Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

     


    Sounds great to me.

    Can we start with the churches...?

     

     Why not start with ALL non profits at the same time? Why your need to single out Church's to be first? Seems rather odd

     



    Because they've had the longest free ride of anyone, and they're far more numerous.

     

     

     



    Right....because its not possible to just cut off all non profit at say...the same time?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

     


    Sounds great to me.

    Can we start with the churches...?

     

     Why not start with ALL non profits at the same time? Why your need to single out Church's to be first? Seems rather odd

     



    Because they've had the longest free ride of anyone, and they're far more numerous.

     

     

     

     



    Right....because its not possible to just cut off all non profit at say...the same time?

     



    I don't know.  Is it?  Ask the IRS.

    I merely offered a logical place to begin trimming the fat, so to speak.

    If people are truly serious about reducing dependency on govt, we should start with the big guns.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

     


    Sounds great to me.

    Can we start with the churches...?

     

     Why not start with ALL non profits at the same time? Why your need to single out Church's to be first? Seems rather odd

     



    Because they've had the longest free ride of anyone, and they're far more numerous.

     

     

     

     



    Right....because its not possible to just cut off all non profit at say...the same time?

     

     



    I don't know.  Is it?  Ask the IRS.

     

    I merely offered a logical place to begin trimming the fat, so to speak.

    If people are truly serious about reducing dependency on govt, we should start with the big guns.

     



    well, the suggestion put forth was to eliminate non profit. You make money, you get taxed. 

    To which you snarkily replied let's start with churches. There's no need to start with specific entities. If you say there is no more non profit then there is no need to start with specific entities. They all get hit.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

    In response to massmoderateJoe's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

    Obama should ask Colin Powell to head a group of nonpartisans to investigate the IRS and to come up with recommendations that will help the taxpayers to regain confidence in the neutrality of the IRS .

     




    Or...just fire the people involved. I am amazed that hasn't happened yet. I would agree with your suggestion..but we know nothing ever comes of these panel recommendations. The IRS should have been dramatically reformed or restructured years ago.

     

     



    As per another post a senior IRS Administartor of this group is getting recognition at a western Mass Law School this graduation season.

     

     




    Joe ... I would hope that person , Lois Lerner, would cancel on her own .

     




    ..and apparently she has. She cancelled her appearance earlier today.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     

    501(c)(3) — Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National or International Amateur Sports Competition, or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations
    501(c)(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees

    I'm glad this is in the news.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

    These Tea Party organizations should never have been granted 501 (C) 3 or 4 status, because every single one of them are OVERTLY political.  Same goes for the ones on the left.

    How does a political organization that acts exactly like a third party, makes a point of aligning itself with a major political party, and is dedicated to fielding candidates who proudly call  themselves "Tea Party candidates," and willing takes public credit for winning elections fit into any of the prerequisite categories listed avove?

    Kick them all out!

     

     



    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

    as far as campaign finance reform, just get rid of it.  The idea that this type of legislation can be done impartially and in the best interests of the people has not stood the reality test.

    less, not more, is the answer here.




    This is where people get confused. Non profit is a business model..not a tax status. Not all non profits are tax exempt.

    In my opinion..the only non profits who should be allowed to apply for tax exempt status are 501(c) 3', 501(c)19 and 501(c)23. I don't believe 527's or social welfare groups should be considered tax exempt.  I think there are too many tax exempt categories.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

     


    Sounds great to me.

    Can we start with the churches...?

     

     Why not start with ALL non profits at the same time? Why your need to single out Church's to be first? Seems rather odd

     



    Because they've had the longest free ride of anyone, and they're far more numerous.

     

     

     

     



    Right....because its not possible to just cut off all non profit at say...the same time?

     

     



    I don't know.  Is it?  Ask the IRS.

     

    I merely offered a logical place to begin trimming the fat, so to speak.

    If people are truly serious about reducing dependency on govt, we should start with the big guns.

     

     



    well, the suggestion put forth was to eliminate non profit. You make money, you get taxed. 

     

    To which you snarkily replied let's start with churches. There's no need to start with specific entities. If you say there is no more non profit then there is no need to start with specific entities. They all get hit.

     



    We've got to start somewhere.  Some churches are just as politically motivated, and the mega-churches bring in big bucks.

    I didn't say no more non-profits.  Skeeter did.  I just agreed with him.

    Call it snark, if it makes you feel better.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

     


    Sounds great to me.

    Can we start with the churches...?

     

     Why not start with ALL non profits at the same time? Why your need to single out Church's to be first? Seems rather odd

     



    Because they've had the longest free ride of anyone, and they're far more numerous.

     

     

     

     



    Right....because its not possible to just cut off all non profit at say...the same time?

     

     



    I don't know.  Is it?  Ask the IRS.

     

    I merely offered a logical place to begin trimming the fat, so to speak.

