NFL Media

[NinerSickness]

Speaking of a flat tax...

I know it's off topic, but it's May 27th, so maybe this will get some interesting insight...

I was thinking about this earlier today. I think a better idea is a Federal Sales tax. Income taxes are just passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices anyway; at least this way you could get rid of the IRS.

Also, it would eliminate the following scenario. A business owner nets $200,000 in profit one year and ends up paying an effective tax rate of about 50% with federal & state stuff. Then the next year he loses $200,000 due to uncontrollable economic factors. He thinks the business is still a good long-term idea, but he has to close the doors because he can't pay the rent due to the fact that he lost all his savings. He essentially made zero profit over 2 years, but he paid $100,000 in taxes. Huge businesses can get away with this and keep going because they're huge, but small businesses can be taken out with 1 bad year.

Whad'ya think?

 

[dredinis21]

This fucktard puts Bellichek at 3, then cites that his reverence towards Bellichek is based on Tom Brady not being Tom Brady in college, therefore that shows that Bellichek can handle QBs but Walsh had Montana so he's 8. That's a fucking travesty. Joe Montana was made by the West Coast Offense that was designed by a certain Coach Walsh. Walsh hand picked his QB of the future and he hit jackpot, not once but twice as he was instrumental in trading for Steve Young. Reilly can kiss my ass.

 

[MHSL82]

This fucktard puts Bellichek at 3, then cites that his reverence towards Bellichek is based on Tom Brady not being Tom Brady in college, therefore that shows that Bellichek can handle QBs but Walsh had Montana so he's 8. That's a fucking travesty. Joe Montana was made by the West Coast Offense that was designed by a certain Coach Walsh. Walsh hand picked his QB of the future and he hit jackpot, not once but twice as he was instrumental in trading for Steve Young. Reilly can kiss my ass.

Spot on. The only thing wrong about this post is that it is in the wrong thread.

 

[dredinis21]

Spot on. The only thing wrong about this post is that it is in the wrong thread.

At the top of this page is where the article I am referencing is.

 

[NinerSickness]

Random note: The better Bill (Walsh) didn't get his 3 rings by cheating.

 

[SY8goat]

Speaking of a flat tax...

I know it's off topic, but it's May 27th, so maybe this will get some interesting insight...

I was thinking about this earlier today. I think a better idea is a Federal Sales tax. Income taxes are just passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices anyway; at least this way you could get rid of the IRS.

Also, it would eliminate the following scenario. A business owner nets $200,000 in profit one year and ends up paying an effective tax rate of about 50% with federal & state stuff. Then the next year he loses $200,000 due to uncontrollable economic factors. He thinks the business is still a good long-term idea, but he has to close the doors because he can't pay the rent due to the fact that he lost all his savings. He essentially made zero profit over 2 years, but he paid $100,000 in taxes. Huge businesses can get away with this and keep going because they're huge, but small businesses can be taken out with 1 bad year.

Whad'ya think?

Look up Net Operating Loss.

 

[MHSL82]

Spot on. The only thing wrong about this post is that it is in the wrong thread.

At the top of this page is where the article I am referencing is.

Oops, the post you were responding to existed before the thread I thought it was in: http://www.sportshoopla.com/forums/san-francisco-49ers/100294-coaches-all-time.html

I didn't see that post here and assumed you meant to respond to the link above. My fault. So my post should be amended to: Spot on.

 

[NinerSickness]

Look up Net Operating Loss.

Interesting. Thanks for the info'. I didn't know about that part of the tax code.

It says, "A period in which a company's allowable tax deductions are greater than its taxable income." By that definition, it doesn't look like someone who makes nothing (or very little) one year but makes much more another year can average the two years for a tax basis because there wouldn't be an acual loss. But then again, I'm just discovering this phenomenon, so maybe one could.

Tax preparers certainly love how complicated the tax code is; I don't think the rest of us do.

 

[Bemular]

Interesting. Thanks for the info'. I didn't know about that part of the tax code.

