Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 5, 2017 11:44:14 GMT -5
OK, I'll bite. "Government doesn't actually exist." This is like saying money doesn't actually exist or family doesn't really exist. Yes it's true that government in its most abstract form isn't a tangible thing. It's a structure. It's a collection of laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority that grant order and structure to human society. But it's also the difference between a useless heap of gears, axles, and pistons, and a working car. Government and structure are utterly indispensable to prosperity. They're the only reason we live in skyscrapers eating juicy cheeseburgers instead of scrapping over rats in caves. Family is a form of government. Do you understand that? Most religions, including Christianity, are about government. Not necessarily governments of man, but templates showing what government should and will ultimately be like. Businesses are a form of government. Housing co-ops are a form of government. Militias and armed rebellions are a form of government and cannot exist without it. So when you're talking about "government" disappearing here, what specific form(s) of government are you talking about? National government? State? City? Family? Are you predicting we'll devolve into complete anarchy and wind up like the apes? I did that on purpose, and your response was wonderful. Excellent lead in, thank you. Government is a gun to the head. Simple as that- which means, the answer to your question is: Yes. Taxation is theft. You can leave your family, your church, your neighborhood, or any other organization because these constructs, these structures- with their 'laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority' are all VOLUNTARY. We can discuss the morality and ethics of abandoning your family, or the benefits of remaining part of your church, or community-- but government is, at it's core, simply force. And the belief that government is essential is simply this: That just the right amount of violence used by just the right people in just the right way can perfect society. As you know, force--the gun to the head--is the power from which all other governmental power flows. Our society is based on laws, ordinances, protocols, etc., as you've acknowledged. "Do not take what is not yours," for example. These laws are not voluntary. Any system of government, from a family all the way up to a nation, has systems in place to compel adherence. The family, for example, can exert formidable influence, especially when it comes to elders chastening children. This includes everything from corporal punishment to confinement (curfew, grounding) to deprivation of privileges and property. Today we send utterly incorrigible children to prisons and juvenile detention centers for lives "in the system". In ancient Israel, parents had the right to accuse their lawless children in front of the congregation and put them to death. Rebellion and lawlessness of that magnitude was considered a sin as grave as rape or murder, and the family was the entity responsible for judging it. In many nations around the world--India, Mongolia, Polynesia, Pakistan, China, to name a few--families and communities still retain this kind of governmental authority to varying degrees. In some cases, families and communities still put people to death. This is government at a local level. In western society, abundant wealth has permitted citizens to delegate (cede, some might say) nearly all of the authority to judge and to punish to massive overriding governments. Rather than being judged by his family, a young thug may be judged by rival gangs, by armed men defending their property, by police officers, by prison inmates, and by criminal court judges. The law--"Do not take what is not yours"--is the same. The necessity of compliance is the same. The threat of grave, even fatal punishment--the proverbial gun to the head--is still there. The difference is the entity with the authority to administer punishment and thus enforce the law. Hence I disagree with your assertion that federal government is fundamentally different from other forms of government by being the only government with the power to enforce laws with a gun to the head. It just so happens to be this way in our society because we've ceded all relevant authority to it over the centuries as a matter of ease and convenience. What you're lashing out against isn't government, or even force at the end of a gun, but the fact that one huge monolithic entity--the state--holds nearly all governmental power in 21st Century western society. It's an issue of centralization and concentration of power. With this in mind, are you predicting that monolithic central governments will cease to exist as people wise up to their worsening corruption in the 21st Century? I can't fathom why you would. The evidence we have points to society becoming ever more dependent on such governments, and more tolerant of them. Meanwhile the governments themselves are becoming progressively less tolerant of anyone or anything that defies their authority.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 6, 2017 5:07:03 GMT -5
