Podcasts about revenue act

The Revenue Act of 1978 changed the landscape of retirement in the US forever. With 401k planning, 403 planning, you made a deal with Uncle Sam, I'm not gonna pay you now, I'm gonna pay you later. We're gonna talk about that today on Plan Today, Own Tomorrow. If you have any questions about your retirement planning call Guardian Investment Advisors 800-517-1575 or click here to visit our website. Planning, Retiring, Saving, 401K, IRA, TSP, 403B, TaxesSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe fake news makes fools of themselves when they try to fact check Lee Zeldin. Job market is looking worse because of Biden. Since Trump has taken office inflation has dropped. Schumer makes move to shutdown government, wait for it. Trump makes a move to reverse the [CB] policies, he begins by removing income tax for those who make less that $150k. The [DS] criminal syndicate is being exposed every step of the way, the more judges that try to stop Trump shows the people who was really running the country, the people see the criminal syndicate. The more they do the worse it gets. The cleaning crew is activate, agencies are now cleaning it all out. It's just a matter of time.   (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Economy https://twitter.com/epaleezeldin/status/1900148992140345642 https://twitter.com/GlobalMktObserv/status/1899964805336703437 https://twitter.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1900163217822744835 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1900192933829075199   https://twitter.com/WesleyHuntTX/status/1899940301898199188 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1900179542771409389   https://twitter.com/KatiePavlich/status/1899940663799496967  https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1899925243189170457 citizens —— “People are so use to paying taxes, it's like we have Stockholm syndrome…” BAM  The 2023 CPS data shows the median household income was $74,580 in 2022. The distribution indicates that about 75% of households earned less than $125,000, and roughly 85% earned less than $150,000 (extrapolating from quintiles and income brackets). The top 10% of households start around $212,000 (per DQYDJ's 2024 calculator), so 85-90% of households earn $150,000 or less. Were the Rich Taxed First After 1913? Yes, when the federal income tax was implemented in 1913 under the Revenue Act of 1913, it was designed to primarily tax the wealthy. Here's why and how: The Setup in 1913 Income Thresholds: The tax applied only to taxable income above a personal exemption of $3,000 for single individuals or $4,000 for married couples. In 1913, $3,000 was a significant amount—roughly equivalent to $86,600 in 2025 dollars (as calculated earlier). The average annual income for a worker was around $700-$800, so most Americans earned far below the taxable threshold. Tax Rates: A base rate of 1% was levied on taxable income above the exemption. A progressive surtax kicked in for higher earners: 1% on income over $20,000 (about $577,000 in 2025 dollars) up to 6% on income over $500,000 (about $14.4 million in 2025 dollars). Impact: Only about 1-2% of the U.S. population paid income tax in 1913, as the exemptions excluded the vast majority. Those who did pay were disproportionately the rich—business owners, professionals, and the industrial elite. Why the Rich? Political Intent: The 16th Amendment and the 1913 tax were championed by Progressive Era reformers who aimed to shift the tax burden from regressive tariffs (which hit the poor harder) to a direct tax on high incomes. The idea was to make the wealthy shoulder more of the federal revenue load. Economic Context: The Gilded Age had created stark income inequality, with tycoons like Rockefeller and Carnegie amassing fortunes. The income tax was a response to calls for fairness and funding government without taxing consumption. Early Evidence In 1913, the top 1% of earners—those making above roughly $10,000-$20,000 annually (hundreds of thousands in today's dollars)—bore the brunt. For example,

Another day, another danger as an heiress finds herself in double trouble, but a minor medical emergency is nothing compared to the tax man.September – October 1933, Doris Duke finds herself in the hospital only weeks before her tax case heads to the Supreme Court. In both instances, more attention is given to her vast fortune in the press.Other people and subjects include: Nanaline Duke, James “Buck” Duke, Walker Inman, E.T. Stotesbury, Eva Stotesbury, James H.R. Cromwell aka “Jimmy,” Mdivani brothers (Serge Mdivani), tonsillectomy, President Franklin Roosevelt - FDR, New Deal, Chief Justice Hughes, George Allen, William Perkins, Uncle Sam, tax commissioner, Bureau of Internal Revenue – Internal Revenue Service – IRS, Supreme Court, Board of Tax Appeals, Third Circuit Court of Tax Appeals, levy, tax exile, tax evader, first richest list, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, Vincent Astor, public fascination with millionaires, robber barons, breeder bureaucracy, trusts, Duke Foundation, Sixteenth Amendment, Revenue Act of 1924, tariffs, sales tax, Gilded Age, Prohibition, World War I, World War II, St. Luke's Hospital, President Donald Trump, Ferdinand Pecora, Wall Street investigation, J.P. Morgan Jr. Al Capone, biographies, missing information, uncovering new details, story restructure, empathy, Los Angeles fires, empathy, Heraclitus, tax audit, divorce, cancer, home loss, trauma, anger, phishing scam, Matt Taibibi, rich people problems, problems, Hurricane Helene, Carolinas, envy, bitterness, poison,…--Extra Notes / Call to Action:Check out and answer polls for As The Money Burns via social mediaX / Twitter – https://x.com/asthemoneyburnsInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/asthemoneyburns/Share, like, subscribe--Archival Music provided by Past Perfect Vintage Music, www.pastperfect.com.Opening Music: My Heart Belongs to Daddy by Billy Cotton, Album The Great British Dance BandsSection 1 Music: Temptation Rag by Harry Roy, Album The Great British Dance BandsSection 2 Music: Ain't She Sweet by Piccadilly Revels Band, Album Charleston – Great Stars Of the 20sSection 3 Music: Swingin' The Blues by Benny Carter & His Orchestra, Album Perfect BluesEnd Music: My Heart Belongs to Daddy by Billy Cotton, Album The Great British Dance Bands--https://asthemoneyburns.com/X / TW / IG – @asthemoneyburnsX / Twitter – https://x.com/asthemoneyburnsInstagram – https://www.instagram.com/asthemoneyburns/Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/asthemoneyburns/

Welcome to episode 74 of the One for the Money podcast. I am so very grateful you have taken the time to listen. In this episode, I will share when you should max out your retirement plan such as a 401k, and when you should not. In the tips, tricks, and strategies portion, I will share a retirement saving tip for those who don't have access to a retirement plan through their job. In this episode...1978 Revenue Act [1:05]When Not to Max Out Contributions [3:03]When You Should Max Out Contributions [6:46]1978 was a watershed moment in the history of retirement for Americans. That was the year that a Revenue Act was enacted by congress and established 401k and 457b retirement plans. 401k retirement plans are for the private sector and 457b plans are for state and local government employees, as well employees of certain tax-exempt organizations. These plans now allowed employees to defer some of their income and avoid taxes on that income until they take it out later in retirement. This was huge. People could now save for retirement in tax advantaged ways. Prior to that, most American's relied on pensions from their employers for income in retirement. With a pension, the employer is committed to providing a specific amount of money to the employee for life during retirement. And that was feasible when people worked for several decades for the same employer and didn't live that long in retirement. But as individuals started changing jobs more frequently for better opportunities and peoples life expectancy increased significantly, the pension system became untenable for both the public and private sector. 401ks are for companies government employees use 457b plans and public school employees (teachers) and non profits use 403(b) plans. Specifically regarding 401ks, 68% of private sector American workers currently have access to an employer sponsored retirement plan.For those Americans who have access to a retirement plan at work be it a 401k, 403b, 457b, SEP IRA or Simple IRA some wonder whether it makes sense to max it out every year. As with any financial planning, it depends upon your unique situation and circumstances.When you should NOT max out your 401k/403b/457b/SEP or Simple IRAThere are times when you shouldn't max out your retirement account. One of the most obvious reason is if you have high interest debt that needs to be paid off first. However, I would recommend in this scenario that you at least contribute to the company match as that is free money. No higher contributions should be made until after your high interest debt is paid off. You need to pay down high-interest debt, for example credit card debt. The average credit card currently has an APR of more than 20%, which is well above the amount you could reasonably expect to earn on a diversified portfolio in any given year. That's why it is always better to funnel extra cash toward paying down high-interest debt instead of maxing out retirement plan contributions.Another reason not to max out contributions to your work retirement plan is if you don't have a sufficient emergency fund. As a reminder, you should have 3-6 months of your minimum expenses in savings to cover a potential financial emergency. We learned this first hand a few months ago when our eldest son nearly drowned while surfing. He was rushed to the hospital and was released the next day, but I was glad we had the savings to cover the incredibly high costs we have incurred as a result.A third reason why you shouldn't max out your company retirement plan is if you haven't yet funded a Health Savings Account or HSA. As a reminder, HSAs are available to individuals with qualifying high deductible medical plans. HSAs are incredibly powerful as they are the only triple tax free retirement account and they have the added advantage of early...