It says, "A period in which a company's allowable tax deductions are greater than its taxable income." By that definition, it doesn't look like someone who makes nothing (or very little) one year but makes much more another year can average the two years for a tax basis because there wouldn't be an acual loss. But then again, I'm just discovering this phenomenon, so maybe one could.

Tax preparers certainly love how complicated the tax code is; I don't think the rest of us do.

Here, this may help explain the idea a little more clearly, and no, I'm not being a prick I am actually trying to help you...

The Net Operating Loss Carryback and Carryforward - AccountingTools

 

[NinerSickness]

The Net Operating Loss phenomenon appears to help in the first scenario, but it doesn't in the second. If someone makes a net zero income in one year, that doesn't help to offset the higher tax bracket in which someone could have fallen the year prior. So if you make $200,000 in one year & make nothing the next year, you don't get reimbursed for the difference between the difference in taxes on making $100,000 each year.

Also, it appears most states don't allow the carryback deduction for income taxes. All the more reason to do away with income taxes completely & rely on sales taxes IMO.

I know; exciting stuff.

 

[SY8goat]

The Net Operating Loss phenomenon appears to help in the first scenario, but it doesn't in the second. If someone makes a net zero income in one year, that doesn't help to offset the higher tax bracket in which someone could have fallen the year prior. So if you make $200,000 in one year & make nothing the next year, you don't get reimbursed for the difference between the difference in taxes on making $100,000 each year.

Also, it appears most states don't allow the carryback deduction for income taxes. All the more reason to do away with income taxes completely & rely on sales taxes IMO.

I know; exciting stuff.

Well, if they believe income is going to significantly decrease the following year, they can defer income.

This is why CPA firms get paid a lot of money! Tax planning/avoidance...

 

[NinerSickness]

Well, if they believe income is going to significantly decrease the following year, they can defer income.

This is why CPA firms get paid a lot of money! Tax planning/avoidance...

It becomes expensive guess work. And it's even worse if they guess wrong. It's more waste (just like tax prepareres & accountants) because of how convoluted the tax code is. It's 73,954 pages long.

The thing is, income taxes & corporate taxes are essentially paid by consumers anyway through the higher price of goods & services. The taxes are baked into the price of stuff. The concept that businesses pay any taxes is a fallacy. They either make a profit or they don't. However, they CAN take advantage of certain payoffs and loopholes. The deduction for people with bees on their property is my favourite exaple (Jon Bon Jovi does this; it's a state thing, but it's an example of stupid, specific loophoels). GE pays no corporate taxes (except payroll), etc. It's one big cluster F.

That's why I'm a Federal Sales Tax guy. That way there's no hiding all the taxes in stuff; it's right there on the receipt for you to see. Setting a 35% corporate tax rate makes peope feel like they're sticking it to some big, rich business, but it's really sticking it to their customers.

 

[NinerSickness]

Back to the NFL media...

I think we've seen a new level of stupid from the NFL media. Joe Theisman says Lebron James should be an NFL quarterback when he retires from the NBA.

Wow. What little credibility Theisman had is now gone.

What's even worse is that ESPN has an article about whether Lebron could play QB or not, and they go to friggn' Warren Moon to answer the question. Who gives a crap about what Warren Moon says about it?
The only thing Warren Moon is good for is: :ss:

Why is this sport so poorly covered? It's not like this with NBA coverage or baseball coverage. As little as I care about those sports, at least the coverage isn't littered with nearly as much stupidity. What about this sport makes the people covering it so inept? Is it the fact that it's mostly ex-players who took too many shots to the head?

 

[SY8goat]

It becomes expensive guess work. And it's even worse if they guess wrong. It's more waste (just like tax prepareres & accountants) because of how convoluted the tax code is. It's 73,954 pages long.

The thing is, income taxes & corporate taxes are essentially paid by consumers anyway through the higher price of goods & services. The taxes are baked into the price of stuff. The concept that businesses pay any taxes is a fallacy. They either make a profit or they don't. However, they CAN take advantage of certain payoffs and loopholes. The deduction for people with bees on their property is my favourite exaple (Jon Bon Jovi does this; it's a state thing, but it's an example of stupid, specific loophoels). GE pays no corporate taxes (except payroll), etc. It's one big cluster F.

