IRS quietly deletes guideline that Fortnite virtual currency must be reported on tax returns

[Belgarathian]

I love taxes...

 

Government: Guess how much you owe us!

Me: Why don't you tell me, you know already don't you?

Government: Yes, but I want you to guess

Me: But what if I get it wrong?

Government: You go to jail

[ARikozuM]

26 minutes ago, Belgarathian said:

I love taxes...

 

Government: Guess how much you owe us!

Me: Why don't you tell me, you know already don't you?

Government: Yes, but I want you to guess

Me: But what if I get it wrong?

Government: You go to jail

Or cutting funding to the IRS so they can only fight small claims in court rather than the long-winded battles of the rich... 

[Mr Nobody]

1 hour ago, ARikozuM said:

Or cutting funding to the IRS so they can only fight small claims in court rather than the long-winded battles of the rich... 

Or just eliminating taxation altogether, since taxation is theft.

[RonnieOP]

19 minutes ago, Mr Nobody said:

Or just eliminating taxation altogether, since taxation is theft.

Unless you dont use any of the programs funded by taxes (which you do) its not theft. factually its not theft.

 

If you think taxes are bad. A life without them would be much much worse.

 

its basically only idiot anarchists that claim taxation is theft.

 

I have a lot of issues with taxes (mainly how they are used and the rates) but taxes themselves are not theft.

[RonnieOP]

3 hours ago, Mr Nobody said:

Most of these things you would only be able to deduct the percentage of time you are actually earning virtual money (which will significantly reduce the amount you would be able to claim), and it has the added benefit of red flagging you for an audit. But with the changes in tax law in 2018, the likelihood is that for the average gamer, none of these things are deductible, as they will not exceed the standard deduction currently in place.

If your job is a full time stream/content creator you can in fact deduct alot of those things on your taxes. Im not sure why you think you wouldnt.

[ARikozuM]

47 minutes ago, Mr Nobody said:

Or just eliminating taxation altogether, since taxation is theft.

Taxation is not theft. Paying less taxes than the rest of society when you could pay the same % or more is theft. 

[Donut417]

49 minutes ago, Mr Nobody said:

Or just eliminating taxation altogether, since taxation is theft.

So how do we pay for roads, bridges, dams, Levies, and other infrastructure? How about education? Defense? Etc? Any way you look at it you will have to pay. 

[RonnieOP]

33 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

So how do we pay for roads, bridges, dams, Levies, and other infrastructure? How about education? Defense? Etc? Any way you look at it you will have to pay. 

This.

 

I have alot of issues with the IRS and our tax system. But we have to pay taxes to function as a society. A country with no taxes leads to a country where only the top 1% would survive. And even they would eventually fall.

 

Schools, roads, the health department, police, fire department, courts, etc are all funded by taxes. And thats just some of the things on the local level.

 

Take away taxes on the federal level and its much worse.

 

 

[Andreas Lilja]

44 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

So how do we pay for roads, bridges, dams, Levies, and other infrastructure? How about education? Defense? Etc? Any way you look at it you will have to pay. 

Libertarians do love the taxes for defense. 

 

But healthcare and safety net? Hell naw. 

[Belgarathian]

1 hour ago, Mr Nobody said:

Or just eliminating taxation altogether, since taxation is theft.

wut?

 

 

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, Mr Nobody said:

Or just eliminating taxation altogether, since taxation is theft.

Nope nope.

 

If you don't want to pay taxes, go buy a boat and anchor 200 nm away from the coast of any country and live off what you catch. Better hope you never get sick.

 

See, the thing is "tax the rich" is really the correct argument, but getting that revenue out of people who hide their income is impossible without tax treaties. So if you're a rich doofus who has enough money to buy their own space station, then you should be paying taxes on every single non-productive asset until it either becomes productive, or you sell it.

 

Non-productive assets include:

- Empty properties

- "farm"'s that grow nothing.