Unlock the secrets of mastering the tax benefits of whole life insurance with our latest Money Advantage podcast episode. We promise you'll gain an in-depth understanding of tax laws related to life insurance strategies, like the pivotal 1988 government decision to limit cash value life insurance investments due to their tax perks. By diving into the historical context of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 and the Revenue Act of 1987, we uncover the intricate relationship between these laws and the economic climate of the time, helping you make smarter financial decisions today. https://www.youtube.com/live/0XcaTFWcOhM Travel back in time with us to explore how Nixon's 1974 move away from the gold standard set the stage for inflation and the creation of IRAs and 401(k)s. These financial products shifted funds from whole life insurance, leading to the popularity of universal life policies. Our discussion reveals how high interest rates and regulatory responses like the 1988 Tamra Act reshaped the life insurance landscape, ensuring it remained a protection tool rather than a tax haven. The 1979 FTC report's critique of whole life insurance also played a significant role, challenging traditional perceptions and influencing market dynamics. We round off the episode by dissecting the Modified Endowment Contract (MEC) and the Tamra Act's regulatory impacts on life insurance policies. Discover the nuances of the one-year and seven-year rules, the scenarios leading to a policy becoming a MEC, and the resulting tax implications. We delve into circumstances where intentionally MEC'ing a policy could be beneficial, such as for estate planning or achieving better returns than traditional banking options. This rich historical insight equips you with the knowledge to navigate today's complex financial landscape with confidence. Tax Loopholes vs. Tax IncentivesWhole Life Insurance and TaxesThe History of Whole Life Insurance and TaxationWhat Does it Mean to Be a MEC?Applying Whole Life Insurance tax Benefits TodayBook A Strategy Call Tax Loopholes vs. Tax Incentives To kick off this conversation, let's get something clear: tax loopholes are not actually loopholes. The word “loophole” has a negative connotation, and if often used to suggest that people who use tax incentives to reduce their taxes are doing something sneaky or unethical. The reality is that the IRS writes tax law to be as specific and intentional as possible, and those “loopholes” are actually intentional incentives from the government. Tax incentives work to provide tax credits or breaks for investors who can do things that the government does not want to spend their own money on. For example, there are many tax incentives in real estate because housing is a constant and prevalent need. If housing cannot be provided by landlords, the government may have to provide more housing, and so the government creates tax incentives to have investors take the lead.  Tax breaks don't exist by accident. They are purposeful and are designed to get investors to take specific actions.  Whole Life Insurance and Taxes Whole life insurance is a popular “tax-advantaged” asset because you can technically access your cash in a tax-free way. You can do this through a policy loan, which must still be paid back, or by withdrawing only up to your base premium. Otherwise, you can still have a taxable event. That being said, whole life insurance has long been a popular strategy for tax purposes, and in fact used to be even more beneficial from a tax standpoint, until the IRS got involved. And while there are some limitations, now, whole life insurance is still extremely advantageous from a tax standpoint. The History of Whole Life Insurance and Taxation Until the 1960s, whole life insurance was the premier savings vehicle for American families. It provided great flexibility and protection and was a powerful tax advantage.

On this day in 1933 President Roosevelt signed the Beer and Wine Revenue Act. Learn more in today's KTAR Timeline brought to you by Beatitudes Campus.

In 1916, the United States Supreme Court delivered a landmark decision in the Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co. case, a ruling that profoundly shaped the legal landscape of federal income taxation in America. This case, brought forth by Frank Brushaber, a shareholder in the Union Pacific Railroad Company, challenged the constitutionality of the recently enacted federal income tax imposed by the 1913 Revenue Act. The significance of the Brushaber case lies not only in its direct impact on tax law but also in its broader implications for federal authority and the scope of the 16th Amendment. Today we talk about constitutional and legal arguments, the historical context surrounding the case, and the enduring influence of the Supreme Court's decision on the American fiscal system. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/plausibly-live/message

