Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Phil Mickelson

Sublime Peach





Posts: 7168
(7166 all sites)
Registered: 4/7/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 06:26 AM
Congrats to you. Too bad they have slapped your hand and put you in the "corner" and have made you appologize for expressing your feelings about being over taxed. Obviously this is not allowed in Amerika anymore. He better watch out or he will end up like Mcafee. Time to play ball Phil. Now sit down and be quiet and be a good little boy and be happy with what you have.


Phil Mickelson, Stop Whining and Give Thanks for your Good Fortune
Len Burman
Forbes

In Saturday’s New York Times, pro golfer Phil Mickelson complained about his high marginal tax rates.

“If you add up all the federal and you look at the disability and the unemployment and the Social Security and state, my tax rate is 62, 63 percent,” Mickelson said. “So I’ve got to make some decisions on what to do.”

My first reaction is that Phil should talk to his accountant because his effective tax rate is surely lower than 60 percent. The fiscal cliff deal raised his marginal income tax rate to 39.6% (assuming he’s in the top bracket). The phase-out of itemized deductions will add about 1.2% and he will also have to pay a combined Medicare tax rate of 3.8% (the regular 2.9% for self-employed people plus the new 0.9% surtax enacted to help finance the Affordable Care Act). According to the New York Times article, Mickelson will also owe 13.3% in California state income taxes because he’s in the new millionaire bracket. That adds up to 57.9%, but state income taxes and 1.45% of the payroll tax are deductible from federal income tax, so that reduces their net cost by 5.8% (39.6% of 14.75%). In net, Mickelson will owe about 52% of his marginal earning in federal and state taxes.

But suppose Mickelson’s upper estimate on his tax bill–63%–were right. Is he saying that a $10 million endorsement deal wouldn’t be worth doing if he only got to keep $3.7 million after tax? Really? Mr. Mickelson, do you understand that the typical American would have to work about 75 years to earn that much money before tax?

Sir, you get paid astonishing amounts of money for playing golf–directly through the purses you win at tournaments and indirectly through all the endorsement deals that come with golf success. According to Forbes, you are the seventh highest paid athlete in the world, with $4.8 million in salary and winnings and $43 million in endorsements?

Do you have any idea how lucky you are?

Please stop whining and give thanks for being able to earn a fabulous living playing a game and selling golf clubs (even after tax). 99.999% of people would never have that option, no matter how hard they worked on their swing.

 

____________________
"If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there'd be peace."

- John Lennon

 
Replies:

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 10:01 AM
The writer is correct in saying that even if over half of Mickelson's income is taken by the gov't, that still leaves him with more money than most people ever make. But how many people win the Masters three times? Rising to the top of your profession calls for a big reward, and the gov't taking over half of the income generated is totally unfair no matter how much he's allowed to keep. It's his money.
 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 69258
(69619 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 10:04 AM
Maybe he should give Mitt a call - maybe get some tips on Cayman Island investment opportunities.....

 

____________________

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 11689
(12132 all sites)
Registered: 1/8/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 10:22 AM
Did Mickelson aquire his wealth illegally? If not, who are we to decide how he should manage it?

 

____________________
We'd all like to vote for the best man, but he's never a candidate.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 10:31 AM
Whoever wrote that also uses terms like "good fortune" and "lucky," which makes it easier to justify his position that Phil's obligated to share more than half his earnings with the government. I believe skill, talent and the desire and perseverence to develop them have a lot more to do with it.
 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2004
(2027 all sites)
Registered: 2/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 10:38 AM
corporations do this all of the time. people do it all of the time. U2 moved their business away from Ireland for the same reasons. Only problem here is that Phil vocalized his opinion.

The problem is not with Phil. It is with tax laws. This isn't a fair share discussion. It's a problem. In theory, raising the taxes on people like Phil would mean more income. What happens when Phil (And corporations) move away and we collect even less taxes than before? Theory goes out the door.

He is not doing anything illegal, either.

