Business tax – ATO Ogratuit http://atoogratuit.com/ Sat, 18 Sep 2021 01:25:05 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.8 https://atoogratuit.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/icon-5-150x150.png Business tax – ATO Ogratuit http://atoogratuit.com/ 32 32 US banking lobby groups oppose tax reporting bill https://atoogratuit.com/us-banking-lobby-groups-oppose-tax-reporting-bill/ https://atoogratuit.com/us-banking-lobby-groups-oppose-tax-reporting-bill/#respond Fri, 17 Sep 2021 22:36:00 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/us-banking-lobby-groups-oppose-tax-reporting-bill/ People are seen on Wall Street outside the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, United States, March 19, 2021. REUTERS / Brendan McDermid / File Photo Sept. 17 (Reuters) – America’s biggest banking lobby groups banded together on Friday to make another attempt to kill a bank account reporting bill being drafted as […]]]>

People are seen on Wall Street outside the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, United States, March 19, 2021. REUTERS / Brendan McDermid / File Photo

Sept. 17 (Reuters) – America’s biggest banking lobby groups banded together on Friday to make another attempt to kill a bank account reporting bill being drafted as part of Congress’ reconciliation agenda.

In a letter to US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Parliamentary Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, lobby groups said the proposal would create “reputation challenges” for large service companies. financial institutions, increase the cost of tax preparation for Americans and small businesses, and create serious “financial privacy concerns.”

“We urge members to oppose any effort to advance this new misguided reporting regime,” the groups said in the letter.

“While the stated goal of this vast data collection is to uncover tax evasion by the wealthy, this proposal does not remotely target that goal or that population.”

The national accounts reporting requirement proposed in the House’s $ 3.5 trillion package is becoming a significant issue for the banking industry, which opposes the tax reporting changes proposed by Democrats.

The new proposal will require financial services companies to track and submit the inflows and outflows of each bank account above a minimum threshold of $ 600 for one year to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), including breakdowns for species.

The proposal also raises significant privacy concerns, which lobbyists say would discourage taxpayers from participating in the financial services system and undermine efforts to include vulnerable populations and unbanked households.

Reporting by Michelle Price in Washington DC and Sohini Podder in Bengaluru; Editing by Anil D’Silva

Our Standards: Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.


Source link

]]>
https://atoogratuit.com/us-banking-lobby-groups-oppose-tax-reporting-bill/feed/ 0
Tax Foundation analysis examines impact of rising corporate tax rate https://atoogratuit.com/tax-foundation-analysis-examines-impact-of-rising-corporate-tax-rate/ https://atoogratuit.com/tax-foundation-analysis-examines-impact-of-rising-corporate-tax-rate/#respond Fri, 17 Sep 2021 12:03:19 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/tax-foundation-analysis-examines-impact-of-rising-corporate-tax-rate/ According to the Tax Foundation, the corporate tax increase proposal included in the Build Back Better Act, which was put forward by the United States House Ways and Means Committee this week, is higher than it is ‘it seems. © Shutterstock In a recent blog post, authors Alex Muresianu and Eric York pointed out that […]]]>

According to the Tax Foundation, the corporate tax increase proposal included in the Build Back Better Act, which was put forward by the United States House Ways and Means Committee this week, is higher than it is ‘it seems.

© Shutterstock

In a recent blog post, authors Alex Muresianu and Eric York pointed out that while the reconciliation bill would raise the top federal corporate tax rate from 21% to 26.5%, most companies would face a tax rate higher than 26.5%. This is because most states also levy corporation tax.

Including the state’s average corporate tax rate, they wrote, the United States would have an average corporate tax rate of 30.9%. It would be the third highest corporate tax rate in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), behind Colombia and Portugal.

“Under current legislation, the United States is very much in line with peer OECD countries and is actually in the middle of the pack when it comes to corporate taxation. Coming back near the top of the OECD for corporate tax rates would be costly for several reasons: it would discourage investment and encourage companies to shift their profits and locate elsewhere, which would translate into less money. job opportunities for Americans and less tax revenue for the US government, ”Muresianu and York wrote.


Source link

]]>
https://atoogratuit.com/tax-foundation-analysis-examines-impact-of-rising-corporate-tax-rate/feed/ 0
Debate over who actually pays corporate tax continues https://atoogratuit.com/debate-over-who-actually-pays-corporate-tax-continues/ https://atoogratuit.com/debate-over-who-actually-pays-corporate-tax-continues/#respond Fri, 17 Sep 2021 00:01:39 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/debate-over-who-actually-pays-corporate-tax-continues/ House Democrats have released their plan to raise $ 2.1 trillion in taxes to partially offset the cost of their $ 3.5 trillion “human infrastructure” plan. As expected, the plan increases the corporate tax rate. The new rate would be 26.5% instead of the current rate of 21%. This is less than the 28% rate […]]]>

House Democrats have released their plan to raise $ 2.1 trillion in taxes to partially offset the cost of their $ 3.5 trillion “human infrastructure” plan.

As expected, the plan increases the corporate tax rate. The new rate would be 26.5% instead of the current rate of 21%. This is less than the 28% rate favored by President Biden but still below the 35% rate that prevailed in 2017.

The impetus behind the 21% rate was to make the United States competitive with the rest of the world. American companies were fleeing the country through “reversals” or mergers with a foreign company. In both cases, the company “emigrated” taking its head office, jobs and other functions elsewhere.

The lower rate also brought money back to the United States that had been hidden abroad. The tax code allowed overseas profits not to be taxed by the United States unless and until they are repatriated. The 35% tax was a huge reason for leaving money overseas. At 21%, repatriation has become much more attractive.

Eventually to remove the 26.5% rate as a renewed temptation, the minimum tax on foreign income would drop from 10.5% to 16.6%.

There will be the usual debate about who actually pays corporate taxes. Companies are intermediary entities. Taxes are borne by a combination of customers with higher prices, workers with lower wages, and shareholders with lower profits. To the extent that customers and workers pay, it flies in the face of the promise that no one earning less than $ 400,000 a year will be affected by tax increases.

The maximum capital gains tax rate would be reduced from 20% to 25%. This is much less than the 39.6% rate proposed by President Biden.

