Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Member Login

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/10/2003 3:48:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/13/2003 8:25:35 AM EDT by sharky30]
what a load of crap. heaven forbid they actually cut spending to correct the budget gaps

www.wben.com/newsroom/fullstory.php?newsid=00966


Unwelcome Surprise on State Income Tax Forms
WBEN Newsroom - Wednesday, December 10, 2003 08:58 AM

Buffalo, NY (WBEN) - As New York grapples with budget gaps, it is apparently looking to you to help plug them.

On the state income tax form you'll fill out for the 2003 tax year, you'll be expected to estimate how much sales tax you avoided paying by shopping on-line, out-of-state, or on the reservation.

If you failed to save your receipts all the year, the state will include a chart with estimated taxes you should have paid.

Link Posted: 12/10/2003 4:14:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/10/2003 4:17:57 PM EDT by green18]
So now they think that they are entitled to tax transactions from anywhere in the world regardless of whether or not the company has a presence in NYS............

Of course with the state in such a sad financial state(pun intended)we good NY'ers only shop locally and insist on paying BUST OUT RETAIL and the maximum sales tax possible..........don't we
Link Posted: 12/10/2003 5:38:26 PM EDT
I usually take these forms, fill them out and put them in the circular file cabinet with the others.  When the circular bin is full i bring it to the curb where a govt employee picks it up and puts it in his truck.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 3:33:03 PM EDT
Does this mean the NYS gov't is gonna get court orders to see our credit card statements? PayPal, eBay and all that. Or supeona our mail carriers and UPS guys to testify? I buy a whole lotta sh!t from websites but I sure as hell ain't paying a tax for it. I may be OK with paying sales tax as long the stores online have brick and mortar stores in the same state of purchase so i can return or exchange.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 8:48:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/12/2003 5:59:06 AM EDT by HiramRanger]
Just to clarify, states may not require vendors outside the state of NY, and who have no presence in the state of NY, to act as agents of the Department and collect sales tax.  That is a Supreme Court ruling.  However, the Supreme Court has also ruled that the burden may legally be placed on the taxpayer to pay compensating use tax at a rate equal to the sales tax rate in their respective jurisdiction.

Just so you know, this obligation has been in effect for years, this is nothing new.  However, as part of last year's budget process the legislature mandated that the Department of Taxation and Finance add a line to the personal income tax forms to report untaxed purchases and to pay the use tax owed.  The Governor vetoed the budget and the legislature overrode the veto.  Incidently, the legislature mistakingly believes that NYers will remit more than $300 million in use tax from untaxed purchases.

And in answer to your question, yes, it is possible to detect untaxed purchases.  The way it would likely happen would be in the course of an audit in which you might be required to produce credit card and or bank records.  If they pointed to untaxed purchases the taxpayer could be assessed for the tax and any penalties and interest applicable.

It seems to me the Tax Department will have a very hard time detecting purchases paid for with money orders.  Personal checks can be obtained from the bank, same thing with credit card records.  But money orders, those are pretty hard to trace, especially if they aren't postal money orders and are issued by a third party financial institution where you don't have an account, like say Western Union or Walmart.
Link Posted: 12/11/2003 9:29:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
Incidently, the legislature mistakingly believes that NYers will remit more than $300 million in use tax from untaxed purchases.



Delusions are best when they are REALLY BIG!
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 4:38:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Hoplite:
I usually take these forms, fill them out and put them in the circular file cabinet with the others.  When the circular bin is full i bring it to the curb where a govt employee picks it up and puts it in his truck.




Some people have found that when you do that a government employee will put a delinquency notice in a white envelope and mail it to you and then you'll pay penalties and interest and maybe go to jail and lose your gun rights.

And if you think no one gets caught for this, check out these articles:

dks.thing.net/NS-Otto.html

www.azcentral.com/ent/arts/articles/1024arttax24.html

www.latefinal.com/archives/000236.html

subscript.bna.com/SAMPLES/dtr.nsf/0/c9268000bb925dd285256ce30012dcc6?OpenDocument­

www.mekkamanuscript.com/artnews/boilstitbit.htm


Link Posted: 12/12/2003 5:13:34 AM EDT
I certainly won't be using any estimated uncollected sales tax chart on my steal-your-income tax form. I'll simply write in zero. If someone wants to prove that I owe tax, they can be my guest. But they'd better watch their backside.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 5:48:16 AM EDT
Bill, I would choose your language more carefully.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 7:06:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/12/2003 7:10:48 AM EDT by Phil_A_Steen]

Originally Posted By BillStClair:
I certainly won't be using any estimated uncollected sales tax chart on my steal-your-income tax form. I'll simply write in zero. If someone wants to prove that I owe tax, they can be my guest. But they'd better watch their backside.