congress has the authority to levy taxes, right? because, you know, that is the only item under discussion, here. The government actually has no legitimate claim to anything. It literally has no authority at all. it actually does, under the same article you cited. so, either you don't understand the constitution, or you are opting for a very liberal interpretation that is not in any sense, "originalist". so, the answer to the question is actually YES. congress DOES have that authority.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 6, 2017 5:12:28 GMT -5
OK, I'll bite. "Government doesn't actually exist." This is like saying money doesn't actually exist or family doesn't really exist. Yes it's true that government in its most abstract form isn't a tangible thing. It's a structure. It's a collection of laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority that grant order and structure to human society. But it's also the difference between a useless heap of gears, axles, and pistons, and a working car. Government and structure are utterly indispensable to prosperity. They're the only reason we live in skyscrapers eating juicy cheeseburgers instead of scrapping over rats in caves. Family is a form of government. Do you understand that? Most religions, including Christianity, are about government. Not necessarily governments of man, but templates showing what government should and will ultimately be like. Businesses are a form of government. Housing co-ops are a form of government. Militias and armed rebellions are a form of government and cannot exist without it. So when you're talking about "government" disappearing here, what specific form(s) of government are you talking about? National government? State? City? Family? Are you predicting we'll devolve into complete anarchy and wind up like the apes? I did that on purpose, and your response was wonderful. Excellent lead in, thank you. Government is a gun to the head. Simple as that- which means, the answer to your question is: Yes. Taxation is theft. You can leave your family, your church, your neighborhood, or any other organization because these constructs, these structures- with their 'laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority' are all VOLUNTARY. We can discuss the morality and ethics of abandoning your family, or the benefits of remaining part of your church, or community-- but government is, at it's core, simply force. And the belief that government is essential is simply this: That just the right amount of violence used by just the right people in just the right way can perfect society. everyone wants just the right amount of government. socialists think that the right amount is way more than we have, anarchists like you and me, way less. it then becomes a political issue. but NO MATTER WHAT, taxes are required for whatever government you want. it is just a matter of how much is necessary for what the MAJORITY want. at least, that is how it is supposed to work. i disagree with your last sentence, however. force is required to get those that refuse to obey the law to obey it, and if they refuse, yeah- jail. that is how it works in a society of laws. you don't like it? there are lots of African nations where you can take matters into your own hands, and live with the rather uncertain results. me? i prefer this, thanks.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 6, 2017 5:23:44 GMT -5
I did that on purpose, and your response was wonderful. Excellent lead in, thank you. Government is a gun to the head. Simple as that- which means, the answer to your question is: Yes. Taxation is theft. You can leave your family, your church, your neighborhood, or any other organization because these constructs, these structures- with their 'laws, ordinances, protocols, systems of authority' are all VOLUNTARY. We can discuss the morality and ethics of abandoning your family, or the benefits of remaining part of your church, or community-- but government is, at it's core, simply force. And the belief that government is essential is simply this: That just the right amount of violence used by just the right people in just the right way can perfect society. As you know, force--the gun to the head--is the power from which all other governmental power flows. Our society is based on laws, ordinances, protocols, etc., as you've acknowledged. "Do not take what is not yours," for example. These laws are not voluntary. Any system of government, from a family all the way up to a nation, has systems in place to compel adherence. The family, for example, can exert formidable influence, especially when it comes to elders chastening children. This includes everything from corporal punishment to confinement (curfew, grounding) to deprivation of privileges and property. Today we send utterly incorrigible children to prisons and juvenile detention centers for lives "in the system". In ancient Israel, parents had the right to accuse their lawless children in front of the congregation and put them to death. Rebellion and lawlessness of that magnitude was considered a sin as grave as rape or murder, and the family was the entity responsible for judging it. In many nations around the world--India, Mongolia, Polynesia, Pakistan, China, to name a few--families and communities still retain this kind of governmental authority to varying degrees. In some cases, families and communities still put people to death. This is government at a local level. In western society, abundant wealth has