Personal income tax will increase by increasing the maximum rate from 37% to 39.6%. This is also a return to pre-2017 rates. The lower rate in 2017 was designed to compensate for the loss of full deductibility for itemized deductions such as state and local taxes.

To the dismay of lawmakers where state and local taxes are a big deal, the so-called “SALT” deduction has not been reinstated. With the thinnest of the Democratic majorities, it will be interesting to see how this is resolved.

An additional 3% surtax will apply to individuals with income over $ 5 million. It was not part of Biden’s proposal.

While legislation targets income, it hardly targets wealth. There is no wealth tax. There is no tax on the growth of assets until the assets are sold. There is no change in the increase in the death cost base.

So billionaires like Warren Buffett and Jeff Bezos can pay themselves tiny salaries and see the value of their shares skyrocket tax-free. On death, there will be no capital gains tax payable.

The big wealth change was to reduce the inheritance tax exemption from around $ 12 million per person to $ 6 million per person now rather than in 2025.

Jeffrey Scharf is the founder of Act Two Investors LLC, a registered investment advisor. Contact him at jeffrey@acttwoinvestors.com.


Source link

]]>
https://atoogratuit.com/debate-over-who-actually-pays-corporate-tax-continues/feed/ 0
Lawmaker calls for tax credits in American Samoa https://atoogratuit.com/lawmaker-calls-for-tax-credits-in-american-samoa/ https://atoogratuit.com/lawmaker-calls-for-tax-credits-in-american-samoa/#respond Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:01:12 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/lawmaker-calls-for-tax-credits-in-american-samoa/ Representative Uifa’atali Amata (R-American Samoa) praised the potential benefits ofa budget reconciliation bill, she said, would provide businesses in American Samoa with new tax credits. © Shutterstock Amata said the legislation would allow a 20% deduction from wages and benefits up to $ 50,000 and 50% up to $ 141,000 for certain qualifying small businesses. […]]]>

Representative Uifa’atali Amata (R-American Samoa) praised the potential benefits of
a budget reconciliation bill, she said, would provide businesses in American Samoa with new tax credits.

© Shutterstock

Amata said the legislation would allow a 20% deduction from wages and benefits up to $ 50,000 and 50% up to $ 141,000 for certain qualifying small businesses.

“American Samoa will benefit from any additional economic stimulus, including allowing businesses to keep more of their money here in the local economy,” Amata said. “Businesses will use the tax credits for local purchases, equipment or supplies they need, or for adding an employee, but it keeps that money working in the local economy. “

The proposed tax credit comes from the House Ways and Means Committee, officials noted.

“My goal is to see that American Samoa is included if this bill passes or a reduced bill appears, as I particularly support the inclusion in the bill of $ 120 million to $ 140 million in hospital funds for patients. American Samoa over ten years, ”Amata added, in the wake of some lawmakers voicing the $ 3.5 trillion measure is too costly following two years of record federal spending. “I appreciate the focus on ongoing fiscal accountability in the Senate and communicate the needs of American Samoa to these leaders to be a part of any outcome.”

Amata said she would continue to focus on legislation regarding funding for hospitals, expanding Medicaid and funding roads.


Source link

]]>
https://atoogratuit.com/lawmaker-calls-for-tax-credits-in-american-samoa/feed/ 0
House Bill increases the odds of a global pact to fight corporate tax havens https://atoogratuit.com/house-bill-increases-the-odds-of-a-global-pact-to-fight-corporate-tax-havens/ https://atoogratuit.com/house-bill-increases-the-odds-of-a-global-pact-to-fight-corporate-tax-havens/#respond Tue, 14 Sep 2021 22:08:45 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/house-bill-increases-the-odds-of-a-global-pact-to-fight-corporate-tax-havens/ Itai Grinberg and Rebecca Kysar, the Treasury officials who led the global negotiations for the United States, argued in an essay last week that with a rate of 21%, “Jobs and investment can thrive in the states. -United “. After a virtual meeting with her counterparts from the Group of 7 Nations last week, Treasury […]]]>

Itai Grinberg and Rebecca Kysar, the Treasury officials who led the global negotiations for the United States, argued in an essay last week that with a rate of 21%, “Jobs and investment can thrive in the states. -United “.

After a virtual meeting with her counterparts from the Group of 7 Nations last week, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen said the higher rate “would generate funds for a sustained increase in critical investments in education, research and clean energy ”.

More details on these plans are expected to be released in early and mid-October. However, it is unclear how and when the United States would enact this part of the deal, known as Pillar 1, and business groups and Republicans are still concerned that American companies are paying the brunt of the new taxes. .

The October deadline is self-imposed and could be extended. Countries have set a goal of fully activating the deal by 2023, as it will take time for countries to change their tax laws.

The House proposal, presented by Democrats in the Ways and Means Committee, could still undergo substantial changes before a final vote. Ultimately, it will have to be merged with a proposal from Senate Democrats, who have yet to set a tax rate for foreign corporate profits.

Manal Corwin, a treasury official in the Obama administration who now heads Washington’s national tax practice at KPMG, said it was possible the rate could rise further despite the corporate downturn.

“You never know how these things play out when they need more income,” Ms. Corwin said.

Any change could be accompanied by adjustments to the House Democrats’ proposal for national corporate tax rates. Despite Mr Biden’s call for 28%, the House proposed a graduated structure, ranging from 18% for smaller businesses, with income below $ 400,000, to 26.5% for businesses with income taxable is greater than $ 5 million.


Source link

]]>
https://atoogratuit.com/house-bill-increases-the-odds-of-a-global-pact-to-fight-corporate-tax-havens/feed/ 0
The conflict over tax relief for investors is intensifying. Business owners should be aware https://atoogratuit.com/the-conflict-over-tax-relief-for-investors-is-intensifying-business-owners-should-be-aware/ https://atoogratuit.com/the-conflict-over-tax-relief-for-investors-is-intensifying-business-owners-should-be-aware/#respond Fri, 10 Sep 2021 21:10:03 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/the-conflict-over-tax-relief-for-investors-is-intensifying-business-owners-should-be-aware/ “Deferred interest” tax relief is once again the subject of fierce debate, and business leaders could feel the effects. The $ 3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill, which is still under preparation in Congress, could target deferred interest, which is a common way for venture capitalists, private equity partners and hedge fund managers to receive compensation. […]]]>

“Deferred interest” tax relief is once again the subject of fierce debate, and business leaders could feel the effects.

