Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eallen

(2,953 posts)
17. Seems more like unearned income to me.
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 05:30 PM
Jul 2012

Work is hard. I know when I've worked for money, and when all I had to do was let other people work for it.

I much prefer the unearned variety.

Sort of hard, though, to justify taxing that at a lower rate. The problem is that we want to encourage companies to pay dividends. Or to put it another way, we don't want dividends too much penalized vis-a-vis capital gains. The current set-up has the company pay taxes on the money earned before it is dispersed as dividend, then gives the dividend favored rates on the shareholder's income. It might make more sense to treat the dividend as straight earned income to the shareholder, but not require the corporation to pay tax on earnings it disburses as dividends.


.... DJ13 Jul 2012 #1
IMO Bloomberg's headline is false. How is the Senate bill a "split" ProgressiveEconomist Jul 2012 #16
I think the "split" is on taxation of the top earners progree Jul 2012 #19
But the President clearly said, Leave taxation on the top 2 percent (and implicitly on ProgressiveEconomist Jul 2012 #22
I'm just going by what the article said and what I've seen and heard in the news over and over progree Jul 2012 #23
Again, here's why a public option was NEVER going to happen! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2012 #2
Thinking as someone who's nearing retirement, I have to disagree with our President. DCKit Jul 2012 #3
Me too, I disagree. Maybe dividends for the big players, like Romney, should be taxed at 40% xtraxritical Jul 2012 #5
The current rate... ensemble Jul 2012 #12
70 K$ taxable income = 89 K$ adjusted gross income progree Jul 2012 #20
You know I used the word dividends when I really meant capital gains, sorry for the confusion. xtraxritical Jul 2012 #21
Both the qualified dividend rate and the LT capital gains rate remain where they are for bottom 98% progree Jul 2012 #24
As Dick Durbin said pscot Jul 2012 #4
...and "Dick The Dick", should know. russspeakeasy Jul 2012 #10
Simplify things. All income regardless of source taxed at the rate for that income level. on point Jul 2012 #6
I believe.... ensemble Jul 2012 #11
Where the strange number (23.8%) comes from progree Jul 2012 #7
How many wealthy Senators.... Capt.Rocky300 Jul 2012 #8
exactly heaven05 Jul 2012 #18
Dividends are earned income and should be taxed as such.... WCGreen Jul 2012 #9
Seems more like unearned income to me. eallen Jul 2012 #17
One thing I've noticed... ensemble Jul 2012 #13
Exactly brutus smith Jul 2012 #27
The DINOs strike again DonCoquixote Jul 2012 #14
On that 3.8% surtax to help pay for health care and the high dividend rates - that's on top earners progree Jul 2012 #15
Taxes must go up rks306 Jul 2012 #25
I see the RW talking point about Obama controlling the Senate is still valid ... zbdent Jul 2012 #26
Tax the hell out of it... I'll never have to worry about dividends... nt Comrade_McKenzie Jul 2012 #28
Politicians tend to over-complicate dividends. Just exempt the 1st $50,000 and tax he rest as 24601 Jul 2012 #29
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Senate Democrats Split Fr...»Reply #17