On this day in legal history, the “Trent Affair” occurred during the U.S. Civil War. The USS San Jacinto stopped the British mail ship Trent and arrested two Confederate envoys onboard–leading to a diplomatic crisis between the UK and the United States. On the 8th of November, 1861, a diplomatic incident with potential major ramifications for the U.S. unfolded as Captain Charles Wilkes of the U.S. Navy seized two Confederate diplomats from the British vessel, the Trent. This bold action by Wilkes was not sanctioned by the U.S. government and rapidly escalated into an international crisis, with Great Britain deeming the seizure a blatant infringement on its neutrality. The Confederacy had hoped that the envoys, James Mason and John Slidell, would secure recognition and support from Britain and France, but their capture threatened to pivot the two powers from neutrality to active opposition against the Union.The Trent Affair tested the diplomatic resolve of the Lincoln administration, which was simultaneously engaged in the Civil War. The British government's response was swift and stern, demanding the release of the envoys and an apology, while reinforcing its military presence near U.S. borders. The U.S. faced the predicament of managing foreign relations without provoking war with Britain. Through careful negotiation, the U.S. conceded to British demands, releasing the envoys and thus diffusing a situation that could have dramatically altered the course of the Civil War. Lincoln was reported to have quipped that he should like to fight “one war at a time.” The resolution of the Trent Affair highlighted the Union's commitment to maintaining international peace during its internal strife, while also confirming Britain's staunch defense of its declared neutrality.On Britain's side, the diplomatic crisis was occuring at the same time as a scandal in the royal family and before a terminally ill Prince Albert, consort to Queen Victoria. In the tense days leading up to Prince Albert's death, he played a pivotal role in steering the British response to the Trent Affair. His influence led to the critical offer to the United States: that an apology would suffice, coupled with the release of the detained Confederate envoys, to prevent hostilities. President Lincoln, aware of the perils of dual conflicts, agreed to these terms. As Britain mourned Prince Albert, Lincoln expressed his condolences to Queen Victoria, underscoring the amicable relations between the nations. This gesture of diplomacy and shared sorrow laid the groundwork for a reciprocal display of sympathy from Queen Victoria when she later reached out to Mary Lincoln upon President Lincoln's assassination, highlighting a personal bond formed amidst national crises.Milbank LLP has initiated the bonus season in the legal industry by increasing associate salaries by $10,000 and announcing annual bonuses. The salary range for associates at the firm now stands between $225,000 and $425,000, with bonuses reaching up to $115,000. The firm's chairman, Scott Edelman, attributes this to the firm's sustained high activity levels and anticipates this trend to continue. This move may influence other major law firms to adjust their salary structures to stay competitive. Despite a quieter transactions market, the legal industry is expected to maintain the current bonus scale. The announcement is part of a broader trend where law firms announce year-end bonuses towards the end of the year, often leading to a series of matching bonuses across firms.Milbank Raises Associate Salaries And Announces Year-End Bonuses! - Above the LawMilbank Raises Associate Salaries, Kicks Off Bonus SeasonCravath, Swaine & Moore has introduced a salaried partner tier, reflecting a shift among elite Wall Street law firms to adapt their compensation structures in the face of new market pressures. This move aims to retain key talent and maintain competitiveness, offering salaries to partners rather than shares in firm profits. The firm, known for its high-profile client work and traditional business model, has also relaxed its seniority-based pay system. These changes come as the firm expands, opening a Washington office and entering the UK legal market, all while ensuring that salaried partners still have the opportunity to become equity partners, according to Cravath's presiding partner, Faiza Saeed.Cravath Adds Salaried Partner Tier in Latest Wall Street Shift (1)Ivanka Trump is scheduled to testify in a civil fraud trial involving her father Donald Trump's business practices. This trial, initiated by New York Attorney General Letitia James, alleges that the Trump family business inflated asset values. Judge Arthur Engoron has found evidence of fraud and is contemplating penalties. Donald Trump, along with his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, have denied any wrongdoing, attributing inaccuracies in property valuations to errors irrelevant to financial institutions. Ivanka was not deeply involved in the Trump Organization's operations during Trump's presidency and was dismissed from the case by an appeals court. The lawsuit seeks substantial fines and business restrictions against the Trumps, amid other legal challenges the former president faces.Ivanka Trump to testify in father's New York civil fraud trial | ReutersWeWork is making its first appearance in U.S. bankruptcy court, seeking approval for a restructuring plan that would reduce its debt by $3 billion and decrease its real estate footprint. The office-sharing firm, supported by Softbank, filed for bankruptcy to manage over $4 billion in debt and high rent costs after a rapid expansion and a downturn in demand due to the pandemic. Despite renegotiating hundreds of leases, WeWork is looking to exit 69 more, including 41 in New York. U.S. bankruptcy law may give WeWork the leverage needed to reject these leases. The company, with $164 million in cash, is asking the court to allow the continuation of employee and critical vendor payments during the restructuring process.WeWork seeks permission to begin canceling leases in bankruptcy | ReutersAmazon's legal team, led by David Zapolsky, has sketched out their defense against the FTC's antitrust accusations in a private company meeting. Zapolsky called the company's actions "absolutely defensible behavior" and quoted Taylor Swift to underscore the company's stance against criticism. The FTC's lawsuit claims that Amazon has created an illegal monopoly by restricting sellers on its platform from offering lower prices on competing platforms. Amazon refutes these allegations, arguing that showcasing higher-priced products would undermine customer trust. The company, which has been under investigation for four years, may be forced to divest assets if the lawsuit succeeds. Zapolsky also addressed the FTC's criticism of Amazon's logistics services, emphasizing that their use is optional for sellers. He reassured employees that Amazon is familiar with such legal challenges and is prepared to defend its practices in court.Exclusive: Amazon.com previews FTC defense at companywide meeting -transcript | ReutersMy column this week is on the importance of the federal estate tax as a mechanism for combatting wealth inequality.The federal estate tax, designed to prevent wealth accumulation across generations, is exemplified by the case of George Steinbrenner, who passed away in 2010—a year when the estate tax was not in effect. Steinbrenner's estate benefited significantly, avoiding a tax that would have been imposed at a rate of 45% the previous year or 55% the following year. This absence of tax exemplifies how fortunes can be preserved and potentially grown through investment, influencing the wealth of future generations. The history of the estate tax in the United States dates back before the Revenue Act of 1916, which formally introduced variable rates based on estate value. These rates have changed over time, peaking at 77% during World War I to fund national efforts and declining thereafter, including a scheduled repeal in 2010.The impact of such a suspension is profound, with the Steinbrenner family's potential to grow their inheritance considerably through investments. For instance, if the tax savings were invested in an index fund or in a company like Apple Inc., the returns could have been substantial. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 further altered the estate tax landscape by doubling the exemption amounts, resulting in significant revenue loss for the government. This legislative change is temporary, however, set to expire in 2025. The Penn Wharton Budget Model suggests that without these cuts, the revenue generated could have been nine times greater, illustrating the substantial role of the estate tax in federal revenue generation.As wealth inequality continues to rise, the estate tax serves as a crucial tool in the pursuit of economic equity. Its effectiveness has waned over the decades due to increasing exemptions and decreasing rates. The upcoming expiration of the TCJA's provisions is an opportunity to reassess and restructure the estate tax to better align with its original intent. Reducing the exemption threshold and increasing rates could serve as a step toward mitigating wealth disparity, emphasizing the tax's role in promoting a more balanced economic landscape.Steinbrenner's Legacy Shows Importance of Federal Estate Tax Get full access to Minimum Competence - Daily Legal News Podcast at www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The guys take on something new when a listener letter points them not to a song or a band - but to the rumor and innuendo surrounding a BRAND. Hear the tale of an ancient accident and the family who turned it into a centuries-lasting business endeavor that would help define jazz and lead to rock n roll. SHOW NOTES: https://mcaulaydrums.com/CYMBALS/item4498.html https://thedrumninja.com/where-are-buddy-richs-drum-sets/#:~:text=Buddy%20Rich%20was%20a%20Zildjian,popularity%20even%20more%20amongst%20drummers. https://reverb.com/news/crash-clash-the-shared-history-of-zidjian-and-sabian https://www.familybusinessmagazine.com/clashing-cymbals-are-music-their-ears https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alchemy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avedis_Zildjian_Company Modern Drummer, 1983 article: https://www.soft.com.sg/forum/showthread.php?21422-Zildjian-Sabian-history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1940 UPI Archives, April of 1981: https://www.upi.com/Archives/1981/04/15/Cymbal-making-family-clashes-in-court/5192356158800/ https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/31/arts/armand-zildjian-81-head-of-family-of-cymbal-makers.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabian_Cymbals