The $ 3.5 trillion budget reconciliation bill, which is still under preparation in Congress, could target deferred interest, which is a common way for venture capitalists, private equity partners and hedge fund managers to receive compensation. It allows these investors or managers to share the profits of their funds at a reduced tax rate. These profits are now taxed at the maximum long-term capital gains rate of 20% plus a net investment income tax of 3.8%, rather than ordinary income, which is subject to a maximum rate of 37%.

President Biden and many congressional lawmakers have called for the elimination of the deferral interest tax relief in the budget deal. General partners and investors would still make profits from their businesses, but they would be taxed at a much higher rate. This could generate $ 16 billion over 10 years, according to an estimate by the Joint Committee on Taxation.

In a statement, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-OR) called the benefit “one of the tax code’s most indefensible loopholes.”

Those who support maintaining the status quo argue that this is fair tax relief given the high-risk nature of entrepreneurial investing. Ending the tax break, they say, would divert money from startups and other job-creating investments.

On Tuesday, the United States Chamber of Commerce, a business advocacy organization, released a study claiming that one of Biden’s proposed tax changes would force affected industries such as real estate and private equity to downsize, cut 4.9 million jobs, hurt businesses pension returns and unfairly sanctioning industries that invest in areas such as sustainability and health.

“The impact … would be widely felt across the economy because of the deterrent effect it will have on investment activity,” the organization wrote in a press release.

Some of the assumptions in the House inquiry are a bit “out of the way,” according to Jeffrey Sohl, professor of entrepreneurship and decision science at New Haven University.

“If this goes into effect, will the venture capital industry cease to exist? I don’t think so,” Sohl said.

Removing or changing interest has been a topic of discussion among lawmakers at least since the days of the Dodd-Frank law on Wall Street reform and consumer protection, which was passed as a result of the 2008 financial crisis, adds Sohl. With Democrats in control of the reconciliation process, it’s likely that interest will suffer, even if it makes exceptions for things like impact investing.

But the possibility of a drastic change worries some investors. Mac Conwell, who runs Baltimore-based RareBreed Ventures, says the loss of deferred interest would slow the growth of his relatively new company. Much of the profit he earns from deferred interest goes directly back to the fund, he says, which would limit the number of startups the company could help.

Moreover, he fears that the tax will simply mean less money for the founders, making venture capital funding even less fair. “The founders who are going to hit the hardest are underrepresented,” he says.

Small investment firms like Conwell are being overlooked in political debates over this tax hike, says Brett Palmer, chairman of the Small Business Investor Alliance (SBIA), a professional association of private equity and venture capital funds . By the logic that small investment firms will invest in small firms, less money for those firms means less investment in small and medium sized firms, he says.

Sohl agrees that a change in the law wouldn’t mean as much for the bigger players. “The first funds affected by this will not be the Andreessen Horowitzes,” he said.

Many other tax changes are being studied under the budget reconciliation bill, including some for intermediary businesses. The bill could pass without the support of Republicans, but would require a near unified front of Democrats.


Source link

]]>
https://atoogratuit.com/the-conflict-over-tax-relief-for-investors-is-intensifying-business-owners-should-be-aware/feed/ 0
Belton Council considers tax rate of 63 cents per $ 100 | Business https://atoogratuit.com/belton-council-considers-tax-rate-of-63-cents-per-100-business/ https://atoogratuit.com/belton-council-considers-tax-rate-of-63-cents-per-100-business/#respond Wed, 08 Sep 2021 00:14:00 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/belton-council-considers-tax-rate-of-63-cents-per-100-business/ Belton City Council members are set to adopt a new property tax rate of $ 0.63 per $ 100 of assessment next week – taxes that would fund an annual budget of $ 36.3 million for fiscal year 2022 . The proposed budget would represent an increase of almost 12.6% over FY2021, while the proposed […]]]>

Belton City Council members are set to adopt a new property tax rate of $ 0.63 per $ 100 of assessment next week – taxes that would fund an annual budget of $ 36.3 million for fiscal year 2022 .

The proposed budget would represent an increase of almost 12.6% over FY2021, while the proposed ad valorem tax rate of $ 0.63 per $ 100 of assessment would represent an increase of 6.6% per year. compared to fiscal year 2021.

“This budget will increase by $ 865,593 more property taxes than last year’s budget … and of this amount $ 235,230 is tax revenue from new properties added to the tax roll this year,” according to the city by Belton.

Under the proposed tax rate – which exceeds the new income tax rate of $ 0.591 per $ 100 of valuation – a homeowner with a property valued at $ 100,000 would pay $ 48.30 more in taxes. the town of Belton.

However, CFO Mike Rodgers has pointed out how much resident property values ​​are on the rise.

“For the 2020 tax year, our average assessed value of a single-family residence is $ 193,247. This particular average house would have paid $ 1,217 in municipal taxes last year, ”he said Tuesday. “For 2021, our average assessed value increased 8.89% to reach $ 210,594. This average home would now pay $ 110 more in property taxes than in the 2020 tax year. ”

At the last Belton city council meeting, Rodgers said there was $ 16.75 million budgeted for the general fund, $ 1.18 million for the debt service fund, $ 2.7 million $ 11.2 million for special income funds, $ 11.2 million for corporate funds, $ 1.36 million for internal service funds, and $ 2.46 million for the Belton Economic Development Corp. fund.

Although Rodgers said the proposed budget could be achieved with a tax rate of $ 0.62, Belton City Council proposed a tax rate closer to $ 0.63 per $ 100 – a move that , according to Rodgers, would provide additional funding of $ 131,000 from property taxes.

“On August 10, 2021, city council proposed a property tax rate of 63 cents per $ 100 of assessed value to generate additional funds to implement the fiscal year 2022 budget,” Rodgers said during a meeting on Tuesday. “The proposed budget now reflects total resources of $ 36,383,280 and expenses of $ 34,180,640. “

Board member Guy O’Banion, however, still believes that a tax rate of $ 0.62 per $ 100 is achievable.

“We’re still not out of the woods with COVID,” O’Banion said at Tuesday’s meeting. “There are still people who are suffering. There are still people who are a bit cramped. We mitigate this increase in (property) value a bit by just dropping a dime more, but we are more acceptable and more responsible with our tax dollars.