IIRC, in December of 98? the New York State Dept. of Taxation & Finance sent agents out to Paramus NJ.  They took down the license plate numbers of cars with New York tags that were parked outside of the major stores.  The tax agents then ran the plates and went to Visa and Mastercard to get charge histories.  When they found a substantial purchase on that date at the place the car was the DOTF sent out a "tax due" notice.  Public furor caused them to abandon the effort.

I'm pulling some hair out trying to re-find this story with Google, does anyone else remember this happening?

Edited to add: Found a reference, see footnote 3 to this article.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 7:10:19 AM EDT
Phil, let me research that and I'll get back to you.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 7:19:27 AM EDT
I'm sick of choosing my language carefully. I'm sick of having MY money stolen, more and more each year. If the courts won't stop this blatant theft and the cops continue to enforce it, I have no choice but to take it into my own hands. Wish it weren't so.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 8:06:53 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/12/2003 8:07:15 AM EDT by HiramRanger]

Originally Posted By BillStClair:
I'm sick of choosing my language carefully. I'm sick of having MY money stolen, more and more each year. If the courts won't stop this blatant theft and the cops continue to enforce it, I have no choice but to take it into my own hands. Wish it weren't so.



Apparently you don't understand the concept of the Social Contract.  You see, you elect officials to represent you in a democratic process.  They in turn act as you.  The authority they have was given to them by you.  You have the power collectively to replace them.  If those who abuse their power remain in office, it is because the electorate has decided to allow it to happen.

There is nothing illegal about sales or use taxes.  Everything the state is doing is within the guidelines established in supreme court rulings.  It may be unpopular, but that does not make it illegal.

Now, back to the social contract.  If you choose to live in the state, you have chosen to live under the laws enacted by your democratically elected representatives.  Your continued presence and residence in the state is your consent to abide by those laws and your agreement to be punished by them for violation.  This is the very underpinning of democracy.

If you do not like living under the laws you have two choices.  (1) Replace your elected officials via the ballot box, or (2) move to a state that is more to your liking.

Bottom line, I don't like paying taxes any more than anyone else but I'm familiar enough with the state's tax laws to know they are legally valid.

And Phil, I checked with the state's audit people.  They will continue to research it for me, but they said it was definitely not in 1998 that they did this and their recollection was it happened around 1991 under Mario Cuomo.  I will conitnue to track this for you.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 10:00:29 AM EDT
You're right. I don't understand the social contract. There IS no social contract. I signed no contract. No constitution that I did not sign, or swear to uphold, applies to me. The Constitution is a limitation on those public officials who have sworn to uphold it. It has no power whatsoever over me except in so far as I am cowed into obeying the so-called "laws" created by these cretins because of their army of men with guns.

And even if I DID believe in this imaginary "social contract", the courts no longer invalidate laws that are clearly unconstitutional. Witness the 20,000 gun "control" laws (which part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand?) and the recent validation of the campaign finance "reform" law (which part of "Congress shall make no law" do they not understand?).

And you left out choice 3) Shoot the bastards. That choice becomes more attractive with each passing day.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 11:28:24 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BillStClair:
You're right. I don't understand the social contract. There IS no social contract. I signed no contract. No constitution that I did not sign, or swear to uphold, applies to me. The Constitution is a limitation on those public officials who have sworn to uphold it. It has no power whatsoever over me except in so far as I am cowed into obeying the so-called "laws" created by these cretins because of their army of men with guns.

And even if I DID believe in this imaginary "social contract", the courts no longer invalidate laws that are clearly unconstitutional. Witness the 20,000 gun "control" laws (which part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand?) and the recent validation of the campaign finance "reform" law (which part of "Congress shall make no law" do they not understand?).

And you left out choice 3) Shoot the bastards. That choice becomes more attractive with each passing day.



Do me a favor Bill, keep your nutty ideas about shooting anybody off of this board or I'll be forced to request that staff review your account.

Now, if you want to debate the legality of taxes that's fine and welcome. Debate however does not include making not so veiled threats of shooting public officials who are carrying out policies and laws you don't agree with.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 11:37:27 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 1:00:29 PM EDT
I often forget which boards are populated by happy slaves or people afraid to publically act otherwise. I'll attempt to remember that about this board in the future and act like a good little slave by avoiding topics where I find it impossible to do so.

Claire Wolfe wrote a few years back that "It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." That was a few years back. Things have gotten worse. Much worse.

As a reminder for those of you who have forgotten the spirit of American liberty and for those who haven't but who like being reminded, I'll quote the Declaration of Independence. Remember, the American Revolution was fought over a six percent tax. The flash point was an attempt by the legal government to confiscate arms. Our Founding Fathers would be called terrorists today.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 1:44:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BillStClair:
I often forget which boards are populated by happy slaves or people afraid to publically act otherwise. I'll attempt to remember that about this board in the future and act like a good little slave by avoiding topics where I find it impossible to do so.

Claire Wolfe wrote a few years back that "It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." That was a few years back. Things have gotten worse. Much worse.

