1st Week Results . . .

[suranceman]

You had me until the end.

The charitable tax deduction does favor the rich, simply because they are more likely to give and also will structure their donations to maximize their deductions.

Yes, the premise is correct. A tax deduction simply mitigates the expense, it does not eliminate it. As you mention, by avoiding the behavior completely and paying the tax I would be better off financially.

It doesn't favor anyone. It's neutral. Anyone who donates money can write that off.

I guess the only situation where the donation would result in a net gain would be if you were right on the line of a tax bracket. Then and only then, would the donation be smaller than the tax reduction.

However, that is exceedingly rare. In almost every circumstance, those who donate are taking a big net loss to their bank account. Their tax reduction doesn't come close to recouping what they put out.

 

[Birdman300]

Lol..I really don't like politics.

 

[Ryan Caras]

I know that is the general rule of thought. But what if you contract with a private contractor to man your phones (or some other function) from 8:00AM until 5:00PM. You have set the times they must work,to meet the terms of the contract, do they automatically become an employee?

if you tell them when to come and leave then yes its an employee

i think the only true way to do it is they have to pay for all the expenses associated with that seat and then can come and go whenever they wish... you literally can't ever discipline anyone for coming and going or just not coming at all

i know all the big call centers in this space and they all pay them as employees with benefits...

 

[VolAgent]

if you tell them when to come and leave then yes its an employee

i think the only true way to do it is they have to pay for all the expenses associated with that seat and then can come and go whenever they wish... you literally can't ever discipline anyone for coming and going or just not coming at all

i know all the big call centers in this space and they all pay them as employees with benefits...

I know of one that 1099s them, or at least did. Based upon what I know, they are playing with fire. Of course, things may have changed or it may not have been represented to me correctly.

 

[HoosierLife]

It doesn't favor anyone. It's neutral. Anyone who donates money can write that off.

I guess the only situation where the donation would result in a net gain would be if you were right on the line of a tax bracket. Then and only then, would the donation be smaller than the tax reduction.

However, that is exceedingly rare. In almost every circumstance, those who donate are taking a big net loss to their bank account. Their tax reduction doesn't come close to recouping what they put out.

True that. I give a rather large % of my income to my local church each year. Writing it off is nice, but I'd definitely have more money (on paper) than had I not given the money.

 

[VolAgent]

True that. I give a rather large % of my income to my local church each year. Writing it off is nice, but I'd definitely have more money (on paper) than had I not given the money.

And thus it favors you, which was my point.

Tax deductions are most favorable to those who were going to engage in the behavior anyway.

 

[rousemark]

True that. I give a rather large % of my income to my local church each year. Writing it off is nice, but I'd definitely have more money (on paper) than had I not given the money.

The money I give to the church I give in cash and keep no record of it. I personally do not believe a church should be tax exempt. The exemption is a club the government holds over the church's head. Anytime they want to impose their will on the church, they threaten to take away the tax exemption.

 

[HoosierLife]

And thus it favors you, which was my point.

Tax deductions are most favorable to those who were going to engage in the behavior anyway.

Well maybe I misunderstood. Wouldn't it be favorable to anyone who gives? Aren't I "losing" money by giving?

So you're saying because I make enough money to give, I'm benefiting of getting back a small % of what I gave over the guy that couldn't/didn't give that got to keep a larger % of what he made??

 

[HoosierLife]

The money I give to the church I give in cash and keep no record of it. I personally do not believe a church should be tax exempt. The exemption is a club the government holds over the church's head. Anytime they want to impose their will on the church, they threaten to take away the tax exemption.

Our church has never given taxes and we are not incorporated. Nothing to hold over our heads. That's what the 1st Amendment entitles us to. Government has no control over churches.

Now with that said, many churches have turned into "clubs." Hocking their wares (making merchandise of the people, which Peter said would happen). Building expensive gyms and coffee shops and charging money to the public. That's no more a church than the local country club.

With all that said, I will take every tax break I can get. Now my giving does not depend on the tax break. If they took that away, I would still give. To be fair, with the new standard deduction being so high, I doubt many people that give will pass that standard deduction threshold.

 

[VolAgent]

Well maybe I misunderstood. Wouldn't it be favorable to anyone who gives? Aren't I "losing" money by giving?

So you're saying because I make enough money to give, I'm benefiting of getting back a small % of what I gave over the guy that couldn't/didn't give that got to keep a larger % of what he made??

Let's try this.

You give $100 to the church. The contribution is not tax deductible, you are net -$100.

You give $100 to the church, it is tax deductible and your tax rate is 20%. You are net -$80.

Since you would have given the money regardless of the tax treatment, by making it tax deductible it has benefited you.

I'm not arguing whether it should be tax deductible or not. That is a different discussion. I am simply stating, making something tax deductible favors those the most who would engage in the behavior regardless of tax treatment.