Comments on: Human Greed…

By: Independent

Independent — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 23:09:40 +0000

Just to clarify, I was talking about corporate welfare in general. I know absolutely nothing about vehicles or the particular tax law in question.

By: SCSIwuzzy

SCSIwuzzy — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 22:06:19 +0000

Zorro,
You have to prove that the vehicle is used for business at least 51% of the time to claim any deduction under article 179. AND you must have business income of greater than the deduction that year AND it isn’t compatible with all other deductions.
If there are people tooling around in Hummers in Chicago in such great numbers, than tax fraud must be nearly as bad a vote fraud out there. I’ll be there in Sept, so I’ll keep an eye out for the massive invasion.
So what is your big complaint? Emissions, or somebody isn’t paying as much in taxes as you think they should? Is it corporations, or small biz owners (since a company only has to make $500k to be ineligble. that rules out the large players) that have you riled up? If you aren’t one of those 2, you aren’t elliglble for 179. If they are filing it anywy, I pity them if the IRS pulls their file.

By: Independent

Independent — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 21:51:25 +0000

Zorro wrote, “It makes no sense that these people should get a tax-break for such a luxury item.” I agree wholeheartedly. Corporate welfare is just as responsible for ripping off the tax-payers and sending our budget out of control as redundant and morally defeating social programs. Check out this site if you don’t care about ruining your dinner.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/bg1840.cfm

It would seem some Americans have followed the example of our greedy government. In creating a ravenous monster called government, both parties are to blame.

By: Zorro

Zorro — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:41:06 +0000

Businesses using heavy vehicles for heavy use is not really the issue…the issue is people buying Hummers and the like, partially because they can get a big deduction, and just crusin’ around town. It makes no sense that these people should get a tax-break for such a luxury item.

I don’t know where you live, but in cities like Chicago this is happening a lot.

By: SCSIwuzzy

SCSIwuzzy — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 16:11:40 +0000

BTW, LB you can use section 179 for your new ind. business as well, if you aren’t already.

By: SCSIwuzzy

SCSIwuzzy — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 16:10:47 +0000

So now you’re lowering the bar of your complaint? When your 8600 strawman got pummeled, you need to move to 6000? And instead of fuel econo standards, now it’s tax breaks that have your shorts holed up in box canyon?
Please, notice, where I said that most large vehicles are commercial or farm use. These tax cuts, your own quote says it is a business deduction, not a personal one.
That 100,000 deduction? That is for the entire company, the entire year, and for all heavy business equipment. Vehicles over 3 tons qualify, but so do other things.
Also, A taxpayer’s annual deduction can’t exceed that year’s aggregate net business taxable income from all sources (calculated before the writeoff).
Notice the ALL sources part.
Also:
There also is a limit on the annual total of deductible property. If the cost of qualifying Section 179 property you put into service in a single tax year (2003 through 2005) now exceeds $400,000 then you can’t take the full deduction.
For every dollar above $400,000 that a business owner spends on eligible property, he loses a dollar in deductions. For example, the manufacturer completely re-equipped his facility at a cost of $407,000. This is $7,000 more than allowed, so he must reduce his eligible deductible limit to $93,000: $100,000 minus $7,000.

For a large company, what does this mean? It means that little if any tax burden is lifted. For a small company, like a garage owner who buys a new tow truck or hydraulic lift? It is the difference between employing a worker or upgrading their equipment, at best. At worst, it can be the difference between staying in business or closing their doors.
Class, dismissed.

My data, from personal exp and selfemployedweb.com

By: Zorro

Zorro — Thu, 18 Aug 2005 14:48:21 +0000

Jimbo, SCSI,

the tax breaks start at 6,000 pounds…or didn’t you catch that?

By: Jimbo

Jimbo — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 23:34:37 +0000

Man, Iâ€™m glad you got me on that oneâ€¦
The information I found (automotive.com) says that the 2005 Expedition comes in at 5100 pounds. I suspect that your information on the vehicle’s weight is very highly flawed. Additionally, even (if by some fluke) it is not, you’ve provided a whopping three examples, out of the 500 cars sold in the United States, of cars that exceed 8500 pounds. I hardly consider that overwhelming evidence of Big Oil in Bush’s pocket.

Also, you apparently find no contradiction whatsoever in berating Bush for the state of the economy, and then crying foul when he enacts a tax break to help businesses. Sigh.

By: SCSIwuzzy

SCSIwuzzy — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:52:58 +0000

Wow, you found 3 examples, 2 of which Dave noted.
Still, most of the 8600 pound vehicles are commercial or farm market.

By: Zorro

Zorro — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 16:02:52 +0000

Good job calling Zorro out on that one, Dave.

2005 Ford Excursion 4×4 Eddie Bauer 6.0L
Gross Weight 9200 lbs.

2006 Hummer H1 Alpha Open Top 4 Door
Gross Weight 10300 lbs.

2006 Hummer H2 SUV Sport Utility
Gross Weight 8600 lbs.

http://www.autoweb.com/content/research/index.cfm?id=13171;TAWEB

and actually, the tax breaks start at 6,000 lbs:

Tax Breaks

When businesses purchase an SUV (or other light truck) over 6,000 lbs., they can, thanks to the new Bush tax package, immediately deduct up to $100,000 of the vehicleâ€™s price from their taxable income.
These special interest tax breaks do not preclude businesses from taking the standard 20 percent deduction annually over five years.

Above 8,500 lbs., SUVs are also exempt from:

Fuel Economy Standards
Vehicles need not even comply with the extremely low federal fuel economy standards for light trucks, nor must they report production numbers, miles-per-gallon, or total sales to regulatory agencies.

Emissions Standards
Currently all vehicles over 8,500 lbs are treated as medium duty passenger vehicles, which have significantly more lax emission requirements. Under EPA’s Tier 2 rules, medium duty passenger vehicles (between 8,500 and 10,000 pounds) will be phased into the passenger vehicle emission requirements over time. Light trucks, as classified by EPA, also are permitted to emit more pollutants than cars, an exemption also currently scheduled to be phased out.
Child Restraint Anchorage Systems

Requirements do not apply to vehicles greater than 8,500 lbs., which need not install anchorage systems to accommodate child restraints.

http://www.citizen.org/autosafety/suvsafety/reg_loops/index.cfm

Man, I’m glad you got me on that one…

By: Renee

Renee — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 12:37:58 +0000

Totally stomach turning this is.

Covetousness and Greed, no other way to call it.

By: SCSIwuzzy

SCSIwuzzy — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 12:21:09 +0000

#8 What if you tossed in Odub and Rosie O’Donnel?
I know my Ford pickemup has a lower curb weight 8,500, and it’s no car by any definition.

By: jan brauner

jan brauner — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:32:22 +0000

Gotta love the ‘poor County management’ excuse….

By: Jimbo

Jimbo — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 05:59:21 +0000

Good job calling Zorro out on that one, Dave. There are few things in life more satisfying than setting straight a person who throws out a meaningless statistic and thinks it proves something.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 05:25:15 +0000

what’s amazing, Zorro, is that you think any car sold in America today weighs 8500 pounds.

A fully loaded Escalade is barely over 5000.

I can’t think of any model, except maybe the H1 Hummer (which doesn’t seem to be for sale anymore), that could come CLOSE to 8500 pounds. Even the Ford Excursion, definitely no longer for sale, doesn’t weigh that much. Like LD said in her story that you pasted in here, the exemption is for small business and agriculture, you know, trucks and farm equipment.

You couldn’t even get an Escalade to 8500 pounds if you had Jerrold Nadler driving and Ted Kennedy drinking in the back seat.