John Fitzgerald Kennedy (May 29, 1917 – November 22, 1963), often referred to by his initials JFK and by the nickname Jack, was an American politician who served as the 35th president of the United States from 1961 until his assassination in 1963. He was the youngest person to assume the presidency by election and the youngest president at the end of his tenure. Kennedy served at the height of the Cold War, and the majority of his foreign policy concerned relations with the Soviet Union and Cuba. A Democrat, Kennedy represented Massachusetts in both houses of the U.S. Congress prior to his presidency. Born into the prominent Kennedy family in Brookline, Massachusetts, Kennedy graduated from Harvard University in 1940 before joining the U.S. Naval Reserve the following year. During World War II, he commanded a series of PT boats in the Pacific theater. Kennedy's survival following the sinking of PT-109 and his rescue of his fellow sailors made him a war hero and earned the Navy and Marine Corps Medal, but left him with serious injuries. After a brief stint in journalism, Kennedy represented a working-class Boston district in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1947 to 1953. He was subsequently elected to the U.S. Senate and served as the junior senator for Massachusetts from 1953 to 1960. While in the Senate, Kennedy published his book, Profiles in Courage, which won a Pulitzer Prize. Kennedy ran in the 1960 presidential election. His campaign gained momentum after the first televised presidential debates in American history, and he was elected president, narrowly defeating Republican opponent Richard Nixon, who was the incumbent vice president. Kennedy's administration included high tensions with communist states in the Cold War. As a result, he increased the number of American military advisers in South Vietnam. The Strategic Hamlet Program began in Vietnam during his presidency. In April 1961, he authorized an attempt to overthrow the Cuban government of Fidel Castro in the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion. In November 1961, he authorized the Operation Mongoose, also aimed at removing the communists from power in Cuba. He rejected Operation Northwoods in March 1962, but his administration continued to plan for an invasion of Cuba in the summer of 1962. The following October, U.S. spy planes discovered Soviet missile bases had been deployed in Cuba. The resulting period of tensions, termed the Cuban Missile Crisis, nearly resulted in the breakout of a global thermonuclear conflict. He also signed the first nuclear weapons treaty in October 1963. Kennedy presided over the establishment of the Peace Corps, Alliance for Progress with Latin America, and the continuation of the Apollo program with the goal of landing a man on the Moon before 1970. He also supported the civil rights movement but was only somewhat successful in passing his New Frontier domestic policies. On November 22, 1963, Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas. His vice president, Lyndon B. Johnson, assumed the presidency upon Kennedy's death. Lee Harvey Oswald, a former U.S. Marine, was arrested for the assassination, but he was shot and killed by Jack Ruby two days later. The FBI and the Warren Commission both concluded Oswald had acted alone, but conspiracy theories about the assassination still persist. After Kennedy's death, Congress enacted many of his proposals, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Revenue Act of 1964. Kennedy ranks highly in polls of U.S. presidents with historians and the general public. His personal life has also been the focus of considerable sustained interest following public revelations in the 1970s of his chronic health ailments and extramarital affairs. Kennedy is the most recent U.S. president to have died in office. Original video ⁠here⁠⁠ Full Wikipedia entry ⁠here⁠ John F. Kennedy's books ⁠here --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theunadulteratedintellect/support

The old joke goes that nothing is certain except for death and taxes. But in reality, the United States didn't even have a permanent federal income tax until Christmas Day, 1913, which means we have spent more years as a country without a federal income tax than with one. Over the years, taxation became more and more complicated as the government sought more ways to raise revenue while citizens looked for ways to pay less in taxes. This led to what we have today which is an often difficult to follow maze of tax codes representing a desire for more revenue pitted against tax-reducing incentives to encourage people to behave financially in ways that put less burden on the government overall (such as retirement savings and health care savings).In this episode, we're talking about taxes. We'll discuss how the progressive tax system works, key moments in US tax history that drove some of the tax code provisions that are key to modern tax planning, and considerations around Roth investments, your off-desk Robinhood account, and how the current tax landscape compares to the past.Of course, we can't predict the future and this discussion isn't tax advice. We definitely recommend you connect with a tax advisor for help with your tax questions and financial situation.

Income tax. Taxes based on income are imposed at the federal, most state, and some local levels within the United States. The tax systems within each jurisdiction may define taxable income separately. Many states refer to some extent to federal concepts for determining taxable income. History of the income tax. The first Income tax in the United States was implemented with the Revenue Act of 1861 by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. In 1895 the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. federal income tax on interest income, dividend income and rental income was unconstitutional in Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., because it was a direct tax. The Pollock decision was overruled by the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1913, and by subsequent U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Graves v New York ex rel. O'Keefe, South Carolina v Baker, and Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad Co. Basic concepts. The U.S. income tax system imposes a tax based on income on individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts. The tax is taxable income, as defined, times a specified tax rate. This tax may be reduced by credits, some of which may be refunded if they exceed the tax calculated. Taxable income may differ from income for other purposes (such as for financial reporting). The definition of taxable income for federal purposes is used by many, but far from all states. Income and deductions are recognized under tax rules, and there are variations within the rules among the states. Book and tax income may differ. Income is divided into "capital gains", which are taxed at a lower rate and only when the taxpayer chooses to "realize" them, and "ordinary income", which is taxed at higher rates and on an annual basis. Because of this distinction, capital is taxed much more lightly than labor. Under the U.S. system, individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts are subject to income tax. Partnerships are not taxed; rather, their partners are subject to income tax on their shares of income and deductions, and take their shares of credits. Some types of business entities may elect to be treated as corporations or as partnerships. Taxpayers are required to file tax returns and self assess tax. Tax may be withheld from payments of income (for example, withholding of tax from wages). To the extent taxes are not covered by withholdings, taxpayers must make estimated tax payments, generally quarterly. Tax returns are subject to review and adjustment by taxing authorities, though far fewer than all returns are reviewed. Taxable income is gross income less exemptions, deductions, and personal exemptions. Gross income includes "all income from whatever source". Certain income, however, is subject to tax exemption at the federal or state levels. This income is reduced by tax deductions including most business and some nonbusiness expenses. Individuals are also allowed a deduction for personal exemptions, a fixed dollar allowance. The allowance of some nonbusiness deductions is phased out at higher income levels. The U.S. federal and most state income tax systems tax the worldwide income of citizens and residents. A federal foreign tax credit is granted for foreign income taxes. Individuals residing abroad may also claim the foreign earned income exclusion. Individuals may be a citizen or resident of the United States but not a resident of a state. Many states grant a similar credit for taxes paid to other states. These credits are generally limited to the amount of tax on income from foreign (or other state) sources. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