    If people are truly serious about reducing dependency on govt, we should start with the big guns.

     

     



    well, the suggestion put forth was to eliminate non profit. You make money, you get taxed. 

     

    To which you snarkily replied let's start with churches. There's no need to start with specific entities. If you say there is no more non profit then there is no need to start with specific entities. They all get hit.

     




    This is one of of those be careful what you wish for...especially if you are someone who itemizes deductions on your tax returns. If you do away with the 501(c)(3) you do away with your own tax deduction for any contributions you make.

    That being said..there are plenty of non profits that do a lot of good things..things that government would otherwise be doing..and non profits almost always do it more efficiently and cheaper. ( almost).

    I would be suspect of any organization trying to pass itself off as a social welfare organization..but with a political name. I am not opposed to the scrutiny..I just want the scrutiny to apply to all groups..not just the ones with a certain political view.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

     


    Sounds great to me.

    Can we start with the churches...?

     

     

     

     



    I guess you are too stupid to understand that I said eliminate the concept of non-profit.  That means all non profits.

    but, rail against Christians if you must. After all, that's still politically correct.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

     


    Sounds great to me.

    Can we start with the churches...?

     

     Why not start with ALL non profits at the same time? Why your need to single out Church's to be first? Seems rather odd

     



    Because they've had the longest free ride of anyone, and they're far more numerous.

     

     

     

     



    Right....because its not possible to just cut off all non profit at say...the same time?

     

     



    I don't know.  Is it?  Ask the IRS.

     

    I merely offered a logical place to begin trimming the fat, so to speak.

    If people are truly serious about reducing dependency on govt, we should start with the big guns.

     



    No, you are just being a jerk.  Something's never change.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to UserName99's comment:

     

    501(c)(3) — Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National or International Amateur Sports Competition, or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations
    501(c)(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees

    I'm glad this is in the news.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

    These Tea Party organizations should never have been granted 501 (C) 3 or 4 status, because every single one of them are OVERTLY political.  Same goes for the ones on the left.

    How does a political organization that acts exactly like a third party, makes a point of aligning itself with a major political party, and is dedicated to fielding candidates who proudly call  themselves "Tea Party candidates," and willing takes public credit for winning elections fit into any of the prerequisite categories listed avove?

    Kick them all out!

     

     



    The problem here is behavior, not law.  But setting that aside, doesn't this point to the whole idea of having profit and non profit organizations so encumbered by regulation?  Might it be better to simply eliminate the concept of non profit, it is archaic. You make money, you are taxed.

     

    as far as campaign finance reform, just get rid of it.  The idea that this type of legislation can be done impartially and in the best interests of the people has not stood the reality test.

    less, not more, is the answer here.

     




    This is where people get confused. Non profit is a business model..not a tax status. Not all non profits are tax exempt.

     

    In my opinion..the only non profits who should be allowed to apply for tax exempt status are 501(c) 3', 501(c)19 and 501(c)23. I don't believe 527's or social welfare groups should be considered tax exempt.  I think there are too many tax exempt categories.

     

     



    I say no tax exempt status, period. Enough Of this nonsense.

    these governmment vultures just suck out the money in other ways.  Level the field.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    miscricket This doesn't let the IRS off the hook but according to Bloomberg the IRS targeted at least 3 liberal groupd also and denied one of the 3 , Emerge America, a tax exempt status . None of the Tea Party groups were denied a tax exempt status .

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

    miscricket This doesn't let the IRS off the hook but according to Bloomberg the IRS targeted at least 3 liberal groupd also and denied one of the 3 , Emerge America, a tax exempt status . None of the Tea Party groups were denied a tax exempt status .

     



    We have reached a point with this whole concept of what's a taxable entity and what's not has been totally corrupted. Wipe out the IRS and make everything taxable by the Feds.

     

    you make a profit, you pay taxes on that profit, period.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

    miscricket This doesn't let the IRS off the hook but according to Bloomberg the IRS targeted at least 3 liberal groupd also and denied one of the 3 , Emerge America, a tax exempt status . None of the Tea Party groups were denied a tax exempt status .




    No..doesn't let them off the hook but at least that's something. For what it's worth..Obama finally spoke out about the steps they are taking..starting with the resignation of the acting commisioner. Perhaps they will finally fill that role permanently..lol

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Re: The IRS. We Are All To Blame.

    In response to miscricket's comment:

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

    miscricket This doesn't let the IRS off the hook but according to Bloomberg the IRS targeted at least 3 liberal groupd also and denied one of the 3 , Emerge America, a tax exempt status . None of the Tea Party groups were denied a tax exempt status .

     




    No..doesn't let them off the hook but at least that's something. For what it's worth..Obama finally spoke out about the steps they are taking..starting with the resignation of the acting commisioner. Perhaps they will finally fill that role permanently..lol

     




    Obama took control of the situation and wants to work together with congress to get things right again in the IRS

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     

Share