That's why I'm a Federal Sales Tax guy. That way there's no hiding all the taxes in stuff; it's right there on the receipt for you to see. Setting a 35% corporate tax rate makes peope feel like they're sticking it to some big, rich business, but it's really sticking it to their customers.

For a business to generate $200,000 in net income they have around revenues in around 1 million (I'm only estimating, varies between industries).

So in following year, the business breaks even and you think they should receive treatment similar to a NOL? I don't think they should any type of benefit.

Also, I looked at General Electric's 10-k, they reported an income tax expense of $2.5 billion. How much of that went to the US Gov.? It did state, "Consolidated current tax expense (benefit) includes amounts applicable to U.S. federal income taxes of $651 million in 2012." But I believe this the GAAP number and not what is actually paid to the IRS.

Corporate taxes are fun stuff.

 

[Jikkle]

Back to the NFL media...

I think we've seen a new level of stupid from the NFL media. Joe Theisman says Lebron James should be an NFL quarterback when he retires from the NBA.

Wow. What little credibility Theisman had is now gone.

What's even worse is that ESPN has an article about whether Lebron could play QB or not, and they go to friggn' Warren Moon to answer the question. Who gives a crap about what Warren Moon says about it?
The only thing Warren Moon is good for is: :ss:

Why is this sport so poorly covered? It's not like this with NBA coverage or baseball coverage. As little as I care about those sports, at least the coverage isn't littered with nearly as much stupidity. What about this sport makes the people covering it so inept? Is it the fact that it's mostly ex-players who took too many shots to the head?

They are trying to talk about a sport with only 16 games (20 if you count playoffs) that's played once a week all year long.

Other sports have way more games so there isn't a need to constantly dig for things to talk about since you can actually talk about games and performances.

The NFL is like 24 hour news networks in that there isn't nearly enough compelling content to fill the time so they need to stir things up and talk about something.

 

[NinerSickness]

For a business to generate $200,000 in net income they have around revenues in around 1 million (I'm only estimating, varies between industries).

So in following year, the business breaks even and you think they should receive treatment similar to a NOL? I don't think they should any type of benefit.

I don't know about "should," but the fact remains that they pay significantly more taxes than someone who makes $100,000 in both years. That doesn't seem to be equitable. But you bring up a good point about revenues. Businesses with those high revenues can easily deduct a bunch of expenses that are very questionable at best (or even illegal), and it's impossible to police all of that. A Federal Sales Tax would eliminate this problem.

Also, I looked at General Electric's 10-k, they reported an income tax expense of $2.5 billion. How much of that went to the US Gov.? It did state, "Consolidated current tax expense (benefit) includes amounts applicable to U.S. federal income taxes of $651 million in 2012." But I believe this the GAAP number and not what is actually paid to the IRS.

Corporate taxes are fun stuff.

If applying this GAAP (I don't fully understand all these accounting tricks) to other corporations, would they get a higher number than the amount of money they send to the IRS? I know GE essentially gets what amounts to subsidies. I know the energy sector is different from any other, but there is all kinds of corporate welfare out there hidden in the enormous federal budget. That's why I say get rid of all of it and just go by a federal sales tax. Get rid of the loophooles, give-aways, subsidies & most importantly: the IRS (not to mention tax preparers & other expenses in the "tax sector").

 

[MHSL82]

Didn't know where to place this: Pro Football Weekly says goodbye

 

[NinerSickness]

Didn't know where to place this: Pro Football Weekly says goodbye

Thats's sad.

I hope their employees can catch on with other companies.

 

[MHSL82]

Roger Goodell defends Washington Redskins name

 

[Jikkle]

Roger Goodell defends Washington Redskins name

Watching the First Take video that was embedded in that article I just hate how one side will say you can't speak for the Native Americans and than proceed to speak for the Native Americans.

From what I've seen and read their is no unified opinion on the term Redskins among Native Americans. Some like, some don't care, and some hate it and I don't have a clue as to the ratio each of those are.

I personally don't think it's offensive term but I would support a name change if there was a strong unified push by Native Americans to change it.