 

____________________


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 10:44 AM
quote:
In theory, raising the taxes on people like Phil would mean more income. What happens when Phil (And corporations) move away and we collect even less taxes than before? Theory goes out the door.



It looks like a foregone conclusion that Phil will leave California, so in the attempt to confiscate more of his money they wind up with nothing. Will they ever learn?

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3223
(3222 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 12:11 PM
quote:
Maybe he should give Mitt a call - maybe get some tips on Cayman Island investment opportunities.....


Phil is probably getting whacked like most employees, federal and state taxes get taken right out of an earnings check and its looking bigger and bigger these days. . He is not a business owner who can play games with stock options, deferred compensation and other corporate write offs that benefit Mittens.

 

____________________

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 13753
(14007 all sites)
Registered: 2/10/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 12:22 PM
Phil's a pretty cool guy, a good man. If he feels the need to voice his opinion, his frustrations with tax laws, what's the problem?

Heck, the Beatles sang about the "tax man" some 40 years ago.

nothing new.


 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2262
(2262 all sites)
Registered: 4/14/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 12:22 PM
quote:
Whoever wrote that also uses terms like "good fortune" and "lucky," which makes it easier to justify his position that Phil's obligated to share more than half his earnings with the government. I believe skill, talent and the desire and perseverence to develop them have a lot more to do with it.



Bang on. Envy is a terrible thing and those that see his success as luck or good fortune are very niave. He is looking out for his interests and his family's just like the rest of us. His charitable work is exemplery. All thats happinging here is government is taking that control; that we all want away.............very sad indeed that he can't speak his mind publically without being chastized!

 

____________________
Up in the Great White North Eatin' A Peach For Peace!!
http://www.myspace.com/fatbottomdaddy

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 13753
(14007 all sites)
Registered: 2/10/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 12:25 PM
"envy". Pretty much sums it up...
 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2722
(2722 all sites)
Registered: 1/5/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 01:00 PM
glad Phil expressed his frustrations openly about taxes but to suggest he is going to pack it in or change his lifestyle is not going to evoke a great deal of sympathy. I am frustrated about taxes and probably all in am over 60% rate. Federal, state, FICA, Medicare, and of course long island property taxes.

I still consider myself very fortunate and even voted for Obama although i did not agree with him on taxes or spending.

What angers me is the excessive spending. How much did that show in Washington yesterday cost? So that party is paid for with the taxes we all pay!!!! That is where the nonsense is!!!!

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8410
(8411 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 01:03 PM
We need folks like this to speak about the tax impact. However, it would be better not to signal a "maybe" or "I might..." on this issue. He should just move, and when asked, respond that moving to wherever just saved him "x" millions per year and that California's new tax rates are what prompted the move. Take action and then explain why, or say nothing.

It would also be great if pro sports athletes started to reject offers from CA-based teams because of the taxes. A guy making $5 million/yr would keep $665,000 more of his earnings if based in a non-income tax state. Of course, some of that might be made up in other ways (property tax, sales tax), but at least those are things the individual has some control over. A public that generally thinks raising the rates on the rich is always a better thing might think twice when seeing guys they relate to make life decisions based in part on taxes.

Income tax is becoming the #1 tool for politicians to divide the population and whip up class envy. We shouldn't let them.

BTW - it's been recently reported that France's last President - Nicolas Sarkozy - is planning a move to London because of the insane new rates (75%) on wealthy French citizens. I hope the same happens here and the wealthy flee states like NY, MD, IL, and CA for more friendly places. At the same time, a move is afoot in some Republican-dominated states to get rid of their income taxes and replace the lost revenue with sales and/or property tax changes. Hopefully that talk turns into real action.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46833
(46834 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 01:51 PM
quote:
At the same time, a move is afoot in some Republican-dominated states to get rid of their income taxes and replace the lost revenue with sales and/or property tax changes. Hopefully that talk turns into real action.


We are trying that here in Brownbackistan. It has resulted in deep education cuts, dramatic rises in property taxes and resentment between the richer and poorer counties, with the richer ones wanting more return because they pay more, etc.