Still, Belton City Manager Sam Listi stressed that Belton’s needs are “important” and suggested not to take “a step back just yet”.

Council members will vote on whether or not to adopt the annual budget of $ 36.3 million and the tax rate of $ 0.63 per $ 100 at a meeting at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, September 14.


Source link

]]>
https://atoogratuit.com/belton-council-considers-tax-rate-of-63-cents-per-100-business/feed/ 0
Barclays AAdvantage Aviator business card: 80,000 American Airlines miles https://atoogratuit.com/barclays-aadvantage-aviator-business-card-80000-american-airlines-miles/ https://atoogratuit.com/barclays-aadvantage-aviator-business-card-80000-american-airlines-miles/#respond Fri, 03 Sep 2021 21:34:25 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/barclays-aadvantage-aviator-business-card-80000-american-airlines-miles/ This article contains links to products of our advertisers, and we may be compensated when you click on those links. Our recommendations and advice are binding on us and have not been reviewed by any of the listed issuers. The conditions apply to the offers listed on this page. It’s been a while since we’ve […]]]>

This article contains links to products of our advertisers, and we may be compensated when you click on those links. Our recommendations and advice are binding on us and have not been reviewed by any of the listed issuers. The conditions apply to the offers listed on this page.

It’s been a while since we’ve seen an increased welcome bonus on an American Airlines co-branded credit card, but now there’s an unprecedented offer to consider.

The AAdvantage® Aviator® World Elite Business Mastercard® offers a limited time bonus of 50,000 miles after spending $ 1,000 on purchases in the first 90 days. Plus, earn 30,000 miles after spending a total of $ 6,000 on purchases in the first 12 months.

Even if you don’t travel often with American Airlines, the AAdvantage® Aviator® World Elite Business Mastercard® might still be worth considering. Here’s how the offer accumulates.

Barclays AAdvantage Aviator Business Card: Earn up to 80,000 miles

Regular APR

15.99% or 24.99%

Featured Reward

50,000 miles after spending $ 1,000 on purchases in the first 90 days. Plus, earn 30,000 miles after spending a total of $ 6,000 on purchases in the first 12 months

Chevron icon It indicates an expandable section or menu, or sometimes previous / next navigation options.

  • Advantages and disadvantages

  • Details


  • Advantages
    • American Airlines benefits, including free first checked baggage and preferential boarding
    • 5% annual mileage bonus
    • You can earn $ 3,000 of Elite Dollars qualifying toward American Airlines Elite Status by spending $ 25,000 on the card during a calendar year.
    The inconvenients
    • Journeyman Certificate benefit requires spending $ 30,000 or more on the card in a fiscal year
    • Earn up to 80,000 bonus miles: 50,000 after spending $ 1,000 on purchases in the first 90 days and additional 30,000 miles after spending $ 6,000 on purchases in the first 12 months
    • Earn 2X AAdvantage® miles for every dollar spent on qualifying American Airlines purchases
    • Earn 2X AAdvantage® miles for every dollar spent at qualifying office supplies, telecommunications and rental car merchants
    • Earn 1x AAdvantage® miles for every dollar spent on all other purchases
    • After each account anniversary, earn 5% bonus AAdvantage® miles based on the total number of miles earned with your card
    • First checked baggage free for you and up to 4 accompanying persons when traveling on domestic routes operated by American Airlines

    The new welcome offer on the AAdvantage® Aviator® World Elite Business Mastercard® is tiered, and to unlock the full bonus of 80,000 miles you will need to spend a total of $ 6,000 on purchases over 12 months (an average of $ 500 per month).

    The card also reports:

    • 2 miles per dollar on qualifying American Airlines purchases
    • 2 miles per dollar at qualifying office supplies, telecommunications and rental car dealers
    • 1 mile per dollar on all other qualifying purchases

    There’s an annual fee of $ 95, but you can offset the cost (and more) if you take advantage of the card’s benefits.

    Cardholders get free first piece of checked baggage (worth $ 30 each way) for themselves and up to four companions on the same booking on American Airlines domestic routes, so you can compensate for the annual fee after only a few trips. The card also offers preferential boarding on American Airlines flights (for the cardholder and up to four companions) and 25% off American Airlines inflight purchases.

    Read more: How to earn, redeem and maximize American Airlines miles

    Big spenders can unlock a potentially lucrative perk: If you spend $ 30,000 or more in an account anniversary year, you’ll receive a Companion Certificate that lets you add another person to your round-trip in-class itinerary. American Airlines economy for only $ 99 (plus taxes and fees). Travel must be within the United States and there are other restrictions, but if you can use the certificate it could save you a lot of money.

    The card offers another benefit that can add additional miles to your account. Each year, on your account anniversary date, you will receive a 5% AAdvantage miles bonus, based on the total number of miles accumulated with your card. If you’re looking for Elite status, you can also get a boost – when you spend $ 25,000 on purchases in a calendar year, you’ll receive $ 3,000 Elite Qualifying Dollars (EQD).

    There is another 80,000 mile bonus to consider

    Regular APR

    15.99% – 23.99% Variable

    Credit score

    Good to Excellent

    Featured Reward

    80,000 ThankYou® bonus points after spending $ 4,000 on purchases in the first 3 months after opening the account

    Chevron icon It indicates an expandable section or menu, or sometimes previous / next navigation options.

  • Advantages and disadvantages

  • Details


  • Advantages
    • Sign up bonus
    • Generous bonus categories
    The inconvenients
    • Doesn’t offer a lot of statement credits or other benefits
    • Citi ThankYou Rewards may not be as convenient as other points for US-based travelers
    • Earn 80,000 ThankYou® bonus points after spending $ 4,000 on purchases in the first 3 months after opening the account
    • Earn 3 points for every $ 1 spent in restaurants and supermarkets
    • Earn 3 points for every dollar spent at gas stations, air travel and hotels
    • Earn 1 point per dollar spent on all other purchases
    • Annual savings on hotels
    • 80,000 points are redeemable for $ 800 in gift cards when redeemed on merci.com
    • No expiration and no limit to the number of points you can earn with this card
    • No foreign transaction fees on purchases

    If you don’t have a small business – or if you don’t want to be locked into just one frequent flyer program – there is another high credit card welcome offer that could equal 80,000 American Airlines miles.

