Tom Toles for December 05, 2012

It’s not a ‘charitable’ deduction, but it’s absolutely deductable. All those people at Willard’s fundraiser dinners got to deduct the whole 50k, minus $18 for the value of the actual meal.

I read today that Dick Armey is leaving the Tea Party over differences in ‘principle’. His severence pay is only $8,000,000.-Is there anyone who believes that the tea party is a grassroots organization? Maybe the same people who believe that ‘job creators’ actually exist.

It was kept quiet because it might upset the teabaggers.

All deductions are taxpayer subsidies. Why should all pay more taxes or our collective debt increase because some of us are generous? I’m happy to pay less in taxes because I give to my church, but why should I? The charity deduction means that all organizations that receive such donations are taxpayer subsidized. I don’t mind my taxes being used for good works, but when we all contribute, we should all have a say in how the money is spent. Public support through the back door is still public support.

. . and the 1% who funded Obama’s victory will be rewarded with new tax shelters/loopholes etc. Just wait and see.

As long as they contribute Rove is happy.

No. It means you gambled and lost.

No, but it wins you the name “Sheldon Adelson”.

And that’s not even mentioning the money the 1% blew on all the Senate Races

There are deductions that are used by the majority of US tax payers. Sure you can wipe them out but there will be unintended consequences. Eliminate the mortgage deduction (why should the govt be pushing home ownership?) – but then the housing market takes a hit in the gut. Eliminate the charitable deduction – but then charities will take a big hit on donations.There is a lot of Schedule A reform that makes a lot of sense, and a lot of it can be done incrementally.

Don’t allow mortgage deductions on any but the primary residence Cap the amount of mortgage interest deductible. Maybe home ownership is a good thing but why subsidize buying a $12M mansion? Cap the charitable deduction.

I think all those should be done in addition to letting the top tax bracket go back up.

Those grapes a lil’ sour for ya, Howww-dee?

No, the 99% came up with VOTES.

And they’re not all poor…

Dear Narrowminded: What about all the government services you use? Do you drive a car or ride a bus on streets and highways that are paid for by the government? Do you have police and fire services where you live that you can call 24/7? Is the food you buy and the restaurants at which you eat inspected by government? Do you feel more secure than you would if there were no Army, Navy, Air Force, Nat’l Guard, etc.? Are there public schools where you live? Even if you don’t have school-age children, do you want the next generations to be educated?

How do you suggest paying for these services if not through taxes? Do you vote? Has any elected official for whom you voted ever supported any tax? Has any such official ever suggested abolishing all taxes?

Would you prefer living alone in some wilderness area? Do you have the skills to do so? Can you manufacture or grow everything you need and want?

I’m not saying all taxes are good, or that taxes should be welcomed, but we all get services from various levels of gov’t. It’s how we pay for our civilization, our infrastructure, and so forth. Remember “United We Stand?” So join the rest of us in being united. Somebody was going to lose the election. That’s how elections work.

non-profit, to be sure

Religions are not charities and should not be tax exempt, in truth tax exempt status for religions violates the first phrase of the first amendment “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” and giving religions tax exempt status is certainly “respecting” them.

“Political contributions are nondeductible and should always remain so.’-I’m not 100% sure, but contributions to candidates are completely deductable, including the hidden PACs that support candidates and Karl Rove’s organization.-Contributions to lobbying organizations like ACLU, Sierra Club, and Common Cause are not deductable, except that ALEC and the other right wing lobbyists seem to have special definitions applied to them.

To all of those conservatives here that seem to think that the federal government is “stealing” from its citizens by taking taxes, here is just what the US Constitution (you know, the Law of the Land that we as citizens of this great country are supposed to be obeying) has to say:Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution: “The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes . . . to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.”

Please note, that the US Constitution in this paragraph does not even state exactly just what those taxes shall be, the only thing the Constitution does state further on is that all such federal taxes shall be equally applied to all of the states (AKA citizens of the US) of the union, and I think that most people would agree that is just exactly what the IRS is doing very well, I would be federally taxed exactly the same if I worked in Alaska as if I worked in Alabama!!

Now, mind you, this is in the actual body of the Constitution, and therefore does not even include such amendments as the 16th, which even more specifically specifies the ability of the federal government to tax its citizens in any way it chooses to do so!

Of course, you may very well argue just exactly where the federal government should be spending those tax dollars, and even insist that your representative(s) in Congress also agree with your spending priorities, that is indeed your right under the same Constitution. But by the US Constitution the federal government is NOT stealing by taxing you, however much it desires to tax you!!

What the hell, he probably isn’t paying any taxes anyway..