The United States Tax Court (in case citations, T.C.) is a federal trial court of record established by Congress under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, section 8 of which provides (in part) that the Congress has the power to "constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court". The Tax Court specializes in adjudicating disputes over federal income tax, generally prior to the time at which formal tax assessments are made by the Internal Revenue Service. Though taxpayers may choose to litigate tax matters in a variety of legal settings, outside of bankruptcy, the Tax Court is the only forum in which taxpayers may do so without having first paid the disputed tax in full. Parties who contest the imposition of a tax may also bring an action in any United States District Court, or in the United States Court of Federal Claims; however these venues require that the tax be paid first, and that the party then file a lawsuit to recover the contested amount paid (the "full payment rule" of Flora v United States). The main emblem of the tax court represents a fasces. History. The first incarnation of the Tax Court was the "U.S. Board of Tax Appeals", established by Congress in the Revenue Act of 1924 (also known as the Mellon tax bill) in order to address the increasing complexity of tax-related litigation. Those serving on the Board were simply designated as "members." The members of the Board were empowered to select, on a biennial basis, one of their members as "chairman." In July 1924, Coolidge announced the appointment of the first twelve appointees, of which seven members were appointed from private life and the other five from the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Additional members were appointed in the fall, and the Board when fully constituted originally had 16 members, with Charles D. Hamel serving as the first Chairman. The Board was initially established as an "independent agency in the executive branch of the government." It was housed in the Internal Revenue Service Building in the Federal Triangle. The first session of the Board of Tax Appeals spanned July 16, 1924 to May 31, 1925. In 1929, the United States Supreme Court indicated that the Board of Tax Appeals was not a "court," but was instead "an executive or administrative board, upon the decision of which the parties are given an opportunity to base a petition for review to the courts after the administrative inquiry of the Board has been had and decided." In 1942, Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1942, renaming the Board as the "Tax Court of the United States". With this change, the Members became Judges and the Chairman became the Presiding Judge. By 1956, overcrowding and the desire to separate judicial and executive powers led to initial attempts to relocate the court. In 1962, Secretary of the Treasury Douglas Dillon appealed to the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) to incorporate funds for the design of a new building in its upcoming budget. The GSA allocated $450,000, and commissioned renowned architect Victor A Lundy, who produced a design that was approved in 1966. However, funding constraints brought on by the Vietnam War delayed the start of construction until 1972. The Tax Court was again renamed to its current formal designation in the Tax Reform Act of 1969, changing it from an historically administrative court to a full judicial court. The completed United States Tax Court Building was dedicated on November 22, 1974, the fiftieth anniversary of the Revenue Act that created the court. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution allows Congress to levy an income tax without apportioning it among the states on the basis of population. It was passed by Congress in 1909 in response to the 1895 Supreme Court case of Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. The Sixteenth Amendment was ratified by the requisite number of states on February 3, 1913, and effectively overruled the Supreme Court's ruling in Pollock. Prior to the early 20th century, most federal revenue came from tariffs rather than taxes, although Congress had often imposed excise taxes on various goods. The Revenue Act of 1861 had introduced the first federal income tax, but that tax was repealed in 1872. During the late nineteenth century, various groups, including the Populist Party, favored the establishment of a progressive income tax at the federal level. These groups believed that tariffs unfairly taxed the poor, and they favored using the income tax to shift the tax burden onto wealthier individuals. The 1894 Wilson–Gorman Tariff Act contained an income tax provision, but the tax was struck down by the Supreme Court in the case of Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. In its ruling, the Supreme Court did not hold that all federal income taxes were unconstitutional, but rather held that income taxes on rents, dividends, and interest were direct taxes and thus had to be apportioned among the states on the basis of population. For several years after Pollock, Congress did not attempt to implement another income tax, largely due to concerns that the Supreme Court would strike down any attempt to levy an income tax. In 1909, during the debate over the Payne–Aldrich Tariff Act, Congress proposed the Sixteenth Amendment to the states. Though conservative Republican leaders had initially expected that the amendment would not be ratified, a coalition of Democrats, progressive Republicans, and other groups ensured that the necessary number of states ratified the amendment. Shortly after the amendment was ratified, Congress imposed a federal income tax with the Revenue Act of 1913. The Supreme Court upheld that income tax in the 1916 case of Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad Co., and the federal government has continued to levy an income tax since 1913.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is the revenue service for the United States federal government, which is responsible for collecting taxes and administering the Internal Revenue Code, the main body of the federal statutory tax law. It is part of the Department of the Treasury and led by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, who is appointed to a five-year term by the President of the United States. The duties of the IRS include providing tax assistance to taxpayers; pursuing and resolving instances of erroneous or fraudulent tax filings; and overseeing various benefits programs, including the Affordable Care Act. The IRS originates from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, a federal office created in 1862 to assess the nation's first income tax to fund the American Civil War. The temporary measure provided over a fifth of the Union's war expenses before being allowed to expire a decade later. In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified authorizing Congress to impose a tax on income, and the Bureau of Internal Revenue was established. In 1953, the agency was renamed the Internal Revenue Service, and in subsequent decades underwent numerous reforms and reorganizations, most significantly in the 1990s. Since its establishment, the IRS has been responsible for collecting most of the revenue needed to fund the federal government, albeit while facing periodic controversy and opposition over its methods, constitutionality, and the principle of taxation generally. In recent years the agency has struggled with budget cuts and reduced morale. As of 2018, it saw a 15 percent reduction in its workforce, including a decline of more than 25 percent of its enforcement staff. Nevertheless, during the 2017 fiscal year, the agency processed more than 245 million tax returns. History. American Civil War (1861–65). In July 1862, during the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln and Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1862, creating the office of Commissioner of Internal Revenue and enacting a temporary income tax to pay war expenses. The Revenue Act of 1862 was passed as an emergency and temporary war-time tax. It copied a relatively new British system of income taxation, instead of trade and property taxation. The first income tax was passed in 1862: The initial rate was 3% on income over $800, which exempted most wage-earners. In 1862 the rate was 3% on income between $600 and $10,000, and 5% on income over $10,000. By the end of the war, 10% of Union households had paid some form of income tax, and the Union raised 21% of its war revenue through income taxes. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

About Charlie Corsello and Manny Vetti and TaxCure: Charlie is been working within the tax marketing industry for over 13 years now. He is a former Googler and the previous owner of a tax resolution company. He is a graduate of Georgetown University, holds a bachelor's degree in Business Administration, and is an enrolled agent licensed by the IRS. Co-founder and president of TaxCure. We make finding and assessing tax resolution professionals easier. Manuel Vetti, a graduate of the University of Vermont, started doing financial analysis and accounting work within XL Capital and then for Sempra Energy. In 2007, he began helping companies in the tax industry with digital marketing as well. As the former owner of a tax resolution firm, Manny understands the marketing and operational side of the business. Furthermore, Manny regularly contributes content and has a keen sense of topics to cover. Taxcure is the first marketplace focused on helping taxpayers with major tax problems find and assess licensed tax professionals. Our mission is to help taxpayers make better decisions when they face a significant IRS or state tax problem. Millions of taxpayers a year fall into tax trouble with the IRS and state tax agencies. In fact, over 22 million Americans either have outstanding IRS tax liabilities, have not filed their taxes, or both. Due to the complexities of navigating tax codes, there are professionals (attorneys, CPAs, and EAs) that specialize in resolving tax problems. However, the market lacks transparency. The existence of many bogus review sites and large national tax firms that advertise heavily and overpromise, clouds the market. In a nutshell, it is very difficult to find and assess tax professionals that specialize in tax representation whether it is before the IRS or a state tax agency. We decided it was time to make it easier. Founded by an Ex-Googler, Enrolled Agent and an Accountant We decided back in 2016, that the industry needed changes. TaxCure is the first website dedicated to helping taxpayers assess and connect with licensed tax professionals that specialize in resolving major IRS and state tax problems. Time to Level the Playing Field We want all types of licensed tax professionals and tax firms of all sizes to have a fair shot at success. Every tax professional has strengths and weaknesses, so we set out to highlight these so taxpayers can make better decisions. Tax Representation Is Nothing New But A Lot Has Changed Over the Last 10-15 Years Tax representation is nothing new. After the passing of the Revenue Act of 1913 and with the increasing complexity of income, estate, and gift taxes, the role of enrolled agents and other tax professionals increased the need for taxpayer representation. Statutes were created which eventually lead to Circular 230, which establishes the rules governing attorneys, CPAs, and Enrolled Agents who practice before the IRS. Over the last 10-20 years, national tax resolution firms have largely emerged which has limited many small tax practices and independent tax professionals from competing. Unfortunately, many of the most experienced tax professionals providing tax representation services do not work for these large tax resolution firms.

History. Constitutional. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution (the "Taxing and Spending Clause"), specifies Congress's power to impose "Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises", but Article 1, Section 8 requires that, "Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." The Constitution specifically stated Congress' method of imposing direct taxes, by requiring Congress to distribute direct taxes in proportion to each state's population "determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons". It has been argued that head taxes and property taxes (slaves could be taxed as either or both) were likely to be abused, and that they bore no relation to the activities in which the federal government had a legitimate interest. The fourth clause of section 9 therefore specifies that, "No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken." Taxation was also the subject of Federalist No. 33 penned secretly by the Federalist Alexander Hamilton under the pseudonym Publius. In it, he asserts that the wording of the "Necessary and Proper" clause should serve as guidelines for the legislation of laws regarding taxation. The legislative branch is to be the judge, but any abuse of those powers of judging can be overturned by the people, whether as states or as a larger group. The courts have generally held that direct taxes are limited to taxes on people (variously called "capitation", "poll tax" or "head tax") and property. All other taxes are commonly referred to as "indirect taxes," because they tax an event, rather than a person or property per se. What seemed to be a straightforward limitation on the power of the legislature based on the subject of the tax proved inexact and unclear when applied to an income tax, which can be arguably viewed either as a direct or an indirect tax. Early federal income taxes. The first income tax suggested in the United States was during the War of 1812. The idea for the tax was based on the British Tax Act of 1798. The British tax law applied progressive rates to income. The British tax rates ranged from 0.833% on income starting at £60 to 10% on income above £200. The tax proposal was developed in 1814. Because the treaty of Ghent was signed in 1815, ending hostilities and the need for additional revenue, the tax was never imposed in the United States. In order to help pay for its war effort in the American Civil War, Congress imposed the first federal income tax in U.S. history through passage of the Revenue Act of 1861. The act created a flat tax of three percent on incomes above $800 ($23,000 in current dollar terms). This taxation of income reflected the increasing amount of wealth held in stocks and bonds rather than property, which the federal government had taxed in the past. The Revenue Act of 1862 established the first national inheritance tax and added a progressive taxation structure to the federal income tax, implementing a tax of five percent on incomes above $10,000. Congress later further raised taxes, and by the end of the war, the income tax constituted about one-fifth of the revenue of the federal government. To collect these taxes, Congress created the Office of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue within the Treasury Department. The federal income tax would remain in effect until its repeal in 1872. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