permitted citizens to delegate (cede, some might say) nearly all of the authority to judge and to punish to massive overriding governments. Rather than being judged by his family, a young thug may be judged by rival gangs, by armed men defending their property, by police officers, by prison inmates, and by criminal court judges. The law--"Do not take what is not yours"--is the same. The necessity of compliance is the same. The threat of grave, even fatal punishment--the proverbial gun to the head--is still there. The difference is the entity with the authority to administer punishment and thus enforce the law. Hence I disagree with your assertion that federal government is fundamentally different from other forms of government by being the only government with the power to enforce laws with a gun to the head. It just so happens to be this way in our society because we've ceded all relevant authority to it over the centuries as a matter of ease and convenience. What you're lashing out against isn't government, or even force at the end of a gun, but the fact that one huge monolithic entity--the state--holds nearly all governmental power in 21st Century western society. It's an issue of centralization and concentration of power. With this in mind, are you predicting that monolithic central governments will cease to exist as people wise up to their worsening corruption in the 21st Century? I can't fathom why you would. The evidence we have points to society becoming ever more dependent on such governments, and more tolerant of them. Meanwhile the governments themselves are becoming progressively less tolerant of anyone or anything that defies their authority. Virgil- this is a very coherent and rational response to a fairly incoherent position. i just wanted to give you a kudo, here. as i rarely do so with ANYONE here, let alone you, i am sure it will be appreciated. as Chomsky says, all systems of authority should be challenged for legitimacy- but some ARE legitimate: for example, the power relations between parent and child. it is the RESPONSIBILITY of citizens, particularly those that are informed, to present those challenges wherever they are seen, and do so until illegitimate authority is dismantled. and a great deal of authority IS illegitimate. it only exists because opportunistic elites took privileges when nobody was looking, or when they had the ability to do so without it being questioned. taxation is not theft. it is the power of representative government to pay for that representation, and the ability to enforce the laws created of, by, and for the people.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on May 6, 2017 8:47:53 GMT -5
It is not up to the giver to determine the taxability of the tip/gift. There is no loophole, because there is no hole. Every IRS auditor who reviewed the evidence in the story would determine the amount in question to be a tip and therefore taxable as any other tip. Except the only "evidence" in this case (the receipt) shows $0 for the tip. So there is nothing for the IRS to question. If an audit occurred, the receipt would show no tip.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on May 6, 2017 8:49:05 GMT -5
My mom had a great way for deducing whether or not something was yours, the alternative being- you stole it: Was it yours to begin with, or did someone willingly give it to you? If not, you stole it. I do not willingly pay my taxes. I pay my taxes because if I don't, the government will seize my assets, or put me into prison- and if I resist, they will kill me. I pay taxes for NO OTHER REASON. It is armed robbery. LOL. This is ridiculous. This is like saying I don't "willingly" pay for clothes, but since the store wouldn't let me have them for free THEY STOLE MY MONEY. Also - "armed" robbery? really? The level of hyperbole never ceases to amaze me. No one is threatening to kill you for not paying taxes. Fines? sure. jail? Maybe. Bodily harm? Give me an f'ing break. Because jail is such a nice, peaceful place where no one gets harmed? Yes...give us all a f'ing break.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on May 6, 2017 8:54:59 GMT -5
The government actually has no legitimate claim to anything. It literally has no authority at all. it actually does, under the same article you cited. so, either you don't understand the constitution, or you are opting for a very liberal interpretation that is not in any sense, "originalist". so, the answer to the question is actually YES. congress DOES have that authority. I thought the constitution was deemed to be a "living document" by the left, so that we did not actually have to follow it anymore? (Or is it we don't have to follow what the left doesn't like?)
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 7, 2017 9:13:20 GMT -5
it actually does, under the same article you cited. so, either you don't understand the constitution, or you are opting for a very liberal interpretation that is not in any sense, "originalist". so, the answer to the question is actually YES. congress DOES have that authority. I thought the constitution was deemed to be a "living document" by the left, so that we did not actually have to follow it anymore? (Or is it we don't have to follow what the left doesn't like?) neither Paul nor i are members of "the left", so i presume this was a rhetorical remark.