In FY18 Kansas will face a $2.5 billion state budget shortfall because of the slashes in income and other taxes that were used as incentives for businesses to invest here. The Brownbackian prediction is that the income generated from investment in the state will make up the difference. Only time will tell.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 29713
(29846 all sites)
Registered: 12/13/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 02:55 PM
I'm not saying the tax rate is fair or not...

I'm just saying the guy made $60+ million last year. He made it through hard work, dedication, talent, desire, skill. I get that.

He still made $60+ million in one year. Take away the taxes, he's left with over $25 million. One year.

The truth is he made more money last year (fair and square - unless he cheated on the back nine at Pine Haven ) than most people can even fathom what that amount of money even means. I certainly don't know what that amount of coin is like. So I can't say for certain what's the difference between $60+ million and $25+ million. I can only speculate. I can't believe it's that much. Especially when you made about that much the year before that. Call it envy. Call it whatever you want, but I don't think his family will be going hungry anytime soon.

Again, I'm not saying the tax rate is right or wrong. I'm just saying I think he'll be just fine regardless.

 

____________________
Your neighborhood brewery and tap house - yes! we're now open! Like us on facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/FranklinStreetBrewing

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2722
(2722 all sites)
Registered: 1/5/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:02 PM
exactly being left with 25 million aint all too shabby IMO. No one enjoys paying taxes particularly when much of gets wasted in stuff such as inauguration balls and parades and fancy dresses etc. We all work pretty hard for our money, including Phil but to suggest he has to alter his lifestyle???? And if he does so be it, we all need to adjust our spending a bit. I just wish the government did as well. Anyhow i hope Phil survives financially.
 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 69258
(69619 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:13 PM
The inauguration balls, etc. were not funded by taxpayers......for the most part




Thankfully, most of that pomp and circumstance is funded via contributions, collected by the Presidential Inaugural Committee 2013, or PIC, the group responsible for celebrations such as the National Day of Service, the Kids’ Inaugural Concert, the Inaugural Parade and the Inaugural Ball. It’s unclear how much money in donations PIC collected for the celebrations this year, but, to put it in perspective, the equivalent group collected $53 million in donations in 2009, according to a filing with the Federal Elections Commission.

One change in funding methods this time around is corporate donations. For Obama’s 2009 inauguration, the president -- a staunch opponent of the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United decision, which cemented the legality of super PACs -- refused to take corporate cash for his inaugural festivities. But this year, that rule is out the window: The list of benefactors contributing to inauguration weekend 2013 include such heavy hitters as Microsoft (Nasdaq:MSFT), Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) and the Coca-Cola Company (NYSE:KO). The committee gave no reason for the reversal, but the general consensus is that the president’s reelection efforts -- part of the most expensive presidential campaign in history -- left individual donors tapped out.

Taxpayers aren’t completely off the hook, however. Responsibility for planning the swearing-in ceremonies and the congressional luncheon falls on the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, which was created in 1901. The committee is funded by taxpayer money, and the committee's budget this year is a little more than $1.2 million. A steep price in times of crisis, perhaps, but still down by about $163,000 from 2009.

According to the committee, 2009’s inauguration ceremonies attracted the largest number of attendees in U.S. history. The total bill for that event was more than $170 million, ABC News reported.


http://www.ibtimes.com/obamas-inauguration-do-taxpayers-pay-all-pomp-circum stance-1027028

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8410
(8411 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:26 PM
quote:
quote:
At the same time, a move is afoot in some Republican-dominated states to get rid of their income taxes and replace the lost revenue with sales and/or property tax changes. Hopefully that talk turns into real action.

We are trying that here in Brownbackistan. It has resulted in deep education cuts, dramatic rises in property taxes and resentment between the richer and poorer counties, with the richer ones wanting more return because they pay more, etc.

In FY18 Kansas will face a $2.5 billion state budget shortfall because of the slashes in income and other taxes that were used as incentives for businesses to invest here. The Brownbackian prediction is that the income generated from investment in the state will make up the difference. Only time will tell.

