorry I didn't record 24/7 my life so I could direct you to video or audio.

Oh, I believe you. I also believe that your anecdote is just that, an anecdote.

12% of total labor force is unionized. What your anecdote proves is that you're talking about a minority.