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,353
|
Post by ArchietheDragon on May 8, 2017 14:21:42 GMT -5
It is not up to the giver to determine the taxability of the tip/gift. There is no loophole, because there is no hole. Every IRS auditor who reviewed the evidence in the story would determine the amount in question to be a tip and therefore taxable as any other tip. Except the only "evidence" in this case (the receipt) shows $0 for the tip. So there is nothing for the IRS to question. If an audit occurred, the receipt would show no tip. Not true. The evidence in the case is the receipt with no tip, and a note along with cash which was presumably left at the table, or handed to the wait staff. Making the case that this is truly a gift and should be handled as such for tax purposes is different than just trying to hid cash tips from the IRS.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,478
|
Post by billisonboard on May 8, 2017 14:33:28 GMT -5
Except the only "evidence" in this case (the receipt) shows $0 for the tip. So there is nothing for the IRS to question. If an audit occurred, the receipt would show no tip. Not true. The evidence in the case is the receipt with no tip, and a note along with cash which was presumably left at the table, or handed to the wait staff. Making the case that this is truly a gift and should be handled as such for tax purposes is different than just trying to hid cash tips from the IRS. The note does not have to be saved and the cash is long spent. Where there is evidence is that the statement "taxation is theft" is on the receipt. If I were on the jury I would say, "Assumption of a 10% cash tip is reasonable".
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,353
|
Post by ArchietheDragon on May 8, 2017 14:34:20 GMT -5
Not true. The evidence in the case is the receipt with no tip, and a note along with cash which was presumably left at the table, or handed to the wait staff. Making the case that this is truly a gift and should be handled as such for tax purposes is different than just trying to hid cash tips from the IRS. The note does not have to be saved and the cash is long spent. Where there is evidence is that the statement "taxation is theft" is on the receipt. If I were on the jury I would say, "Assumption of a 10% cash tip is reasonable". correct.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 8, 2017 18:13:13 GMT -5
Not true. The evidence in the case is the receipt with no tip, and a note along with cash which was presumably left at the table, or handed to the wait staff. Making the case that this is truly a gift and should be handled as such for tax purposes is different than just trying to hid cash tips from the IRS. The note does not have to be saved and the cash is long spent. Where there is evidence is that the statement "taxation is theft" is on the receipt. If I were on the jury I would say, "Assumption of a 10% cash tip is reasonable". That's if everybody tipped this way. If the average tip for non-gifters is 15%, then a third or more of patrons would have to be tax-is-thefters, and you'd never get anywhere near that. jkapp is right. There's nothing stopping servers from taking the tax-is-thefters up on the offer except their own morals and sense of civic duty.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on May 8, 2017 18:18:59 GMT -5
Not true. The evidence in the case is the receipt with no tip, and a note along with cash which was presumably left at the table, or handed to the wait staff. Making the case that this is truly a gift and should be handled as such for tax purposes is different than just trying to hid cash tips from the IRS. The note does not have to be saved and the cash is long spent. Where there is evidence is that the statement "taxation is theft" is on the receipt. If I were on the jury I would say, "Assumption of a 10% cash tip is reasonable". Darn, I thought tips were to be paid at a 17 to 20% pace. Fifteen percent was absolute bottom. I want a refund!
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,478
|
Post by billisonboard on May 8, 2017 18:26:30 GMT -5
The note does not have to be saved and the cash is long spent. Where there is evidence is that the statement "taxation is theft" is on the receipt. If I were on the jury I would say, "Assumption of a 10% cash tip is reasonable". That's if everybody tipped this way. If the average tip for non-gifters is 15%, then a third or more of patrons would have to be tax-is-thefters, and you'd never get anywhere near that. jkapp is right. There's nothing stopping servers from taking the tax-is-thefters up on the offer except their own morals and sense of civic duty. "(T)heir own morals and sense of civic duty" and tax auditors. My response was about "evidence" that something more took place than that "0" on the receipt. The "taxation is theft" on the receipt itself would be adequate circumstantial evidence for me to add $2.45 to the server's annual income.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,478
|
Post by billisonboard on May 8, 2017 18:31:34 GMT -5
The note does not have to be saved and the cash is long spent. Where there is evidence is that the statement "taxation is theft" is on the receipt. If I were on the jury I would say, "Assumption of a 10% cash tip is reasonable". Darn, I thought tips were to be paid at a 17 to 20% pace. Fifteen percent was absolute bottom. I want a refund! I was talking for tax purposes it is fair to assume only a ten percent tip rate when auditing for under-reporting of tips IM(not so)HO. Of course, I am not an IRS tax auditor and am not sure what they determine is "fair".