    The Citi Premier® card also offers a record bonus of 80,000 ThankYou® bonus points after spending $ 4,000 on purchases in the first 3 months after opening the account. Citi ThankYou Points are extremely valuable as you can transfer them to over a dozen airline partners, including JetBlue, Air France-KLM, Singapore Airlines, and Cathay Pacific. American Airlines is not normally on this list, but for a limited time, Citi has added American Airlines as a transfer partner.

    Read more: How to Earn, Redeem & Maximize Citi ThankYou Points

    When you have the Citi Premier® card, you can transfer points to American Airlines at a 1: 1 ratio, which means you can convert the 80,000 point bonus into 80,000 American Airlines miles. Just be aware that transfers to American Airlines end on November 13, 2021, so you will need to apply for the card and earn the bonus before that date to take advantage of this option.

    The Citi Premier® card is also more convenient for daily spending as it earns 3 times the points in popular categories – air travel, gas stations, restaurants, supermarkets and hotels – and 1 point per dollar on all other purchases. . It doesn’t come with airline perks, but if you’re not a frequent American Airlines flyer, this might not be a factor for you.

    Featured credit cards from our partners

    Featured Reward

    100,000 points

    Credit needed

    Good to Excellent

    Featured Reward

    3 Free Nights (worth up to 50,000 points each) after spending $ 3,000 in the first 3 months, plus 10x the total points per $ 1 spent for a maximum of $ 2,500 of combined purchases in certain categories in your first 6 months

    Credit needed

    Good to Excellent

    Featured Reward

    $ 200 after spending $ 500 on purchases in the first three months after opening the account

    Credit needed

    Good to Excellent


    Source link

    ]]>
    https://atoogratuit.com/barclays-aadvantage-aviator-business-card-80000-american-airlines-miles/feed/ 0
    Vancouver Liberal dodges questions over use of tax exemption on sales of homes over 40 https://atoogratuit.com/vancouver-liberal-dodges-questions-over-use-of-tax-exemption-on-sales-of-homes-over-40/ https://atoogratuit.com/vancouver-liberal-dodges-questions-over-use-of-tax-exemption-on-sales-of-homes-over-40/#respond Tue, 31 Aug 2021 23:47:40 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/vancouver-liberal-dodges-questions-over-use-of-tax-exemption-on-sales-of-homes-over-40/ VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – Vancouver Liberal candidate Granville refuses to provide details of how he handled more than 40 home sales in the past two decades when tax time arrived. It comes after NEWS 1130 reported that Taleeb Noormohamed had bought and sold at least 42 properties in the Metro Vancouver area in the past […]]]>

    VANCOUVER (NEWS 1130) – Vancouver Liberal candidate Granville refuses to provide details of how he handled more than 40 home sales in the past two decades when tax time arrived.

    It comes after NEWS 1130 reported that Taleeb Noormohamed had bought and sold at least 42 properties in the Metro Vancouver area in the past 17 years. Of those, 21 homes were bought and sold at lightning speed, in stark contrast to his party’s promise in this year’s federal election to introduce an anti-rollover tax.

    Previously, Noormohamed told NEWS 1130 that some of his dozens of deals since 2005 were related to running a business repairing houses with his parents and then selling them.

    In a follow-up interview on Tuesday, OMNI TV asked a simple question: How many of those home sales did you report as your primary residence for tax purposes?

    The Liberal candidate dodged the question three times in an interview, just saying that.

    “In all my, all my – first of all – I want to say unequivocally, I support all the measures the government has proposed to ensure that we can make housing affordability a priority,” said Noormohamed at OMNI. “I support all of these measures. I know some of the transactions that I have been involved in in the past, if this policy had been in place today regarding the speculation tax, that these properties, or these transactions, would have been subject to these taxes.

    “And that’s perfectly fine. I totally support this, because I think it is important that we all do our fair share, and I have made sure that at every moment, that I continue to stand up for these policies, and I will continue to push for these policies one after the other. once I am elected.


    RELATED STORIES:

    “If you declare it as your main residence, you can get by without tax”

    The question of how property income was reported is important. When you sell your primary residence, the gains are tax exempt.

    You have the option of using this exemption once a year, if you live in this house. And you end up paying a lot more if the profit from the sale of a home is reported as business income or as a capital gain.

    “There are three levels of classification,” says tax lawyer Josh Schmidt. “If you are a home buying and selling business, then income is income like any other. So you would pay tax on it, the same way you would pay your employment income, so taxed as a percentage of your tax rate.

    “If you have a house that you owned as a capital asset, say you buy a house and you’re going to rent it out to a tenant, for years and years you rent it out, and after 10 years you decide you have finished renting it, you want to buy something else, you sell the house. This house wasn’t a flip, it wasn’t business income – it’s capital property – so you only tax half of the capital gain, so it’s obviously much more beneficial [than declaring it as part of business income].

    “Now the third category is your primary residence. Your principal residence is a capital asset for you, under the rules of the income tax of Canada, you are allowed to declare a principal residence per year, which you must usually live, as a principal residence for tax purposes, and pay no tax on any gain in respect of that year.

    “The most important point is that if you claim it as your primary residence, you can get away with tax free. “

    When OMNI asked Noormohamed if he could tell us if the profits from any of these transactions were classified as business income or capital gains for tax purposes, he simply replied, “I have always followed the appropriate rules on this subject ”.

    NEWS 1130 has since asked Noormohamed staff for a breakdown of the tax treatment of each of the more than 40 home sales the candidate has participated in since 2005. According to documents obtained by NEWS 1130, Noormohamed made a profit of $ 4.9 million. $ 3.7 million he has pocketed over the past six years, regardless of transaction costs.