As a reminder for those of you who have forgotten the spirit of American liberty and for those who haven't but who like being reminded, I'll quote the Declaration of Independence. Remember, the American Revolution was fought over a six percent tax. The flash point was an attempt by the legal government to confiscate arms. Our Founding Fathers would be called terrorists today.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."



Yes, but you are missing the point Bill.  They were ruled by a King.  They had no means other than revolution to invoke a change.  You and I and all men and women of legal age who are without legal disability have the power to cast a ballot to effect change.  The fact that a majority of the people often vote for leaders who think counter to you and I does not mean we are being oppressed by despots.  It means we have chosen leaders who are excercising the powers given to them by us.  We have the power to strip them of that authority through elections.  The day our right to choose our leaders is taken away is the day that the more extreme measures adopted by our forefathers become valid.  However, so long as we have the power to effect peaceful change it is our obligation as Americans to do so.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 2:52:19 PM EDT
Well, I'm sure you already pay taxes (sales) when you buy beer, muffins and bagels, unless you make your own
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 4:08:52 PM EDT
this has been discussed pretty heavily on local talk radio the last few days. They mentioned that if you buy a car in PA and register it in NY you get hit with NY tax.
How the hell is that legal? You already paid sales tax in PA.
I don't buy online to avoid tax, I do it for convience. After shipping I probably come out even money wise.
One more reason to get out of this state.
Can they do anything else to drive out life long residents and businesses?
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 4:21:08 PM EDT
First off you shouldn't pay sales tax in another state on a car purchase.  I was just in the market to buy a car and was looking at the ads in Mass since my girlfriend lives in Boston.  All the big car circulars mentioned no sales tax for buyers from out of state.  This is usually the case.  I'm betting if you are charged sales tax in another state for a car and you are not registering the car in that state and you do not reside in that state you can apply for a refund of the sales tax.  Regardless, the law in NY states that you must pay either sales or use tax on your purchases.  If you don't like the law, encourage your elected representatives in Albany to change it... but keep in mind, these are the folks who required the new line on the tax forms to report untaxed purchases and overrode the Governor's veto of the budget to make this law.
Link Posted: 12/12/2003 5:07:48 PM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
And Phil, I checked with the state's audit people.  They will continue to research it for me, but they said it was definitely not in 1998 that they did this and their recollection was it happened around 1991 under Mario Cuomo.  I will conitnue to track this for you.



Thanks for that!  I'm pleased to know my memory is longer than I thought.  I had estimated 98 because I figured that's as far back as I could remember.

As far as sales tax on cars, cars are always taxed at point of registration as far as I know -- I bought my car in New Jersey and paid sales tax in NY upon registration.

As far as shooting tax collectors -- anybody who seriously thinks about that is a whacko and we really don't need the lead news story to read how the guy who shot the tax agent father of three was associated with the extremist para-military internet site of AR15.com.

Link Posted: 12/13/2003 3:17:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
Yes, but you are missing the point Bill.  They were ruled by a King.  They had no means other than revolution to invoke a change.  You and I and all men and women of legal age who are without legal disability have the power to cast a ballot to effect change.  The fact that a majority of the people often vote for leaders who think counter to you and I does not mean we are being oppressed by despots.  It means we have chosen leaders who are excercising the powers given to them by us.  We have the power to strip them of that authority through elections.  The day our right to choose our leaders is taken away is the day that the more extreme measures adopted by our forefathers become valid.  However, so long as we have the power to effect peaceful change it is our obligation as Americans to do so.


You have done a stellar job, Hiram, here, and in your earlier "social contract" piece, of describing the dominant paradigm. The schools have done their job well, feeding the inhabitants of the Matrix a steady diet of the blue pill so that the criminal enterprise called "government" can run their protection racket without the public even recognizing that it is a protection racket. Most of the inhabitants don't even know about the red pill and the real world outside the Matrix. And they'll do anything to avoid finding out. Why do you think some drugs are illegal?

But that's all metaphor. Back to reality.

Do you really think I can change anything by voting? I go into the voting booth and the only candidate there whose lever I can pull without vomiting all over the equipment is the Libertarian candidate, who has no chance of winning, and won't have a chance unless the Libertarian party drops its defining principle of the non-initiation of force and morphs into a mixture of Democrat and Republican socialism. Yes, there are third parties with better principles than the dominant two, but none of them has a chance of changing anything. They can't get anybody elected.

"But you can become active in Republican (or Democrat, yuck) politics, change the party from within, and provide real party candidates to vote for," say you. Yes, if I want to take five or ten years of my life and work like a demon, I could probably gain some modicum of control over the local wing of a party and have a real say in who is nominated for a state Senate and Assembly position and, maybe, a U.S. Representative position. Maybe I could even get them elected.

At the state level here in New York, my one guy in the Senate and one guy in the Assembly have Silver and Bruno to deal with. Everyone who's paid the least bit of attention knows that those two guys and Pataki are the only law-makers in New York. Everyone else is just window dressing. And even if there were a normal democratic process in Albany, how much could my two guys accomplish against the scourge of communist legislators from the Big Apple?

