![]() |
obamacare
is there any truth to the obamacare bill that plans to put a 3% tax on all home sales after 2012. that money would go to the government to be used for obamacare purposes. that's 12K on a 400K home. sounds like a lube job to me... if it's even true.
|
I believe it's true or have at least heard something to that effect.
|
Even worse, its 15K on a 500,000 house.
I thought the money was going to be used to buy more limos? |
snopes.com: 3.8% Tax on Real Estate Transactions
pretty much true but once again, its only the "high earners" . you know the working population who Obama and the Dems keep targeting for all their $ solutions. As it keeps adding up, these high earners will only be keeping 40 cents for every dollar they make. |
Quote:
|
Move to the Bahamas
|
Nope, It will only apply to gains of more than 250,000 on your house. Even then it will only be imposed on those with an income above 200,000, 250,000 for a couple. You guys ought to look into the truth of what you type before you post it, I Googled it up because you had me starting to get mad. No need of that, there is plenty of real horror going on without people adding to the existing insanity.:smash:
|
I thought the 250K was for a single and 500K for a couple.
|
snopes it
|
for real estate it is 3.8% tax on real estate profits over $500,000 on the portion above $500,000. So if you sell your house and make a PROFIT of 525,000. You would pay a tax of 3.8% on $25000. So basically, you make $525000 in profits and pay $1000 in taxes on that.
The way to feed the anger is to distort reality. It is seen time and time again in this forum, typically in the original post before the details come out. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The original post said that on a 400K house the tax was $12K. That is not true. There is atleast a $250K deduction for capital gains (assuming a singe filer). So at the most the tax would be only on $150K (and that still would ignore the original cost of the house). Anyone- If I'm not correct pls. correct me as I'm not an accountant. You replied "pretty much true" |
Capital Gain: Sale of a Principal Residence
John and Mary sold their principal residence and realized a gain of $525,000. They have $325,000 Adjusted Gross Income (before adding taxable gain). The tax applies as follows: AGI Before Taxable Gain$325,000 Gain on Sale of Residence$525,000 Taxable Gain (Added to AGI) $25,000 ($525,000 – $500,000) New AGI$350,000 ($325,000 + $25,000 taxable gain) Excess of AGI over $250,000$100,000 ($350,000 – $250,000) Lesser Amount (Taxable) $25,000 (Taxable gain) Tax Due$950 ($25,000 x 0.038) NOTE: If John and Mary had a gain of less than $500,000 on the sale of their residence, none of that gain would be subject to the 3.8% tax. Whether they paid the 3.8% tax would depend on the other components of their $325,000 AGI. Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
The new tax rate applies to Individuals with adjusted gross income (AGI) above $200,000
Couples ?ling a joint return with more than $250,000 AGI Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
"Obamacare Tax on Home Sales. Imposes a 3.8 percent tax on home sales and other real estate transactions. Middle-income people must pay the full tax even if they are “rich” for only one day – the day they sell their house and buy a new one." You can look at the version on snopes too. Pretty much true?????? It is a entirely a distortion of reality. If a couple has a 500000 mortgage balance and sell their house for 1 million, they don't pay it. That is no where close to it being true about 3% on all home sales or 12k on a $400,000 home. Lie's that incite anger amongst those who don't think. If someone is angry about a 3.8% tax on profits from a sale over 500,000, I have no beef with that. It is the anger from all of the distortions about what Obama has done that is f'd up. It is one after another after another. Kudo's to american spirit for checking to see if it is actually true. |
Quote:
Should be able to write it off as a loss. Ya right. |
Quote:
|
...... so it's only a tax on the wealthy. i will never be in that income bracket or be able to sell a home for that much anyway. my insanely republican father-in-law alway has some wild information to share with me, so i needed to look into this one more closely and get specifics.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I guess Ted Knight just about sums it up for most of you.... YouTube - ‪Caddyshack- Ditch Diggers‬‏ |
Quote:
Bet it's closer to June, 6 months, now. :( |
Quote:
|
Quote:
- To your question - B/C I don't want to live in the idilic word that repubs. seem to want to live in - you know one with minimal taxes, minimal govern, minimal regulations/laws that kill jobs, minimal social services, minimal aid to higher education (you must have gone to private school all your life and never had to use a service provided by the govern) , - you know like Pakistan or Somalia. I guess my vision for this country is different that the repubs - prob. why I left the party. 2/3 of proposed repub. cuts would hurt the low and moderate income families - very telling. I guess for the richest 1% , having a larger net worth than the bottom 90% isn't enough. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Once you again you and others mix up having with EARNING. If people have 90% of the income, its because THEY EARNED IT. They already pay SHAT loads of taxes. and PS - Im not a repub. |
Quote:
|
Now I can't quote a response.
Taxes are a requirement so you don't get credit for paying - the federal Pen. prob. isn't a nice place. The repub, conserv. etc. (what ever word you want to use - we can split hair on idiology labels, etc. I do incorrectly use the labels dem/reb. inappropriately) platform is to have minimal taxes and regulations - that all favors people of means who can go out an pay for whatever they need and doesn't effect them. bad roads, crappy mass transit - buy a larger heavier duty car poor educ. system - private schools faulty electrical grid - private generators no police (high crime) - live in a gated community, private police force. crappy hospitals - private clinics, fly to a good hospital cut back on social services - if you have $, you don't need social services etc. etc. No one wants to "give" people money. It's about having decent services for people to poor to be able to afford things on their own. As I've said, if you get welfare, I think you need to do some work for it. I don't see who someone can think that getting $15K a year from the govern. is enough to keep people from working (Certainly there is a tiny % who will want to sit on their butt). It's why when there are job fairs, I see long lines of people trying for those jobs. You and your family had the where with all to pull yourselves up - many people don't. Look at the tax burden of states that all get more/dollar in tax returns then they pay in - all states that vote repub. (south, midwest, etc). I bet Kentucky gets as much back as any state in tax revenue yet elects Rand Paul. They aught to put their $ where their mouth is an refuse fed. $. |
RIJ Quote-
"How did they do it, HARD WORK AND SACRAFICE". Funny how that works.
Ya, God forbid you live within your means, buy something when you can afford it, save part of your income no matter what, and put your family first. If everybody did that we wouldn't be in the mess we are in as everybody would be taking care of their own. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:06 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com