Rebecca Walser thinks that the 401(k) is a failed experiment. In her opinion, the Revenue Act of 1978 was nothing more than a corporate tax dodge for highly compensated executives, and not a state retirement vehicle. While working as a benefits consultant, Rebecca was looking for a way to administer an alternative savings plan for a client as opposed to just a cash bonus savings plan. She came upon the 401(k) provision and noticed it was a “tax dodge” that could be leveraged. One of the main conditions for this to happen was to ask the IRS if they could allow for the provision to not be taxable – otherwise, Rebecca's client would have “phantom income.” They needed the IRS to confirm that the money wouldn't be taxed until it was accessed. At that time, corporations were severely underfunding their pensions. On the benefits side, they were responsible for putting money away and investing the funds, as well as for having enough to honor those pensions and meeting those obligations. When the 401(k) provision came to be, it shifted the burden to individuals to elect to make the contribution – and all of this happened without any testing. In the late ‘70s and early ‘80s, it was a stockbroker's world. People had to call their stockbroker to invest in the market. Private banking and stock brokerages weren't something mainstream America had access to, and suddenly Wall Street had massive million-dollar-cost averaging and it was a way Wall Street had exploded. When it comes to longitudinal, long-term investments – and when you look at various indexes – Americans don't make the minimum averages of any index. There's one piece of advice that Rebecca considers to be absolutely right every single time, and that you can take to the bank: ‘Buy Low, Sell High'. When you look at behavioral finance, you realize people have a fear of missing out when the market is high. Even though some people may have had their portfolio 40% higher pre-Corona, they're still thinking that there's space for it to grow, so they don't want to sell out. When some investors start to see a stock coming down, they keep their position of waiting for it to get to “one dollar higher.” What happens in these cases is that the stock declines and reaches a low at which point the investor says, ‘I can't afford to lose anymore' – and ends up selling when the stock is at the bottom. By nature, when we're managing our money, we do the opposite of what we're supposed to do. The DALBAR Statistics show that the average investor has done so much worse than the average and indexes themselves.  Wall Street attached itself to pre-tax wealth-building. When pre-tax paying came about organically, people were intrigued by the idea of putting their money in a “silo,” where they could save up and have to pay taxes on it only when they retired – and since they would eventually be in a lower tax bracket, they could pay less taxes. However, they forgot to tell people one thing: in order for you to be able to choose your tax rates when you're going through your lifetime, taxes have to remain relatively stable During Reagan's second term, with the passing of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the top bracket to 28%. This widened the bracket, and people who were making $28k a year (after deductions) became part of that bracket. The retirement of baby boomers will shift us to the new phase of taxation in America. It's the thing that has been talked about since the ‘70s: this decade between 2020 and 2030 will be the decade where everything that has been pushed down the road will come to fruition. For the first time in the history of America, the country will have a European-styled system for a third of its people (one-third of Americans will be on social security and Medicare).  Back in 2009-2010, David Walker stated that tax rates would have to double in order keep the U.S. solvent. Not only does he still stand by that statement but he also thinks that tax rates in the future will never be as low as they are today. Before the pandemic, Rebecca Walser was extremely concerned. Now, after having seen how the world dealt with Covid-19, she is mortified by how scary of a fiscal position America is in, especially because of its special status as the World Reserve Currency. Currently, there is over $8 trillion of printed stimulus currency in the U.S.. To give some perspective: Reagan took office in January of 1981. One trillion dollars of debt wasn't reached until October of that year. From October of 1981 till February of 2020, the Federal debt was under 29 trillion dollars. In the last 20 months, $8 trillion has been printed to deal with Covid-19. Before the pandemic, Rebecca was worried. Now, we're at a point where we're talking about a global Central Bank reckoning. The U.S. has been the World Reserve Currency since 1944. In the past, China and India wouldn't bilaterally trade in their domestic currencies, they would buy dollars and use those to trade.  Then, you had the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South America) wanting to make a pact to bilaterally trade for the first time. Over the last 15 years, the dollar hasn't been used much in bilateral trades in countries around the world.  Three months ago, China announced its intention of doing its own digital currency – two months ago, the UK announced its move toward digital currency. As the world moves toward digital currency, the U.S. dollar will literally become irrelevant as the World Reserve Currency. Nearly 3 trillion dollars, nearly half of the U.S. annual spending, comes from its ability to sell its paper to the world. If this opportunity were to end, America would lose almost half of its lifeline (support to the military, social assistance, etc.).

In this Episode of The GRID, host Chris Kuhlmann compares the Federal Government's economic solutions to the children's game, Whackamole.   SHOW NOTES Some Details Gas tax Federal Tax – 18.4 cents/gallon State Tax (Illinois) – 59.56 cents/gallon - 78 cents/gallon History of Gas Tax – June 6 Revenue Act of 1932 Current Federal Tax: 18.46 cents/gallon for regular unleaded Efficiency Standard for Gas Mileage has gone yo-yo over the years. 1 Barrel of oil yields 20 gallons US Travelers – miles driven per year 40 years ago 1.5 Trillion per year Today 3.2 Trillion miles per year Whackamole Effect – Unintended Consequences A solution for one issue causes a problem in another area. Tax dollars raised by fuel tax go to the Highway Trust Fund to build and maintain roads. Increasing fuel efficiency decreases tax revenue because less gas is needed, fewer taxes are paid. fewer taxes means fewer dollars for building and repairs. Fuel efficiency drives tax revenue down. The perfect storm. Decreasing our dependence on fossil fuels is detrimental to revenue for roads and bridges where travel has more than doubled in 40 years. Abortion up (dead citizens who don't pay taxes) - Social Security contribution down (fewer paying in because they are dead) Covid-19 Lockdowns – Mission: flatten the curve > quickly became eradicate the disease (mentality – no grater mission for our country (government's mentality)          Unintended Consequences?              -  45% Adults who lost income avoided medical treatment              -  1/3 who did not loose their jobs didn't get treatment              -  40% age 18-24 suicidal thoughts up from 3% prior              -  5% in Opioid deaths              -  60% higher depression A White Paper was written by the Center for the Study of the Administrative State of the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, titled the Unintended Health Consequences of the Lockdown. On page 3 the writer says, “Rather than invoking Newton's Third Law, "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction," the principle for unintended consequences should be called the Law of Whackamole.”   CREDITS Host: Chris Kuhlmann Written by: Chris Kuhlmann Produced & Directed by: Shaun Griffin Music composed by JD Kuhlmann Art: Shaun Griffin Sound: Shaun Griffin Sponsor: Mercantile Mountain Be sure to visit www.mercantilemountain.com Visit us at www.kingdompatriot.us and check out our Vision Video

