Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
| Welcome to Our Hoosier Board! Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions. Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful. Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine! Cheers, sirbrianwilson Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The second debate | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 9 2016, 08:11 PM (545 Views) | |
| rkl15 | Oct 12 2016, 07:08 AM Post #61 |
![]()
All-Star
|
Hoping this wasn't aimed at me. Don't remember calling you a liar or anything, just trying to give some links to clarify some questions I've read on here. Didn't mean to piss anyone off. And there are no limitations on the "amount" of depreciation you can claim in any single year. IRS Depreciation rules |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Oct 12 2016, 10:03 AM Post #62 |
![]()
Coach
|
you're going to take offense to this, but it seems as you have a very severe fundamental misunderstanding of how this part of the tax code works, and how it is being interpreted in the articles you posted. Given your education level and expertise with numbers, it seems to me that you're either being disingenuous in your conclusion, or your hatred for all things Trump doesn't allow you to think rationally. 1) There are no limits to carry over loss. You won't really find an "article" about this....it's just the basics of the tax code and it's not something that is in dispute (your articles don't even remotely contradict this - I'll explain down below.) 2) There are no limits to depreciation expense. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-regs/depreciation_faqs_v2.pdf 3) As I've explained multiple times now, you can depreciate an asset down to zero (sometimes accelerated, sometimes over time...makes no difference to the end result here), but still own the asset which counts towards your net worth. As I illustrated before, next year my vehicles will show zero value on my books because I will have depreciated them fully and taken the loss (this is fully allowed...not gray area), yet I still own the vehicles. In some cases you depreciate tools or equipment and they may actually increase in value with inflation or situations where a certain machine becomes rare...etc. In those cases your net worth would increase even though you took the loss on the paper depreciation of the items. Your statement "But the net worth he claims to have doesn't jibe with the deductions he would have sVed." http://s15.zetaboards.com/Our_Hoosier_Board/single/?p=10002599&t=10037326 is completely nonsensical as I have illustrated again above. 4) You said "And the amounts you are giving? Come on. $916,000,000 in losses." http://s15.zetaboards.com/Our_Hoosier_Board/single/?p=10002583&t=10037326 Again, this comment doesn't come from a place of reason or understanding of how taxes and taxable income work....it's nonsense. At this point, his 1995 taxes have certainly been audited and this is the amount that he showed as a loss within the confines of the tax code. I don't know how much of it is depreciation, but as I showed above, there is no limit to depreciation expense, so it could have been a significant amount...especially considering he is in the real estate business dealing with very very large ticket purchases. 5) You said "And what plays even worse is that if he hasn't paid an taxes , why does his tax plan call for even greTer breaks for therich?" http://s15.zetaboards.com/Our_Hoosier_Board/single/?p=10002599&t=10037326 . Just for the record, depreciation expense is available to all of us, not just the "rich", and it is also ABSOLUTELY necessary. Otherwise, when my business purchases a new vehicle, or equipment...etc, I would be out the cash, yet still pay tax on it, because these types of items under today's codes are not "expenses". 6) Regarding the articles you posted: Both of them are citing the same "tax experts" from the Times. If you would have just taken a moment to try to understand what they were saying, you would see how far off you are in your conclusion of their writing. Nowhere did they say that his loss would be limited to 18 years or any other year. They CLEARLY show that they are estimating how long it would take to expire that loss if he were to make $50million per year in subsequent years....which is just a complete hypothetical guess for the sake of the article.