And at the national level I've got a similar problem. The medicare prescription drug scheme was dead on arrival in the House. It didn't have enough votes to pass in the normal 15 minute voting period. Only some big-time arm-twisting from the president's men managed to turn the vote of enough Republicans to win the day for this newest mass plunder. And this is business as usual. My guy wouldn't have a chance.

So what have I changed with my years of work? Nothing. Except to soil my conscience by association with liars and scoundrels, and to risk my immortal soul with corruption by power.

But back to the tax issue. Taxation is theft. Having swallowed the blue pill, I doubt that you'll even admit this. Many who do admit it rationalize it away by claiming that taxation is the only way to support government, and government is a necessary evil, so theft in this one case is OK. Bull. If your means are evil, and robbery at gunpoint, which describes taxation to a tee, certainly qualifies as evil, I don't care how lofty your ends might be. You are a criminal. You belong in jail. If your government depends on coercion to survive, it has no right to be.

And taxation remains theft no matter how many people vote for it. Just as the killing of innocents in war, e.g. the nearly 8000 dead Iraqi civilians, remains murder no matter how many people vote for it. One plus one equals two, and no vote can change that reality.
Link Posted: 12/13/2003 8:23:44 AM EDT
maybe I'm wrong about getting taxed twice on cars, I wasn't basing that on first hand experience but what I had heard, and if I am I'll admit it, but getting taxed twice on the other merchandise is still crap.
Link Posted: 12/13/2003 9:09:31 AM EDT
Taxed twice on the 'other' merchandise? What are you talking about? If you buy something in NJ and pay say 4% tax on it, you have to pay the rest say 4.75% to NY looking at it from where I live, as the sales tax is 8.75% here. You don't give them the full 8.75%, you give them the difference to what you paid in NJ and what the tax is in NY. This is how I understand the way it works, I'm sure hirom the tax collector can and will correct me if I'm wrong.
Link Posted: 12/13/2003 10:17:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BuLLet:
Taxed twice on the 'other' merchandise? What are you talking about? If you buy something in NJ and pay say 4% tax on it, you have to pay the rest say 4.75% to NY looking at it from where I live, as the sales tax is 8.75% here. You don't give them the full 8.75%, you give them the difference to what you paid in NJ and what the tax is in NY. This is how I understand the way it works, I'm sure hirom the tax collector can and will correct me if I'm wrong.



Bullet is partially correct, I'm not a tax collector, but he is correct about paying the difference in rates.
Link Posted: 12/13/2003 10:29:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/13/2003 10:36:16 AM EDT by sharky30]
I'm at work so I don't have time to sort through it but I will later
www.tax.state.ny.us/pdf/2003/inc/it201i_2003.pdf

and if the reports on the radio have misled me I will admit to being wrong


was able to find the answer, page 38. I was wrong, you have to pay the difference between the NY tax due and what was paid in another state and not full NY tax on top of the other tax.

I still disagree with this law though.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 4:52:54 AM EDT
It's been over 24 hours and no one's made a peep about my last post. Maybe you're still thinking about it, but, more likely, you're ignoring the crazy anarchist. Can't blame you really. Mine is an opinion that I know is a tiny minority. And ranting about politics on an internet bulletin board rarely changes anyone's mind.

Still, I don't understand one thing. If a criminal comes to my house and attempts to kidnap my children or steal my guns or my other stuff, most of you would think me justified in defending my children and my stuff. If that criminal happens to be wearing a uniform and a badge, however, for some reason your opinion changes. I realize that as a practical matter, it IS different. He likely has lots of friends who will follow him to my house, some with armored vehicles, and dialing 911 won't bring me any assistance. But if I didn't do anything really wrong, if I didn't hurt somebody or steal or damage their stuff, if all I did was smoke the wrong vegetable or possess a magazine that holds too many rounds or a gun barrel that's half an inch too short or an unregistered pistol, why is he any less of a criminal for entering my house than the ununiformed guy?

The reason that taxes set me off so is because that is the place where the force of the state hits me personally, where I am reminded that: "Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. It is a force, like fire: a dangerous servant and a terrible master."
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 6:36:07 AM EDT
You want a response Bill, I'll give you a response.

Taxes ARE a necessary evil.  You sit here typing your anti-government anti-tax rant on a computer that is as advanced as it is because the government heavily financed research into computers for space exploration and military use.  Since the government doesn't create wealth, individuals do, where do you think that money came from?  Taxes.  You have the freedom to spout your diatribe, yes the Constitution guarantees that right, but it is men and women under arms who have been willing to die to protect that right that ensures it.  And how do you think we fund a national defense?

You are doing this over the internet, an apparatus that exists solely because the government funded academic research to lead to this type of network to assure unbroken communications in the event of a nuclear war severing several communication avenues.

You can drive to B&J next weekend to hang out with me and the guys, I'll buy you a cup of coffee.  BUT, you're going to have to drive on the roads paid for with tax dollars.