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on May 8, 2017 18:38:30 GMT -5
Except here in Washington, the IRS assumes a 7% tip for waitstaff. You can hide anything above that and keep it in a mason jar in the backyard like a Cambodian refugee circa 1985.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,161
|
Post by tallguy on May 8, 2017 18:43:02 GMT -5
The whole idea of tipping is stupid. A server today does no more real work than one thirty or forty years ago, but the demands are so much higher now. A 10% tip on a $25 dollar meal was sufficient then. The appropriate level of tip later migrated to 15% for years. All of a sudden, that was no longer sufficient. Why? Because people were told that 15% was too hard to calculate? Seriously?? Tipping now has to be 20%, with some places arguing for 25-30%? Screw them. Bad enough that meal prices have increased tremendously, does the tip percentage deserve to double or triple as well? No. I hate the system so much I now hate even going anywhere that I am expected to tip. And that is another thing: A tip should NEVER be required, expected, or even customary. Any system that depends on tipping is a stupid system.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on May 8, 2017 18:56:22 GMT -5
Go over to the Salmon House on Lk. Union. One of numerous Seattle restaurants that include the tip like in France. A continuing trend.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 8, 2017 21:47:01 GMT -5
That's if everybody tipped this way. If the average tip for non-gifters is 15%, then a third or more of patrons would have to be tax-is-thefters, and you'd never get anywhere near that. jkapp is right. There's nothing stopping servers from taking the tax-is-thefters up on the offer except their own morals and sense of civic duty. "(T)heir own morals and sense of civic duty" and tax auditors. My response was about "evidence" that something more took place than that "0" on the receipt. The "taxation is theft" on the receipt itself would be adequate circumstantial evidence for me to add $2.45 to the server's annual income. I have the same question as jkapp, then. Why on Earth would I keep the receipt claiming the tip is a gift? And what if I did keep it but I didn't follow the suggestion? You're going to tax me twice because of what some guy wrote on a receipt? If you're just saying that hypothetically, if I kept the receipt and admitted to the auditor that I followed the suggestion, I'd be looking at taxes owing, then I agree an audit could catch this.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,478
|
Post by billisonboard on May 8, 2017 23:43:20 GMT -5
"(T)heir own morals and sense of civic duty" and tax auditors. My response was about "evidence" that something more took place than that "0" on the receipt. The "taxation is theft" on the receipt itself would be adequate circumstantial evidence for me to add $2.45 to the server's annual income. I have the same question as jkapp, then. Why on Earth would I keep the receipt claiming the tip is a gift? And what if I did keep it but I didn't follow the suggestion? You're going to tax me twice because of what some guy wrote on a receipt? If you're just saying that hypothetically, if I kept the receipt and admitted to the auditor that I followed the suggestion, I'd be looking at taxes owing, then I agree an audit could catch this. Please take another look at the items shown in the OP. There is what is probably a napkin on which the idea it is a gift is written. There is the official credit/debit card receipt on which is written "taxation is theft" and the zero tip. Megan can easily toss the napkin but the business owner must retain the credit/debit card receipt in case the bill is disputed. I am saying that if Megan claimed that there was no cash tip left, I as an IRS auditor would call bullshit and add $2.47 to Megan's annual income based on the comment written on the official credit/debit card receipt. If written on the receipt was "Might I suggest you consider a different career" or "Your service sucked", I would accept that no cash tip was left. And, like a total fucking duh, if Megan reported the cash tip I wouldn't tax her twice. Now if Megan keep the napkin, brought it to the audit, threw it in my face, and said "Neener, Neerer, you can't tax this", I might tax her once for the tip and add a "You're a dumbshit" surcharge.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on May 9, 2017 2:04:39 GMT -5
I pay my tips in cash. Up to the server what they do with it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,131
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 9, 2017 8:07:05 GMT -5
I pay my tips in cash. Up to the server what they do with it. it's easier to engage in tax fraud if you run a cash business, but you can still get nailed for it.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,263
Member is Online
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on May 9, 2017 12:56:09 GMT -5
I'm a former server and I think the tip system is stupid. DH and I were discussing this the last time we went out. The server actively ignored us to the point where DH went up and complained at the register but he still tipped her 20%!