This week, Rebecca, Matt, and Caleb talk about Noodles the Pug, Mike Stone's lawsuit against Russell Moore, Ben Shapiro tweeting about taxes, and a 100 year old priest moving back to Spain. Pastor Becky's Animal Corner https://www.npr.org/2021/10/19/1047302978/noodles-pug-bones-no-bones-day-tiktok-mood-prediction https://noodleofficial.threadless.com https://vm.tiktok.com/ZM8ffbbah/ The Malcolm Section https://religionnews.com/2021/10/20/mike-stone-files-lawsuit-sbc-rival-russell-moore-defamation-erlc-trump-abuse/ Tweet of the Week https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1452639489877229571?s=20 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1913 News Story https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/25/us/luis-urriza-priest-texas.html

When the U.S. Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1978, it  resulted in the first 401(k) plan, which took the costly burden of financing retirement pensions off of the backs of employers and onto the backs of employees. At one time, over 80 percent of workers retired with a pension. Today less than 18 percent of American workers have a pension in place.   And if many companies get their way, they will be carrying fewer and fewer pensions as time goes on. Many pensions are underwater or will be because of the lowest interest rates in U.S. history on bonds, causing pension plans to take more risk. We'll explain why it's happening and what you should do if you are offered a lump sum.   A great show you don't want to miss-- MASTERING MONEY is on the air!

Income tax Taxes based on income are imposed at the federal, most state, and some local levels within the United States. The tax systems within each jurisdiction may define taxable income separately. Many states refer to some extent to federal concepts for determining taxable income. History of the income tax. The first Income tax in the United States was implemented with the Revenue Act of 1861 by Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. In 1895 the Supreme Court ruled that the U.S. federal income tax on interest income, dividend income and rental income was unconstitutional in Pollock v Farmers' Loan & Trust Co., because it was a direct tax. The Pollock decision was overruled by the ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in 1913, and by subsequent U.S. Supreme Court decisions including Graves v New York ex rel. O'Keefe, South Carolina v Baker, and Brushaber v Union Pacific Railroad Co. Basic concepts. The U.S. income tax system imposes a tax based on income on individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts. The tax is taxable income, as defined, times a specified tax rate. This tax may be reduced by credits, some of which may be refunded if they exceed the tax calculated. Taxable income may differ from income for other purposes (such as for financial reporting). The definition of taxable income for federal purposes is used by many, but far from all states. Income and deductions are recognized under tax rules, and there are variations within the rules among the states. Book and tax income may differ. Income is divided into "capital gains", which are taxed at a lower rate and only when the taxpayer chooses to "realize" them, and "ordinary income", which is taxed at higher rates and on an annual basis. Because of this distinction, capital is taxed much more lightly than labor. Under the U.S. system, individuals, corporations, estates, and trusts are subject to income tax. Partnerships are not taxed; rather, their partners are subject to income tax on their shares of income and deductions and take their shares of credits. Some types of business entities may elect to be treated as corporations or as partnerships. Taxpayers are required to file tax returns and self-assess tax. Tax may be withheld from payments of income (for example, withholding of tax from wages). To the extent taxes are not covered by withholdings, taxpayers must make estimated tax payments, generally quarterly. Tax returns are subject to review and adjustment by taxing authorities, though far fewer than all returns are reviewed. Taxable income is gross income less exemptions, deductions, and personal exemptions. Gross income includes "all income from whatever source". Certain income, however, is subject to tax exemption at the federal or state levels. This income is reduced by tax deductions including most business and some nonbusiness expenses. Individuals are also allowed a deduction for personal exemptions, a fixed dollar allowance. The allowance of some nonbusiness deductions is phased out at higher income levels. The U.S. federal and most state income tax systems tax the worldwide income of citizens and residents. A federal foreign tax credit is granted for foreign income taxes. Individuals residing abroad may also claim the foreign earned income exclusion. Individuals may be a citizen or resident of the United States but not a resident of a state. Many states grant a similar credit for taxes paid to other states. These credits are generally limited to the amount of tax on income from foreign (or other state) sources. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/law-school/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/law-school/support

For this 8th installment in the Wilson series, we will focus on the beginning of Wilson's presidency, including his Cabinet selections, inauguration, and early successes in pushing his agenda through Congress in his first year in office, especially in regard to the passage of the 1913 Revenue Act and the Federal Reserve Act.   Support the Dangerous History Podcast via Patreon or SubscribeStar. The Dangerous History Podcast is a member of the Recorded History Podcast Network, the Dark Myths Podcast Collective & LRN.fm's podcast roster. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Ep #73 / Mar 22nd / Mudslide Washington / Beer & Wine Revenue Act Show Summary: ·       Recent Event ·       Mudslide Washington - 2014·       Beer & Wine Revenue Act - 1933·       Interesting FactSchedule:·       Monday – Friday Social Media Links:·       Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ourdailyhistorypodcast·       Buzzsprout: https://ourdailyhistory.buzzsprout.com/Resources: ·       Music by JuliusH from Pixabay +·       https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/mudslide-in-washington-state-kills-more-than-40-people·       https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/fdr-legalizes-sale-of-beer-and-wine  Support the show (https://www.buymeacoffee.com/ourdailyhistory)

At 40 years old, the 401(k) has become part of the bedrock of the employer-based retirement system. Tens of millions of Americans have socked away trillions of dollars in a retirement investment vehicle that has fundamentally changed the dynamic of how employers provide a secure retirement for their workers. Today, the 401(k) makes up more than $6.5 of the $9.5 trillion in workplace defined contribution assets. But in 1981, this nascent idea was trying to find its place amongst pension and various savings plans, and it was finding an audience that would propel it to prominence. Host Josh Cohen talks with Ted Benna, father of the 401(k), and Richard Stanger, the author of the 869-word insert to the US tax code that changed retirement.   Key Takeaways: [1:15] Josh Cohen picks up where we left off following the birth of ERISA and welcomes two key players in the creation of the 401k: Richard Stanger and Ted Benna. [3:46] To better understand 401k's Josh rounds up the history of profit-sharing plans — which is almost as long as the history of the United-States. [6:27] Richard Stenger shares the story of how he came to write the Revenue Act add-on, from President Carter's election to the entrance of Barber Conable on stage. [11:46] “The beauty of it was that there wasn't a lot of lobbying. Take a blank sheet of paper, forget the history of pension law: how do we create something that creates a fair distribution of contributions and benefits between rank-and-file employees and highly compensated employees?” — Richard Stanger [13:24] Ted Banner is often referred to as the father of 401k's, he shares how he came into this title starting with what was called “thrift plans”, Coda Plans and getting a green light on 401k plans in 1981. [19:33] “They took us into a big auditorium and plopped me up in front of 25 of their top tax writers with their crossed arms like” what's this country hick going to tell us? Less than an hour into the interview it switched over to how can we get that for us?” — Ted Benna [22:10] Ted shares his take — both the good and the bad — on what the employer role is in pension plans, as well as the benefits of the 401k. [24:56] Richard looks back with pride on the legacy of those 869 words he wrote. [26:20] Josh thanks both of his guests and closes out episode 2 of the Accidental Plans Sponsor and shares a teaser on episode 3: looking ahead.   Thank you for tuning in. If you liked what you heard, please subscribe and leave us a review wherever you listen to your podcasts.   Links: The Accidental Plan Sponsor PGIM Follow us on Twitter Mentioned in this episode: Richard Stanger wrote the 869 word add-on to the Revenue Act of 1978. Find him on LinkedIn Ted Benna took Richard Stanger's idea and ran with it! Find him on LinkedIn

The Revenue Act of 1861 was signed into law by Abraham Lincoln, imposing U.S. federal income tax for the first ...