    Source link

    ]]>
    https://atoogratuit.com/vancouver-liberal-dodges-questions-over-use-of-tax-exemption-on-sales-of-homes-over-40/feed/ 0
    The American Families Plan Taxes Billionaires While Protecting Family Farms and Businesses https://atoogratuit.com/the-american-families-plan-taxes-billionaires-while-protecting-family-farms-and-businesses/ https://atoogratuit.com/the-american-families-plan-taxes-billionaires-while-protecting-family-farms-and-businesses/#respond Mon, 30 Aug 2021 04:52:48 +0000 https://atoogratuit.com/?p=581 In recent months, reporting by ProPublica confirmed that some of the wealthiest billionaires in the United States are paying virtually no income tax on the incredible gains in their fortunes. Worse, a massive loophole in the tax code allows these billionaires and other wealthy Americans to escape income tax on their gains for their entire […]]]>

    In recent months, reporting by ProPublica confirmed that some of the wealthiest billionaires in the United States are paying virtually no income tax on the incredible gains in their fortunes. Worse, a massive loophole in the tax code allows these billionaires and other wealthy Americans to escape income tax on their gains for their entire lifetimes—even as regular Americans pay income tax on every paycheck.

    To pay for the transformative investments in his Build Back Better agenda, President Joe Biden has proposed tax reforms to close a capital gains loophole favoring the wealthiest Americans. This change is the most important way that Biden’s plan combats the tax code’s preferential treatment of income from wealth over income from work.

    Under the American Families Plan (AFP), only a small fraction of Americans—those with very large untaxed gains—would be affected, mainly because the plan exempts the first $1 million of untaxed gains per person. And while critics of the president’s plan have argued that it would harm family farms and businesses, these claims are unfounded. As this issue brief explains, many of these claims are based on flawed studies, including some that do not even analyze the actual Biden proposal.

    The fact is that under the AFP, the vast majority of Americans—including family farmers and small-business owners—would be exempt from new taxes, since the proposal is targeted at those with large untaxed gains. Moreover, the proposal includes special protections for owners of family farms and businesses who plan to keep their enterprises in the family. Because of these protections, critics’ harshest claim—that the Biden plan would force families to sell their farms and businesses, thereby preventing transfers from one generation to the next—is simply not true.

    The AFP closes a loophole that allows huge fortunes to permanently escape income tax

    To support vital public investments, President Biden’s plan would raise $3.6 trillion in revenue from high-income Americans and corporations over the next decade, including nearly $350 billion from reforming the taxation of capital gains. Capital gains are the growth in the value of assets between when they are bought and when they are sold. Because of the extreme concentration of wealth in the United States, capital gains accrue overwhelmingly to the very rich. According to data from the Congressional Budget Office, households in the top 1 percent of the income distribution collect nearly $486,000 per year on average in realized capital gains; those in the bottom 20 percent make just $67. Central to President Biden’s tax reform is his proposal to repeal the stepped-up basis loophole—which shields these types of gains from income tax—while protecting the savings of ordinary Americans.

    Figure 1


    Stepped-up basis is one of multiple ways that capital gains receive favorable tax treatment. Under the existing tax code, gains on assets are generally not taxed until they are sold. If a wealthy person buys stock for $1 million and it rises in value to $11 million, they do not owe any tax as long as they hold the asset—even though they have become $10 million wealthier. If the person sells the asset, they would realize a $10 million gain and include that amount in their taxable income. Assuming the person has held the asset for more than one year, the gain would be taxed at the rates for long-term capital gains, which are significantly lower than those for other forms of income. Though the asset value grew over years, the tax is deferred until sale and is subject to much lower rates when it is taxed. By contrast, income derived from labor—such as wages—is generally taxed as it is earned and is subject to ordinary rates.

    Moreover, stepped-up basis allows gains on assets to permanently escape income tax if the owner never sells the asset during their lifetime. If an individual holds an asset until their death, the gain is simply erased at that time. No one—neither the decedent nor their heirs—pays any income tax on the gain accrued during the decedent’s life.

    As the ProPublica reporting illustrates, the wealthiest billionaires in the country pay hardly any income tax from year to year because they often sell little to none of their stock holdings. This means that some of the largest fortunes in human history will permanently escape income tax if Congress fails to change the revenue code before these billionaires pass their fortunes to their heirs.

    Biden’s tax reforms only affect a tiny share of Americans

    The AFP does not repeal the stepped-up basis loophole entirely. Under the plan, up to $1 million in untaxed gains per person—$2 million per couple—would still be exempt from taxation. This would come on top of other capital gains carveouts, including the exemption of $250,000 of gain on home sales—$500,000 for couples—and the exclusion of sales of qualified small-business stock.

    Unsurprisingly, very few people would be affected by these tax hikes. Robert McClelland of the Tax Policy Center estimates that a miniscule 3 percent of households have unrealized capital gains greater than $1 million per person.

    Above the exemption levels, President Biden’s plan would repeal stepped-up basis by counting gifts and bequests of appreciated assets as realization events, requiring the original owner to include the appreciation of the asset in their taxable income. In the case of a bequest, this would fall on a decedent’s final income tax return. Taxes on liquid assets such as stocks would be due that year, but taxes on nonliquid assets such as farms and businesses could be paid over 15 years.

    Moreover, the AFP allows heirs of family-owned farms and businesses to defer taxes indefinitely so long as the farms or businesses continue to be owned and operated by members of the family. Taxes are only owed on the original owner’s gain when the enterprise is sold or is no longer operated by the family. For this reason, no one inheriting and operating a family farm or business would be forced to sell it for the purpose of paying new taxes under the Biden plan.

    Critics of the AFP ignore its specific protections for family farms and businesses

    President Biden’s proposals to tax the rich are overwhelmingly popular. Consequently, the president’s critics have been hesitant to attack his plan directly. For example, a recent CNBC profile of the business lobbying group America’s Job Creators for a Strong Recovery (ACJSR) noted the following:

    The coalition [ACJSR] aims to turn the narrative away from a debate about taxing the rich and the biggest corporations to pay for roads and bridges. The organizers themselves acknowledge that that rhetorical battleground leans strongly in Democrats’ favor in public opinion polls.

    ACJSR has instead mischaracterized President Biden’s plan as a tax hike on families. Eric Hoplin, one of the group’s leaders, claimed that the Biden proposal would “enact record high taxes on America’s individually and family-owned businesses,” a phrase ACJSR has reiterated in multiple outlets.

    Other groups have similarly accused the AFP of harming family farmers. An article in the Northern Ag Network paraphrased Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) as saying that the president’s plan would “destroy the generational handoff of farms and ranches.” Daines also said that  “[t]he only way Montana farmers and ranchers could get through this, would be to sell off part or even all of the family farm or ranch.” Daines’ quote implies that income tax would be due on family-owned farms or ranches when they are handed down to another generation. But that is not true, for two reasons. First, most family farm and ranch owners would fall well under the exemption thresholds in the AFP. And second, even those with more than $2 million of gain will be able to defer their income taxes indefinitely so long as their farm or business continues to be owned and operated by members of their family.