The list goes on and on.  The fact of the matter is the private sector is not always the best answer.  Some services are so specialized that you can not hand it off to a private firm either because it is too expensive (non-profit generating) or you don't want to risk something so important falling into the hands of a monopoly.

Could you imagine if private companies controlled all the roads.  What if every bridge you crossed there was a toll, every spot on a street had a meter or required a permit, access to the roads taking you to work required a $100 a month permit?

Its easy to rant, and it is more than justified to be infuriated by government waste.  There are few people who despise it more than me because I see it first hand and beat my head against the wall trying to stop it where I can.  The system ain't perfect, it needs a lot of work, but it is as just and equitable system as the world has likely ever known.  Sure, you can point to the indians and say they took according to their needs and gave according to their ability and nobody overtaxed them... fact is we aren't a couple thousand people in a tribe, we are 260 million Americans and God knows how many illegals.

Anyway, I am a complete contradiction in terms.  I am an anti-tax, small government, freedom loving conservative who is in many ways a libertarian at heart.  I am also a consultant to the very system you hate.  The difference is I'm trying to go that long and frustrating 20 year route that you ridiculed in order to change things.  Eight years in, not sure what good I've done.  But for me the answer is not taking a shot anyone.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 10:44:24 AM EDT
HiramRanger,  Good post!  I agree with alot of what you said, but I also agree alot with BillStClair said as well.  For example, you said  

Could you imagine if private companies controlled all the roads. What if every bridge you crossed there was a toll, every spot on a street had a meter or required a permit, access to the roads taking you to work required a $100 a month permit?
 

The State of North Carolina wants to put toll booth up and down I-95.  I-95 which was paid for with mine (and your) taxes.  Now they want me (us) to pay to use what I (we) have already paid for?  WTF!!  Now that's just theft, plain and simple!



    Vulcan94
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 11:12:13 AM EDT
Vulcan, its the same with every pay highway run by states in the country that I'm aware of.  The tolls originally covered the bonding to construct the highways, and in theory they are supposed to be toll free after the bonds are retired.  However, the system requires extensive maintenance that politicians are sadly not willing to pay for with general fund expenditures.  That is the true crime, not that the road use is charged a fee (I actually support that, only those who use the resource pay for it).  The real shame is the elected officials are spending out of control, democrats AND republicans.

I don't have all the answers, but I have a good idea where to start and that is not with the crosshairs in play.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 2:43:29 PM EDT
Thank you, Hiram, for spending the time to create a well-reasoned response. I wish you luck in your twenty year task to gradually change the state. I have nowhere near the patience for that, nor do I expect to be on the planet for much more than twenty years, even if I die of old age, which I sadly doubt.

Your opinion that some things require tax-supported government funding is a common one. I do not share it. $100 a month for access to the private roads I would need to drive to work in a truly free society would be a great bargain. I would pay it gladly. I would also be able to send both of my kids to excellent private schools, an order of magnitude better than the public school my son is currently attending, were it not for the tax burden hanging around my neck.

Yes, some of our current computer technology was partially funded by government projects, but most of it was done by companies in the private sector, funded by private sector sales. Advancement was as quick as it was because the computer industry was almost untouched by government regulation. The internet has grown as fast as it has because it has been untaxed.

In my opinion, if it weren't for the taxation and regulation burden, many of us would be living today on a terraformed Mars. And all of us would have an effective income of 8 times what we currently earn, without working any more than we currently do. That's one doubling for not having to pay your own tax, another doubling for the vendors not having to pay tax, and a third doubling for eliminating the useless regulations. The free market provides all the regulation we'll ever need.

And even if I did think that taxation was the only effective way to fund the roads and the schools and the police and the army, I would still not agree to it. Theft is immoral. Theft is wrong. No matter what the reason. I want a society in which all human interaction is voluntary. This will not happen by changing the current forms. They must end.

But mine is not a popular opinion, except amongst a small cadre of market anarchists. Wish it weren't so.
Link Posted: 12/14/2003 3:27:46 PM EDT
Bill, this is a debate I can wrap my mind around... well reasoned, civil and free of the belligerence so common in Internet debates.

OK, I'll pay.  Let's assume we go your route.  Let's assume I buy into all of your premises, which I do not.  But let's assume do for arguments sake.

Many of the services provided by government could be privatized.  Please explain how you privatize the police and criminal justice functions of society as the Constitution is only binding on the government and not private individuals or organizations?  The police and courts are limited in how they act by the constitution, what limits would there be on private police departments, courts, prisons?  Who would enforce any regulations to ensure your freedoms and rights are protected?

How do you provide for the common defense?  How do you support a standing army?  Do you allow corporations to build standing armies?  How do they finance it?  Do they assess a national defense fee against every citizen?  What if the vast majority of people refuse to pay?  What is to stop them from turning their arms against society as a whole and becoming tyrannical?  And if you yield to this being one province of government that you will support, how do you fund it as you have abolished the tax system.