- Parked Luxury cars, boats and planes

- "Private Collections" of things such as art, luxury goods, etc

 

Basically, if it's a net-loss to everyone else, and is consuming resources while being an "investment," tax it until it's no longer an investment.

 

Tax write-offs stop mattering to business owners when the entire purpose of a tax write-off is to get the businesses to spend (trickle down) money on local services and supplies. If your business has no physical presence, and consumes no resources, then there is no reason to permit tax write offs. So if you rent an apartment for $2000/mo, and own a $5000 PC  and pay $200/mo in energy/internet access, you know how much you get to write off? 1/4 of the PC and energy costs, and maybe 1/10th of the rent (unless you've dedicated an entire bedroom to a VR setup that needs that space.) The bigger your property, the less you can write off, because you largely only get to write off the space used by the computer and the desk, and only for the amount of time spent "working".

 

So if you want a business to spend money, you have to make the requirement for a tax write off must be of a local benefit. You don't get to write off anything outsourced. You don't get to write off anything made in china. So that largely means you only get to write off vehicles produced in the country and bought from a local dealership and office supplies from local office supplies stores. You don't get to write off anything ordered from Amazon.com if it wasn't made in town.

 

But I digress. Nobody on this forum is going to make a difference in tax policy anywhere.

[RonnieOP]

50 minutes ago, Kisai said:

Nope nope.

 

If you don't want to pay taxes, go buy a boat and anchor 200 nm away from the coast of any country and live off what you catch. Better hope you never get sick.

 

See, the thing is "tax the rich" is really the correct argument, but getting that revenue out of people who hide their income is impossible without tax treaties. So if you're a rich doofus who has enough money to buy their own space station, then you should be paying taxes on every single non-productive asset until it either becomes productive, or you sell it.

 

Non-productive assets include:

- Empty properties

- "farm"'s that grow nothing.

- Parked Luxury cars, boats and planes

- "Private Collections" of things such as art, luxury goods, etc

 

Basically, if it's a net-loss to everyone else, and is consuming resources while being an "investment," tax it until it's no longer an investment.

 

Tax write-offs stop mattering to business owners when the entire purpose of a tax write-off is to get the businesses to spend (trickle down) money on local services and supplies. If your business has no physical presence, and consumes no resources, then there is no reason to permit tax write offs. So if you rent an apartment for $2000/mo, and own a $5000 PC  and pay $200/mo in energy/internet access, you know how much you get to write off? 1/4 of the PC and energy costs, and maybe 1/10th of the rent (unless you've dedicated an entire bedroom to a VR setup that needs that space.) The bigger your property, the less you can write off, because you largely only get to write off the space used by the computer and the desk, and only for the amount of time spent "working".

 

So if you want a business to spend money, you have to make the requirement for a tax write off must be of a local benefit. You don't get to write off anything outsourced. You don't get to write off anything made in china. So that largely means you only get to write off vehicles produced in the country and bought from a local dealership and office supplies from local office supplies stores. You don't get to write off anything ordered from Amazon.com if it wasn't made in town.

 

But I digress. Nobody on this forum is going to make a difference in tax policy anywhere.

We already tax the rich (alot more then we tax the poor).

 

The top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined.

[ARikozuM]

19 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

We already tax the rich (alot more then we tax the poor).

 

The top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined.

The average percent paid by the top 1% was only 20% while the poor and middle classes paid 22-28% of their total income. There are too many write-offs and caps that are only available to the rich, i.e. depreciation of an airplane and SSI cap. 

[RonnieOP]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

The average percent paid by the top 1% was only 20% while the poor and middle classes paid 22-28% of their total income. There are too many write-offs and caps that are only available to the rich, i.e. depreciation of an airplane and SSI cap. 

 

Even if I pay more in a percentage sense. im still paying a tiny fraction of what they are.

 

Personally. I think we should do a flat 10% with 0 deductions for everyone.