    Critics of the AFP cite misleading and flawed studies

    To make these tenuous assertions appear valid, President Biden’s critics have cited two studies: one from the Agricultural and Food Policy Center (AFPC) at Texas A&M University and another from the accounting firm EY, formerly known as Ernst & Young. Both studies dramatically overstate the impact on family farmers and business owners from repealing stepped-up basis, and neither directly examines the Biden plan. Nonetheless, the studies have gained attention because of the novelty of their conclusions, which greatly exceeds the strength of their evidence.

    The AFPC study

    On July 21, 2021, Sen. John Boozman (R-AR) claimed on the Senate floor that President Biden’s plan would “crush rural America.” He highlighted a study that Republicans on the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the House Committee on Agriculture had requested from the AFPC. Boozman asserted that if President Biden’s plan were implemented, 92 of the 94 “representative farms” selected by the AFPC “would be impacted with an average additional tax liability of more than $720,000 per farm.” In a similar vein, House Agriculture Committee Republicans cited the study to claim that if combined with a wholly separate bill, changes that “mirror” President Biden’s plan would cost those 92 farms an average of $1.4 million each. Finally, Sen. John Thune (R-SD) cited the AFPC study in a Fox News op-ed, writing:

    But the Biden administration is targeting this longstanding part of the tax code [stepped-up basis] as it scrambles to pay for its far-left crusade to permanently grow the federal government and fund the massive tax breaks they’re proposing for wealthy Americans in blue states.

    The Texas A&M Agricultural and Food Policy Center studied how this new tax would affect family operations, and it found that 98 percent of the representative farms in its 30-state database would pay a big price. How much? On average, the proposal would increase the tax liability by $726,104 per farm.

    Nobody likes paying taxes, but this heavy additional burden – again, often on unrealized gains – has the potential to force families to sell off part of the farm or lose the farm entirely just to pay a tax bill.

    For starters, policymakers should recognize that the AFPC study does not consider President Biden’s plan. Rather, the study focuses on an estate and gift tax bill—the For the 99.5 Percent Act—introduced in Congress and another proposal—the Sensible Taxation and Equity Promotion (STEP) Act of 2021—put forward as a discussion draft.

    The For the 99.5 Percent Act, sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-CA), would change the taxation of estates, gifts, and trusts in a number of ways, most notably by decreasing the exemption amount and introducing higher marginal rates for the estate tax. President Biden’s budget, however, currently includes no estate tax changes.

    Like the AFP, the STEP Act—sponsored by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD)—seeks to eliminate the stepped-up basis loophole. It also includes a $1 million exemption threshold—$2 million for couples—and allows new tax liabilities to be paid over 15 years. But unlike the president’s proposal, the draft of the STEP Act did not include specific protections for family farms and businesses. The reason that no protections are spelled out in the bill is precisely because it is a discussion draft, and its authors have invited outside input before introducing an actual bill. As noted above, President Biden’s plan guarantees that no taxes will be owed on family-operated farms and businesses until those farms or businesses are ultimately sold; this deferral of tax liability was not included in the STEP Act discussion draft studied by the AFPC.

    More importantly, the AFPC study contains multiple methodological flaws. First, the AFPC’s selected farms are hardly “representative” of family farms nationwide. Although the word “representative” makes dozens of appearances in the AFPC report, there is little clarification as to who or what is being represented. At one point, the authors briefly note that “AFPC’s representative farms and ranches are all assumed to be full-time, commercial-scale family operations.”

    This means that the AFPC’s 94 farms are unrepresentative of family farms generally. According to 2019 data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), just 8.2 percent of all family farmers own commercial farms. Moreover, these commercial farmers are far wealthier than the 91.8 percent of noncommercial farmers. This skews the AFPC study toward the very wealthiest family farmers.

    Second, even after limiting itself to commercial farms, the study gives disproportionate weight to large commercial farms. The most recent AFPC study does not discuss the selection criteria for the farms, but in a March 2021 AFPC study of the same 94 farms, the researchers noted:

    AFPC has developed and maintains data to simulate 94 representative crop farms, dairies, and livestock operations chosen from major production areas across the United States. … Often, two farms are developed in each region using separate panels of producers: one is representative of moderate size full-time farm operations, and the second panel usually represents farms two to three times larger.

    For AFPC farm households, median net worth was roughly five times the national median, and average net worth was nearly four times the national average. (see Table 1) This discrepancy cannot be explained away by confounding factors. For example, even if one were worried about the USDA’s inclusion of small residential farms in its sample, this would not explain the large differences in net worth between AFPC commercial family farms and the commercial family farms surveyed by the USDA.

    Table 1


    The AFPC study exaggerates the burden of taxes in other ways as well. For example, consider the center’s assessment of the For the 99.5 Percent Act. The AFPC study highlights the act’s “average” tax increase for “impacted” family farmers, and those modifiers create two distortions. First, by limiting its analysis to “impacted” farmers, the AFPC excludes all farmers who would pay zero estate taxes under the For the 99.5 Percent Act. Second, the use of an average greatly exaggerates the effect on most farmers. If 99 individuals each owed $1 in taxes and one person owed $99,901, it would be misleading to declare that the “average” person owed $1,000 in taxes. This problem arises in the AFPC study, where a large share of the estate tax burden is borne by a minority of extremely wealthy farmers.

    The AFPC researchers determine that with the For the 99.5 Percent Act’s provisions in place, 41 of the 94 farms would pay the estate tax, with an “Average Additional Tax Liability Incurred for Farms Impacted” of just less than $2.2 million. Using data from their March 2021 paper, the AFPC’s results have been replicated for this issue brief. The authors follow the AFPC methodology of ignoring the increased deduction for Section 2032A special use valuation—an estate tax break for farms. According to this replication, an estimated 39 farms would pay estate taxes under the For the 99.5 Percent Act, and the average liability per affected farm would be $2.5 million.