I'm looking forward to your response.
Link Posted: 12/15/2003 7:23:59 AM EDT
I don't have time for a long response right now. Maybe tonight or in a day or two.

I have read credible theories on private police and courts, run primarily by insurance companies. There is a new book out on private military, but I haven't read it yet.

www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?control=1356

Of course these are all ideas. Except in Somalia, and some now defunct communities in Iceland and Scotland, anarchist societies haven't been tried very much. I consider market anarchism to be the next experiment in "government" to try, now that the U.S. constitutional republic experiment has failed. And no, I don't expect many of you to agree with me that it HAS failed.
Link Posted: 12/15/2003 11:53:00 AM EDT
Well, boys and girls. Expect the burden of taxation to increase wherever Government, both local, state, and federal, can get away with it. It is unavoidable. With the greying of our society, and all the social programs associated with same, taxes are gonna go up. Worse, regardless of which party is in office, government continues to bloat.

In my county, Medicaid/Medicare expenses are huge and increasing. The funds for this leviathan is largely generated by property taxes (yeah, you home owners already know this). I find it ironic that many of the programs demanded by the elderly could eventually force many of them out of their homes.

Bill, don't mind Hiram. I fear he has already been corrupted by the beast known as ALBANY

And you pacifists take heart, I think the system will collapse under it's own weight before Clair Wolfe's eloquent words come into play...We won't have to shoot tax collectors (as appealing a thought as that may be!), we'll be too busy with rampaging, starving  looters from the burning cities
Link Posted: 12/15/2003 12:07:00 PM EDT
i'd like to say a few things that i think is on the minds of gunowners and taxpayers.a lot of times gunowners are the poeple that believe we are the one defending freedom and the others are just sheeple blindly going to whereever they are ordered. there is some truth to that.
on the subject of taxes we see that certain people appear to be getrting a free ride from the system(awful word couldnt find a better one)and many times we look at the wastes and excesses and feel we are not getting our due. there are many times that we need to make ends meet and they wont  because of the tax burden.

we pay taxes and fees for services watch them be mismanaged and people sued by the state ag, it was our money but we dont get the return on a suit for wrongdoing ,the state does.the roads we pay taxes to have in good repair are usually in lousy shape with the state or municipality putting off work until its dangerously necessary or too late and theyre paying an award for a lawsuit.

the worst part of the social contract is that when we elect people to represent us ,they usually dont they represent whomever will put more money in their reelection chest or trade some lulu for it.

yes i vote and every time i vote i feel like i need to take a shower afterwards, i never feel like the republican party is any different than the democrats in nys(they really arent they move from one side to the other depending on where theres room on the ballot).

im not a big fan of thoose who want to shoot it out with the batfe on their doorstep. suicide by cop is dumb but id really love to see a better method than our current electoral system where 20% vote
Link Posted: 12/15/2003 4:48:56 PM EDT
While taxes are needed to some degree, so is responsible spending. This will upset state employees, but it'd be nice for them to pay part of their health insurance premiums and get taxed on their retirement like private sector employees have to.
Roads, military, fire fighters, police and some medical infrastructure such as building hospitals and providing ambulance service I have no problem with. But too much spending is done on unneeded social programs and simple waste.
Link Posted: 12/15/2003 6:23:09 PM EDT
State employees get cheaper health benefits for the following reason:

There are a couple hundred thousand members of the health plan provided by the state and local governments.  That means more negotiating power with the insurance companies.

State employees are paid less than private sector counterparts.  I am a public servant, not a civil servant.  I have no job security other than my performance.  I also have not had a pay raise in 4 1/2 years, and none in sight.

State employees pay state taxes on their retirement at time of contribution, thus the returns are not taxable - kind of like certain IRA's.  State employees pay federal taxes on their retirement benefits when they receive them.  Look on your NYS personal income tax return, there is a line for state employees to add their 414-H contribution which is the money that comes out of our checks into the retirement plan.  The reason it is added in on the NYS PIT form is because NYS bases its adjusted gross income on the federal AGI which does not tax retirement contributions because it taxes the benefits down the road.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 2:26:35 AM EDT
I was intending to write more about private police, courts, and military, but Brad Edmonds has done it for me. I know it's a bit of a cop out to ask you to go somewhere else, but he's a lot more of an expert at this than I. I've read enough to convince me that getting rid of the state is worthwhile, but I'm not great at writing about it.

Why Abolishing Government Would Not Bring Chaos

I think his title is a little off. We're not going to get rid of government. That's impossible. Wherever two people have to live together, politics arises and some sort of government is necessary. But we can get rid of the state's monopoly on government services within a geographical area and let the market work its magic.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 4:01:25 PM EDT

"Social Contract" == Socialism.

You meet anyone talking about a "Socail contract" they are merely trying to sell you socialism.  