When the U.S. Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1978, it  resulted in the first , which took the costly burden of financing retirement pensions off of the backs of employers and onto the backs of employees. At one time, over 80 percent of workers retired with a pension. Today less than 18 percent of American workers have a pension in place.   And if many companies get their way, they will be carrying fewer and fewer pensions as time goes on. Many pensions are underwater or will be because of the lowest interest rates in U.S. history on bonds, causing pension plans to take more risk. We'll explain why its happening and what you should do if you are offered a lump sum. Then Fox News Contributor Gary Kaltbaum joins us for the Q & A.   A great show you don't want to miss MASTERING MONEY is on the air!

Lynn Nichols Federal Tax Update Podcast July 16, 2018, edition   We are back after a short hiatus! Listen as Lynn Nichols provides commentary on 8 Items pertaining to current developments in U.S. tax law. This week’s topics include: OUR PROGRAM THIS WEEK INCLUDES . . . . . .   Termination of S Corp Election Inadvertent The IRS ruled that a company will be treated as continuing to be an S corporation from the date its subchapter S election was inadvertently terminated when a trust became an ineligible shareholder, provided some conditions are met. [LTR 201824003; 10/27/2017, rel. 6/15/2018] (FIVE LIKE THIS IN SAME WEEK ! ! !) IRS Scraps Leveraged Partnership Rules, Keeps Bottom-Dollar Ban The IRS is reverting to old rules on leveraged partnerships in response to an executive order calling for the removal of burdensome regulations, but bottom-dollar guarantees didn’t make the cut. [Tax Notes Today; June 19,2018, article by Eric Yauch] IRS Proposed Disguised Sales Regs Would Reinstate Prior Regs The IRS has published proposed regulations on the allocation of partnership liabilities for disguised sales, adding that if finalized, the proposed regs would reinstate prior final regs on allocations of excess nonrecourse liabilities of a partnership.  [REG-131186-17; 83 F.R. 28397-28401; 6/19/2018]   Medical Marijuana Business Can't Claim Deduction for Wages The Tax Court held that deductions for wages a couple received from their medical marijuana S corporation weren’t attributable to cost of goods sold and are disallowed under section 280E as attributable to trafficking a controlled substance, rejecting the couple’s claim that denial of the deduction is discriminatory. [Loughman, Jesse M.; No. 21464-15; T.C. Memo. 2018-85, 6/18/2018]   Decedent Held Rights to Cash Surrender Value of Life Insurance The Tax Court refused to hold that sections 2036 and 2038 are inapplicable in valuing a decedent’s interests in three split-dollar life insurance agreements to the cash surrender value at the date of death because the bona fide sale exception was not satisfied and held that summary judgment on inapplicability of section 2703 was inappropriate. [Cahill, Estate of Richard F.; No. 10451-16; T.C. Memo 2018-84, 6/18/2018]   Microcaptive Insurer Case Leaves Open Questions The Tax Court granted the IRS another victory June 18, adding to the agency’s arsenal for combating abusive captive insurance arrangements, but the opinion failed to offer additional guidance for taxpayers.  [Tax Notes Today; 6/20/2018, Article by Emily Foster]   Property Manager Was Employee; Company Hit With Employment Taxes The Tax Court held that the property manager for a company that operated an apartment complex was an employee and not an independent contractor and held the company liable for employment taxes, additions to tax, and penalties; the court held that the company wasn’t entitled to relief under section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978. [Hampton Software Development LLC; No. 30231-13L; T.C. Memo. 2018-87, 6/19/2018]   Fraudulent Filer Can’t Avoid Penalties With Amended Returns   The Tax Court held that an individual who admitted to filing fraudulent returns but who later filed amended returns reporting additional income was still liable for the penalties, finding that he could not avoid fraud penalties by filing amended returns because an amended return doesn’t purge the original fraudulent filing or fraudulent intent. [Gaskin, Gary et al. v.; No. 7475-17; T.C. Memo. 2018-89; 6/20/2018]   S. Supreme Court Overturns Quill, Freeing States to Tax Online Sales The U.S. Supreme Court held June 21 in South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc. that the physical presence standard in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota is "unsound and incorrect," freeing states to require tax collection on remote sales. [Tax Notes Today; 6/22/2018, Article by Jad Chamseddine]     [South Dakota v. Wayfair Inc.; No. 17–494]

International Cannabis Business Conference 2016 coverage continues as Russ Belville speaks with California Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, John W. Lee (director for the Americans For Policy Reform (AFPR) and a proponent of the Marijuana Control, Legalization and Revenue Act of 2016 or MCLR.

PatiCakes Queen of CannabisKandice Hawes Orange County NormlKeiko Beattie US Weed Channel Magic Mike our fabulous Producertalk with John Lee of Director of Americans for Policy Reform San Jose, CA (March 11, 2015) Efforts to legalize marijuana in California in 2016 are gaining momentum. Americans For Policy Reform (AFPR), the group behind the Marijuana Control, Legalization and Revenue Act of 2014 (MCLR), is announcing the opening of the MCLR 2016 language for input from the community. The initiative will establish clear guidelines for Medical Marijuana and Adult-use Marijuana in addition to allowing for the production of industrial hemp in the state. “We have heard a resounding cry from leaders in the cannabis community saying they want MCLR in 2016,” stated John Lee, Director of AFPR. “We feel obligated to help.” In 2013, MCLR was developed as the first “open-source” or “crowd-sourced” method for advocates and experts everywhere to contribute directly to the language of California’s marijuana legalization law. It received an impressive fiscal analysis from the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), in addition to a highly favorable Title & Summary from California Attorney General Kamala Harris. “MCLR 2016 is now open for community input. We want to ensure everyone has another opportunity to address any concerns and contribute to the initiative,” said Mr. Lee. “We also encourage all serious supporters interested in signing on as a Proponent to contact us immediately.” John W. Lee is Director of Americans for Policy Reform, a California 501(c)4 created to facilitate the reform of marijuana laws nationwide. AFPR coordinates community based involvement utilizing open-source strategies and social media tools to enable grass roots policy reform. While spending the majority of his career in Silicon Valley high tech, John has dedicated the last 5 years to bringing the skills he developed in those industries to advance positive and cooperative cannabis policy reform in California. John most recently served as Chairman of the Silicon Valley Cannabis Coalition and Director of the San Jose Referendum campaign to stop citywide Dispensary closures. He was a co-author and Proponent of the Marijuana Control, Legalization and Revenue Act of 2014 and serves as Moderator of the SaveCannabis.org email forum. With a current assignment to the Task Force chartered with establishing cannabis concentrate processing regulations in Santa Clara County, John is expanding his presence and network at all levels to effect change on behalf of the people. He continues to work tirelessly to assist advocacy groups throughout the state to use core grass roots principals to achieve success. john@afpr.us Give us a call @ 714.287.0329 E-mail us: pgordon5@verizon.net or paticakes@hempradio.com Let us know what you think. We love hearing from you! Be Safe Be Smart Have a Fabulous time!

Welcome to the seventh part of the Tax Issues that Impact your Wealth series and the second part of the Independent Contractor section. In this podcast, Frank L. Brunetti, Scarinci Hollenbeck Partner and Chair of the Tax, Trust and Estate Group, focuses on Section 530 of the Revenue Act and how it can be a benefit for employers. For more information on Mr. Brunetti and his practice group, please visit his blog and watch the video at TaxTrustEstateNews.com.

Pages 41-47 in the text, as narrated by Floy Lilley. From Part 2 of Conceived in Liberty, Volume III: "Enforcement of Mercantilism."