    The authors’ results show just how distortionary the words “average” and “impacted” are. The average estate tax for the 39 affected farms is $2.5 million, yet the average for all 94 farms is $1 million—just 41 percent as much. Moreover, the vast majority of the average tax would be paid by a small group of farmers. Fifty-five farmers would owe no estate taxes; 27 farmers would owe below-average amounts; and just 12 would pay more than the average per affected farm. These 12 estates—12.8 percent of farms in the survey—would be responsible for 65.8 percent of the total tax bill. And again, as noted above, these farms come from a sample that cherry-picks extremely large commercial farms.

    Although the AFPC researchers published the net worth of all 94 farms in their March 2021 report, they have not made similar statistics available for each farm’s unrealized capital gains. If their data for unrealized capital gains are as dominated by a few rich farms as their data for estate values, then most of the STEP Act’s average burden will be borne by a small subset of AFPC farmers.

    Finally, the AFPC study overstates the STEP Act’s impact on farmers by assuming that none of them are married, even though nationwide, roughly 4 in 5 farmers have a spouse. That is important because the exemption for unrealized capital gains is $2 million per couple but only $1 million for single individuals. In assessing the impacts of the STEP Act, the AFPC researchers assume that the farms in their study would be allowed to use the stepped-up basis provision for just $1 million, effectively underestimating the true step-up threshold by 50 percent.

    The EY study

    Opponents of the AFP have also cited a study by the accounting firm EY. As with the AFPC study, the EY study has been used to attack the Biden plan even though it never comments on the president’s proposal.

    The EY study has two component parts. In the first part, the researchers give examples of how five hypothetical family businesses would be harmed by taxation at the time of the owner’s death. With business resale values averaging $74 million and ranging from $20 million to $200 million, EY’s hypothetical businesses do not remotely resemble typical family businesses in the real world.

    In the second part of their study, the researchers translate their hypothetical stories to real-world data. In that section, EY concludes that the economic cost of taxing capital gains at death would be just 0.04 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). Moreover, just one-third of the cost would be borne by labor.

    As insignificant as that would be, it overstates the cost of the Biden plan for two reasons. First, the EY study—like the AFPC study—is not an assessment of the Biden plan. Rather, it looks at the effects of immediate taxation upon the death of a business owner. As such, the EY researchers do not account for how tax deferral would protect family businesses, nor do they account for the Biden plan’s exemption of $2 million per couple. When the EY researchers analyze a second proposal more akin to true tax deferral, they find that the total economic cost would be just 0.02 percent of GDP—exactly half of an already small number. Critics who cite the EY study should be more forthright in noting both this point and that the $2 million exemption preserves stepped-up basis for the great majority of family farmers and business owners.

    Second, EY’s analysis fails to account for the economic benefits of eliminating the lock-in effect associated with stepped-up basis. With stepped-up basis, investors and business owners have an incentive to hold assets until their deaths even if they otherwise would have sold the assets. This harms economic efficiency and growth. Repealing stepped-up basis would make capital more liquid since there would be less incentive to hold assets indefinitely.

    Extrapolating from the conclusions reached in the EY study, the macroeconomic cost of the Biden plan would be somewhere between trivial and nonexistent. Meanwhile, the $350 billion in revenue from reforming capital gains taxes would be invested in ways that enhance growth and support working families. The EY study also fails to analyze President Biden’s proposals on the spending side. Instead, it merely includes assumptions about generic government spending.

    The AFP taxes the rich, not working-class families

    While there would be no additional taxes under the Biden plan for farms and businesses that remain family-owned and -operated, taxes would go up substantially for wealthy individuals who are only passive business owners.

    Consider family farms. The word “operated” ensures that tax deferral will only extend to actual farmers—not to wealthy individuals who happen to own farmland. According to 2014 data from the USDA, 31.1 percent of the country’s farmland is owned by nonoperating landlords—people who rent out the land but do not farm it themselves. For example, before their recent divorce, Bill and Melinda Gates owned more farmland than any other couple in the country. Because the Gateses do not operate their own farmland, they would not qualify for tax deferral under the Biden plan.

    Moreover, the Gateses and their heirs are not an exception to the rule. Of the 283 million acres of farmland currently owned by nonoperating landlords, 53.8 percent were either inherited or gifted. Had the Biden plan been in place when these nonfarmers inherited their land, they would have paid taxes on unrealized capital gains above the $2 million threshold.

    The AFP protects genuine family farmers even as it taxes wealthy landlords. According to the USDA, 98 percent of family-owned and -operated farm estates would not incur any additional taxes when parents’ assets are passed to their heirs. Under the Biden plan, such families would have their tax payments deferred so long as the farm remained in the family. The remaining 2 percent would pay higher taxes only on their nonfarm assets. For example, even if Bill Gates were to begin farming his own land and could thus take advantage of the Biden exemption for family-operated farms, he would still have to pay taxes on the gains from his Microsoft stock and any other nonfarm assets he owned.

    Conclusion

    Under the AFP, working-class parents could pass their farms and businesses to their children without having to pay any capital gains taxes at the point of transfer. Yet proponents of the tax code status quo are hiding behind family farmers and business owners to protect a far different group: the extremely rich.

    Middle-class Americans generally do not have significant capital gains. Households in the middle fifth of the income distribution realize just $333 in capital gains each year. If they accrue similar amounts of unrealized gains, it would take more than 6,000 years to surpass the American Families Plan’s $2 million exemption threshold. Although life expectancy is projected to rise in the future, it is unlikely that the Biden plan will raise taxes for ordinary working people.

    Families who work their own land or operate their own businesses will receive similar treatment. Typical family farms are not worth $7.2 million, and normal family businesses are not worth $74 million. The studies reporting enormous tax hikes for family farms and businesses cherry-pick their examples from a few exceptionally wealthy estates—because that is who will pay taxes under the Biden plan.

    Those affected by the Biden proposal will not be family farmers or family business owners, but rather the heirs of stockholders, bondholders, and landlords. The working class will be protected, even as the passive rich will not.

    Nick Buffie is a policy analyst specializing in federal fiscal policy on the Economic Policy team at the Center for American Progress. Bob Lord is an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and tax counsel for Americans for Tax Fairness.

    Endnotes


    Source link

    ]]>
    https://atoogratuit.com/the-american-families-plan-taxes-billionaires-while-protecting-family-farms-and-businesses/feed/ 0