The basic idea of socialism is that "we all owe others for our success" or put more specifically-- "the state owns you body and soul".   Or, in propaganda terms "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

In other words, Hiram endorses taxation because he feels he needs whatever subsidy he's getting from the government.

He wants to put a gun to Bill St. Clairs head (LITERALLY) to take that money.  He doesn't care if he has to do it or if he hires goons to do it.  As far as he's concerned, its moral, because *AS A SOCIALIST* he thinks Bill owes him the money.

Bill, on the other hand, says that anyone who pulls a gun on him puts his own life in jeapardy when he does so.

And Hiram, natually, hearing that he, or his goons might be theratened, tells bill he better watch his mouth or Bill will be silenced on this forum.

THAT'S what just happened here.

The difference is Hiram doesn't want to be honest about the fact that he's a socialist, or the fact that he advocate violence gainst Bill.

He just wants to pretend that Bill is the violent one for advocating self defense.

I think Bill is right to defend his life and his property with force-- especially when others, such as Hiram, advocate that it be taken by force.  And what are taxes other than forced robbery?

Are taxes payment for services?  OF course not!  IF they were, the government would merely charge you when you use their services... and you'd be able to go somewhere else and hire the same service from a competitor.  But the government doesn't liek that-- because the government knows they charge too much and deliver too little.  

For instance, wher I live, in a major metropolitan area, we don't have fire protection.  Sure, they will show up eventually, after an hour or so, after the house is mostly destroyed.  But we still are forced to pay taxes to provide that "Service.".

IF taxes were merely charging us for services we use, they would actually provide the service in question... or let us go to someone else to provide that service.  After all, that is the nature of capitalism.

But that's not what taxes are.  Taxes are an attempt to justify theft by some group of people of resources from the larger group of people.  Such theft is not a capitalist solution-- its the socialist solution.

So don't give me no "Social contract".... you claim Bill owes you money and you have the right to take it by force.

When bill tells you that you take your life at risk in doing so, he's not threatening you-- he's promising to defend himself.

Hiram should have his account reviewed for advocating violent theft.
Link Posted: 12/16/2003 4:07:17 PM EDT

Oh, and Government did not produce computer technology.  Government holds it back.

IF it werent' for the government, the computer industry would still be healthy... but instead, the government fiddled with the economy and destroyed the tech sector (for the time being.)...  

You know what causes booms and busts?  Fiat money.  The Federal Reserve.  If we were on the gold stanard, our money would mean something and our economy would be much healthier, and that computer Bill is using would be much more advanced.

But, this gets back to taxation-- you can't print more gold.  So what do you do when your president has a pentchant for invading countries and wants to buy his re-election with more welfare?  Print more money!

And that's just what they are doing.

Gold is at $400 an ounce... the cost of gold has not gone up, but the value of the dollar has, taking more to make an ounce of gold.  The price of gold in euros has declined a bit this year.

AT the same time, the dow is over 10,000.  Why?  Well, people think its because we have a recovery.  But if we do, why is gold so high?

The reason its over 10,000 is the value of that $10,000 has GONE DOWN.  Thus for the DOW to measure the same sized economy, the number gets higher.

When gold is going one way and the DOW the other, that's economic slowdown.  When the dow is up and gold is down, that's a robust economy.

But when both are up, you should know what's happening: You're getting ripped off because the government is printing money as fast as it can.

Link Posted: 12/16/2003 6:05:22 PM EDT
Don, put your tinfoil hate back on buddy...

The Social Contract is a concept that was proposed by the likes of great Western philosophers hundreds of years ago... you know... Locke, Rosseau. Hobbes, Montesque.  The thinkers who were of the greatest influence on our founding fathers.

I'm a capitalist, but I recognize that there are certain services that the market can not provide - national defense being the prime example.  It is simply not financially tenable to turn needed services that do not prodce a profit, and hence do not provide an incentive for private industry, over to entites other then the government.

But go ahead, call me a socialist... hell that's kind of tame compared to what I am used to.

And for the record, Bill can call me whatever he likes.  He can not however advocate violence against anybody on this board, and that goes for everyone else as well.
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 3:07:01 AM EDT
But it's OK to advocate that the police use violence against me if I refuse to pay my taxes?
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 4:56:47 AM EDT
No Bill, I don't recall advocating that they use violence.  It is ok for them to enforce duly enacted laws that the courts have ruled constitutional.  If you oppose their efforts by trying to use violence against them, they will act in kind.  You are the one who is talking about shooting them.  I have been present at seizures over the years and I can tell you that the agents hated doing it, tried all other methods to collect the tax without having to seize property, and when it came time for the seizure they acted in far more courteous of a manner then I likely would have.  They are greeted with insults, threats and all other kinds of aggression and intimidation.  Not once did I ever see them act in a violent or belligerent manner in return.