50 million x 18 years equals about the 900million we're talking about. The 18 years figure was probably just used because that's how many years we're talking about to take him to the present. Here's how that works if you're following along. He probably hasn't filed his 2015 taxes yet, and won't until this saturday, so we're dealing with his 2014 being the most recent. His carry over loss would have begun in 1996. 1996 plus 18 equals 2014. The article is written with an obvious slant and perhaps they used these figures to intentionally confuse those who don't actually understand how this works.....and apparently you took the bait hook line and sinker brum. As I pointed about above, the 2nd article you posted from Vanity fair references the same hypothetical tax analysis from the first article. Fact is, depending upon how much taxable income Trump has had since 1995, he could have years and years worth of carry over still available....and you and I have the exact same ability if we choose to purchase eligible assets. It's not a loophole...it's not "for the rich"....even the smallest mom&pop operations have this available to them, and for very very good reason. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Oct 12 2016, 04:36 PM Post #63 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
So this is the process I see: 1. I ask simply for a link since I stated everything I read had stated that everything I was reading on said he could have avoided paying taxes for three years prior and fifteen years after. 2. You call me a liar. 3. I show you what I had read and say I don't appreciate the accusation. I also state that I wasn't sure if there was a limit to how much depreciation could have been used. 4. You finally provide a links from the irs -- which is all.I.asked.for.in.the.first.place. So got it, I'm just an ignorant, uninformed liar for you to educate -- the ignorance part I SAID UP FRONT WHICH IS WHY I ASKED FOR LINKS. But no, instead of just providing it you want to poke the bear. Don't bother. I will point out that your statement of '18 years is probably just used because that would bring us to today' is not true. What I won't do is call your math nonsensical, say you made stuff up, or a very severe understanding how math works. 1996 taxes would have been paid in 1997; that's year 1. 1997 taxes paid in 1998; year 2 1998 taxes paid in 1999, year 3 1999 paid in 2000, year 4. fast forward 14 more years and that would mean his 2013 taxes paid in 2014 would be the 18th tax year we are talking about. The most recent taxes paid -- for tax year 2014, paid in 2015 -- would be year 19, not 18. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Oct 12 2016, 06:30 PM Post #64 |
![]()
Coach
|
The ignorance part you "said up front". Really? No....this is exactly what you said up front:
That's an absolutely false statement by you and you state it as fact.....no indication of ignorance. I pointed out your error and you followed it up with this:
Again a completely false statement stated as fact with no indication or acknowledgement of ignorance. so are you lying now? |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Oct 12 2016, 11:26 PM Post #65 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
So if a statement is incorrect, it must be a lie. Cool story. So why did you lie about 18 years of taxes bringing it up to today? |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Oct 13 2016, 10:11 AM Post #66 |
![]()
Coach
|
i never called you a liar, but I assume you are equating my comment about you not "just making stuff up" to me calling you a liar. If you took it that way, I apologize....i didn't intend it to call you a liar, rather meant it as further implication that you had no idea what you were talking about regarding the tax code as it related to Trump's situation. And no....being incorrect isn't the same as lying. That being said, however, yesterday you posted the following:
You claim that you noted your ignorance on the topic up front....but you did not as I illustrated with my post yesterday. I asked if you were lying about this. I mean....claiming that you said something when you really didn't....that is exactly what Trump did, which you called him a liar for in this thread (as well as many other threads). |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Oct 13 2016, 04:37 PM Post #67 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
I will amend the 'saying it up front' to 'saying it'. It was why I asked a question about whether there was a limit on the amount of depreciation you could claim per year plus asking for a links disputing the 18 years of taxes. It wasn't meant to be an accusation that you were wrong -- it was meant to ask for links contradicting everything I had read(and heard as well -- I'm a news radio kind of guy). Even Fox News on Sirius was saying what I had read (Yes, I mainly listen to CNN and Fox -- Fox because I do want to know what those with an opinion opposite mine are saying). Basically every news outlet I read or heard from -- liberal, neutral, or conservative -- was citing the NYT story and not questioning it. It's why I didn't question it -- the conservative outlets I heard from didn't either. Seriously, when you questioned it the first time I googled to find anyone outlet questioning how the NYT arrived at 18 years -- not a single source, conservative or otherwise, did. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Oct 14 2016, 05:16 PM Post #68 |
![]()
Coach
|
Well, hopefully you learned your lesson on relying on the New York Times. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Oct 14 2016, 06:25 PM Post #69 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
What news source do you listen to/read that has never been inaccurate? |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Oct 14 2016, 06:55 PM Post #70 |
![]()
Coach
|
I said "rely on"....you said "listen to/read"...different things. I mean...you made a hate filled accusation on bad information that was extremely easy to look up and refute. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| brumdog44 | Oct 15 2016, 03:26 AM Post #71 |
![]()
The guy picked last in gym class
|
'Hate-filled accusation'??? |
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Oct 15 2016, 04:26 PM Post #72 |
![]()
Coach
|
yeah man....if you could step back and take an unbiased view of the tone of your posts when your talking about Trump or formerly Cruz.....it's way different than your norm....much more "fly off the handle", "type before I think" type of stuff with a very strong tone of hate and disgust. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| sirbrianwilson | Oct 15 2016, 05:15 PM Post #73 |
![]()
Stemlerite
|
I don't see hating trump as necessarily a weird thing. |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| Mr Gray | Oct 15 2016, 06:43 PM Post #74 |
![]()
Coach
|
Nobody said it was weird. |
![]() The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism. | |
![]() |
|
| sirbrianwilson | Oct 15 2016, 08:50 PM Post #75 |
![]()
Stemlerite
|
I was just making a statement. br |
![]()
| |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
7:52 PM Jul 10
|













7:52 PM Jul 10