 

But no matter what your stance is. to say that we dont tax the rich is just factually wrong. The top 1% pays more $ then everyone else combined.

[Kisai]

21 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

We already tax the rich (alot more then we tax the poor).

 

The top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined.

That's because the goal posts keep moving.

 

Rich people aren't paying 60% of their income in taxes, they are paying closer to zero. Where as "poor" people are often paying 90% of their income in taxes between income taxes, state taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and other nickel-and-dimeing of the consumer where a rich person doesn't even feel it.

 

For example, when I worked for AT&T, NYC people pay a stupid amount of sales taxes. people who live in California pay taxes on the wholesale price of anything "free". So if you can't even subsidize living in California because the subsides are taxed. So, in theory you can't even win a car without having pay half it's value in taxes. 

 

[RonnieOP]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

That's because the goal posts keep moving.

 

Rich people aren't paying 60% of their income in taxes, they are paying closer to zero. Where as "poor" people are often paying 90% of their income in taxes between income taxes, state taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, and other nickel-and-dimeing of the consumer where a rich person doesn't even feel it.

 

For example, when I worked for AT&T, NYC people pay a stupid amount of sales taxes. people who live in California pay taxes on the wholesale price of anything "free". So if you can't even subsidize living in California because the subsides are taxed. So, in theory you can't even win a car without having pay half it's value in taxes. 

 

They are still paying the majority of taxes.

 

 

[ARikozuM]

8 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

 

Even if I pay more in a percentage sense. im still paying a tiny fraction of what they are.

 

Personally. I think we should do a flat 10% with 0 deductions for everyone.

 

But no matter what your stance is. to say that we dont tax the rich is just factually wrong. The top 1% pays more $ then everyone else combined.

It doesn't matter if it's "a tiny fraction", it's that they CAN'T use all of that money in the first place. They invest and make more money. They can store money offshore whereas many of us can't even dream of it. Donations are not sufficient because they too are tax deductions. 

 

We live in a country that believes in merit and hard work, yet we're happy to let rich people pass off all of their assets to their children for nothing. Not only do the children start off with prestige to better education, better opportunities, and never having to work, they also get all of their parent's earnings and merits. Either it's a meritocracy and we share those values and start a wealth tax and heavier estate tax, or we call it for what it is. 

[ARikozuM]

3 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

They are still paying the majority of taxes.

 

 

Amazon uses the roads a heck of a lot more than you or I do...

 

They paid zero in federal taxes. 

 

Walmart...

 

Zero.

 

Etc.

[RonnieOP]

Just now, ARikozuM said:

It doesn't matter if it's "a tiny fraction", it's that they CAN'T use all of that money in the first place. They invest and make more money. They can store money offshore whereas many of us can't even dream of it. Donations are not sufficient because they too are tax deductions. 

 

We live in a country that believes in merit and hard work, yet we're happy to let rich people pass off all of their assets to their children for nothing. Not only do the children start off with prestige to better education, better opportunities, and never having to work, they also get all of their parent's earnings and merits. Either it's a meritocracy and we share those values and start a wealth tax and heavier estate tax, or we call it for what it is. 

They dont pass of their assets for nothing. We have an inheritance tax. which is actually bullshit since they are taxing money that was already taxed.

 

You bring up merit and hard work yet your saying we should take their money and give it to others who did nothing to earn it.

 

I didnt work for that money so why should i be entitled to it?

 

I dont care if they earned it themselves or their parents did. I have no claim to it. If i bust my ass and leave my kids behind a nice chunk of change I dont see why other people are entitled to my hard work and earnings.

[ARikozuM]

Just now, RonnieOP said:

You bring up merit and hard work yet your saying we should take their money and give it to others who did nothing to earn it.

Good!

 

Let's give that money to the workers of the company! Why should the kids get it when the workers did all of the work? 

[Spotty]

- Thread Locked -

This discussion is entirely how much people hate taxes, which is not tech news.