Quote:
Originally Posted by Homeslice
So the fact that the rich pay the majority of taxes proves there isn't any cheating going on?
|
As Sean posted, I never said that. Obama also, if my memory is correct, wasn't saying that rich tax cheats weren't paying their fair share. He was stating that the rich had too many tax breaks under Bush and it was going to come to an end. It was always "those making more than $250k per year" not "those making more than $250k per year and cheat on their taxes". It also ignores the fact that those making more than $250k per year pay around 50% of all the personal income taxes collected each year, even with the Bush tax cuts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homeslice
Getting back to the subject, if you were the IRS, and the President told you to do a better job cracking down on tax evasion, who would you spend more time investigating, a middle-class tax evader, whose tax evasion only amounts to a few hundred or thousand dollars, or a rich person who you suspect has cheated in the millions?
|
Again, as Sean posted, I would go after all of them.
If you do feel the need to choose, a rich person potentially could have cheated for more, but it will be much more difficult, time consuming, and expensive to identify. If it is actually identified, rather than just pay the penalty, the rich person is much more likely to fight the charges. This brings the chances of a conviction down and drives the cost to convict and collect up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
Equal protection under the law, we haz it.
|