Folks don't like change and they will always find reasons to complain about something new.

But, I don't agree with Brownback's "investments" in business. Remove all income taxes, which includes those on business, and see what happens. That sets the playing field level for all, big and small businesses alike. Don't play kingmaker and spend the citizen's money favoring select businesses over others.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16019
(16023 all sites)
Registered: 9/24/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:34 PM
quote:
The inauguration balls, etc. were not funded by taxpayers......for the most part




who foots the bill for "security" issues ? Just wondering....if a president is an incumbent why have an "inauguration" ceremony for the second term ? Might as well have a farewell ceremony as well. Waste of money, just to "toot one's own horn"

 

____________________

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2262
(2262 all sites)
Registered: 4/14/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:37 PM
quote:
I'm not saying the tax rate is fair or not...

I'm just saying the guy made $60+ million last year. He made it through hard work, dedication, talent, desire, skill. I get that.

He still made $60+ million in one year. Take away the taxes, he's left with over $25 million. One year.

The truth is he made more money last year (fair and square - unless he cheated on the back nine at Pine Haven ) than most people can even fathom what that amount of money even means. I certainly don't know what that amount of coin is like. So I can't say for certain what's the difference between $60+ million and $25+ million. I can only speculate. I can't believe it's that much. Especially when you made about that much the year before that. Call it envy. Call it whatever you want, but I don't think his family will be going hungry anytime soon.

Again, I'm not saying the tax rate is right or wrong. I'm just saying I think he'll be just fine regardless.



Being just fine is not the point. The point is why should he or anyone for that fact be penalized for excelling in there field? As I said previously, the amount of money that he gives back to charity is in the millions annually through his foundation. The charities that they give to are either related to children, education and veterns, all areas that are under the gun in regard to spending cuts. Continue to take away dollars from him and not only does the charity decline, but you are now putting the money back in the hands of the government that does such a great job managing it!!!

Ya Phil's not gonna starve, but he is as much a philanthropist as he is a pro golfer and he like many are frustrated at the way the governments on this planet have mismanaged our money!!

 

____________________
Up in the Great White North Eatin' A Peach For Peace!!
http://www.myspace.com/fatbottomdaddy

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46833
(46834 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:40 PM
quote:
quote:
The inauguration balls, etc. were not funded by taxpayers......for the most part




who foots the bill for "security" issues ? Just wondering....if a president is an incumbent why have an "inauguration" ceremony for the second term ? Might as well have a farewell ceremony as well. Waste of money, just to "toot one's own horn"


Inaugration ceremonies are so steeped in tradition that its just become "what we do," I suppose.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16019
(16023 all sites)
Registered: 9/24/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:45 PM
quote:
Inaugration ceremonies are so steeped in tradition that its just become "what we do," I suppose.


I understand that, but an "incumbent" was alreadinaugerated once before. Seems the donated money could be used for other things. Another question, is money donated to a inaugeral affair tax deductable or deferred ?

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46833
(46834 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:54 PM
quote:
quote:
Inaugration ceremonies are so steeped in tradition that its just become "what we do," I suppose.


I understand that, but an "incumbent" was alreadinaugerated once before. Seems the donated money could be used for other things. Another question, is money donated to a inaugeral affair tax deductable or deferred ?


Political donations of any type are not deductible, including any donation to the Presidential Inauguration Committee. The IRS is pretty clear on that.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16019
(16023 all sites)
Registered: 9/24/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 03:57 PM
quote:
Political donations of any type are not deductible, including any donation to the Presidential Inauguration Committee. The IRS is pretty clear on that.



thanks

 

____________________

 

Sublime Peach



Karma:
Posts: 7168
(7166 all sites)
Registered: 4/7/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/22/2013 at 04:25 PM
I am pretty sure our founding fathers left England for this kind of taxation. But wait for it, they want MORE. The money grab isn't over yet.

Just ask Nancy ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YewOr2REWys

It will never be enough, until there is no more.

 

____________________
"If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there'd be peace."



- John Lennon

 
<<  1    2  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com