Now, the one case where I know an agent used force was the result of a raid pursuant to a search warrant and the agent was assaulted by the store owner.  The agent responded in subduing the assailant, and only to the extent needed to arrest him.
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 5:42:08 AM EDT
Getting back to the thread topic (I think I remember what that was), a usually well-informed friend has heard this as well, but he heard it is simply another internet rumour.

Anyone have a firm answer on this yet, or will I have to be extra creative this spring?
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 5:43:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/17/2003 5:44:09 AM EDT by BillStClair]
And that's where the religious training comes in. If I were to go to somebody's house and demand that they pay me money or I would take them away and lock them in a cage, it would, rightfully, be called assault and, were I to succesfully lock them up, kidnapping. When the police do it, it's called "enforcing the law", because so many of us  have been inculcated from birth in the religion called "the state" and "the rule of law".

Now I don't mind the rule of law as far as the common law goes. That makes perfect sense. It says that you own your body and your stuff and anyone who would try to damage or take either is a criminal against whom you have the right to defend yourself, with as much force as necessary. The only difference between my viewpoint and yours is that in my mind the police are as subject to the common law as everybody else, so if they come to my house to "enforce" the theft of my property, I am justified in defending myself. Just because 51% or our "representatives" vote to steal my money doesn't magically transform it into something other than theft.

But this is a religious argument, and nobody ever changes their mind in a religious argument.
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 5:52:10 AM EDT
Fair enough Bill, we can agree to disagree.
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 5:54:07 AM EDT
Gerry, confirmed, its line 56 of the IT-201 form.  If you need to obtain forms or instructions or have questions on partial year filing - whatever your circumstances are since the move - please call 1-800-CALL-TAX and a representative will be able to fax you any forms or instructions you need.
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 5:58:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/17/2003 5:58:56 AM EDT by BillStClair]
As for the question that started this thread, it's no internet rumor.

www.tax.state.ny.us/pdf/memos/sales/m03_3s.pdf contains a summary of the new tax law for 2003. The section laballed "Compensating Use Tax Line on Personal Income Tax Return" says:

A law was enacted to require the Tax Department to include a line or lines on the New York State personal income tax returns in order to enable taxpayers to report and pay unpaid state and local compensating use taxes with their income tax returns. These lines will be added to personal income tax returns for income tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2003, to allow taxpayers to pay both sales and use taxes.

The law also requires the Tax Department to inform taxpayers of their legal requirements to remit such unpaid state and local taxes when they make purchases outside of New York State, whether in person or by remote means such as the Internet, mail-order and catalog sales.

As a result of this amendment, individuals, estates and trusts which are not registered sales tax vendors may report and pay on their personal income tax returns any unpaid state and local sales and compensating use taxes due for the year covered by the income tax return. The sales and use tax must be paid on or before the due date of the income tax return without regard to filing extensions.

(See Part R3 of Chapter 62 of the Laws of 2003.)


Forms are available at www.tax.state.ny.us/Forms/income_fullyear_forms.htm. "Sales or use tax" is line 56 of form  IT-201.

Page 36 of the IT-201 instructions says:

For general information on paying sales and se taxes, see Information on paying sales and use taxes on your income tax return on pages 4 and 5. To determine if you owe sales or use tax, continue with these instructions.

Complete the Computation of total sales or use tax due section below, using the Sales and use tax chart and any of Worksheets 1, 2, and 3, beginning on page 37 that apply.

These instructions offer two ways to compute your sales and use taxes for nonbusiness-related purchases of individual items or services costing less than $1,000 each, excluding shipping and handling. For these purchases, you may elect to use the Exact Calculation Method on Worksheet 1 on page 37 or the Sales and use tax chart below to determine your tax due. The Sales and use tax chart is a simple, time-saving method to use to compute your sales or use tax on individual items or services costing less than $1,000 each. However, you may not use the Sales and use tax chart for business-related purchases or for royalty activity or rental real estate activity-related purchases, regardless f the amount. You must use the Exact Calculation Method on Worksheet 3 on page 38 to calculate your tax on these purchases.

Note: For purposes of the sales or use tax line instructions, the word tax will be used to refer to either the sales tax or the use tax, or both.


The table is as follows:

Sales and use tax chart
(for line 1 computation only)
If your federal
adjusted gross
income (line 18) is: Tax amount
up to $15,000* ............... $6
$15,001 - $30,000 ......... $18
$30,001 - $50,000 ......... $26
$50,001 - $75,000 ......... $34
$75,001 - $100,000 ....... $43
$100,001 - $150,000 ..... $54
$150,001 - $200,000 ..... $69
$200,001 and greater .... .0345% (.000345) of income, or
$200, whichever
amount is smaller



Link Posted: 12/17/2003 5:59:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:
Fair enough Bill, we can agree to disagree.


Agreed.
Link Posted: 12/17/2003 6:04:02 AM EDT
After looking at the chart, I find it hard to consider it worth much effort to avoid an extra $50 or less of tax. Certainly not worth shooting anyone over. One also wonders how much effort the state will consider it worth to chase down people who write 0 on that line.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top