I asked why the heck he did that she should have gotten nothing. He told me he feels guilty because servers make so little he didn't want to cheat her.
I pointed out that for every person who does not tip there are a 100 like him who tip out of guilty/sense of duty. Which means nothing ever actually gets solved because by the end of the night it all averages out. Short of murdering a customer there isn't a whole lot that will get rid of a bad server.
I much preferred dining in Malayasia. My server was horrified at the idea of tipping, he said that you should take pride in your job and do a good job no matter what. He considered it blackmailing the customer because it's implied that unless you give me cash I will do a shitty job.
Hell half the people I ever worked with did a shitty job regardless. Going to where you get paid standard wage based on your actual performance would cause these people to move on. As it stands now they just have to get enough people like DH in their section and it doesn't matter.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 9, 2017 17:38:32 GMT -5
I have the same question as jkapp, then. Why on Earth would I keep the receipt claiming the tip is a gift? And what if I did keep it but I didn't follow the suggestion? You're going to tax me twice because of what some guy wrote on a receipt? If you're just saying that hypothetically, if I kept the receipt and admitted to the auditor that I followed the suggestion, I'd be looking at taxes owing, then I agree an audit could catch this. Please take another look at the items shown in the OP. There is what is probably a napkin on which the idea it is a gift is written. There is the official credit/debit card receipt on which is written "taxation is theft" and the zero tip. Megan can easily toss the napkin but the business owner must retain the credit/debit card receipt in case the bill is disputed. I am saying that if Megan claimed that there was no cash tip left, I as an IRS auditor would call bullshit and add $2.47 to Megan's annual income based on the comment written on the official credit/debit card receipt. If written on the receipt was "Might I suggest you consider a different career" or "Your service sucked", I would accept that no cash tip was left. And, like a total fucking duh, if Megan reported the cash tip I wouldn't tax her twice. Now if Megan keep the napkin, brought it to the audit, threw it in my face, and said "Neener, Neerer, you can't tax this", I might tax her once for the tip and add a "You're a dumbshit" surcharge. Okay... Do you have a record of every single tip paid to Megan? Of course not. Most tips are cash. On her IRS tax form, Megan reports $Y total in tips. You might be able to account for some of this total, but certainly not all of it. So you're scouring the credit card receipts the restaurant has kept, looking for wrongdoing, and lo you come across "taxation is theft". "Aha!" You cry. "I'm charging you on an extra $2.47 in income." "But that was just a silly suggestion," Megan cries. "I didn't follow it. The tip he paid me is included in the total I reported for my income; I've already been taxed on it." "Too bad for you," you say. "I can't verify that. Learn to get better customers." "But you're penalizing me for doing the right thing!" Megan insists. "It would be fairer if I'd not reported the tip." "Ha! You admit it!" "No. No, I just mean..." "Tax evader!" "No!" "Witch! Witchcraft, I say! She admitted it!"
|
|
wyouser
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:35:20 GMT -5
Posts: 12,126
|
Post by wyouser on May 9, 2017 17:52:02 GMT -5
Let's see, I give you a gallon of milk. You give me a gallon of gas plus 14 eggs in change. I eat the eggs and let the taxman have the shells....Oh, and the taxman can have all the methane gas he can collect from my cowpies......but...touch not my cow, we hang rustlers in these parts!!
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,478
|
Post by billisonboard on May 9, 2017 17:56:58 GMT -5
Please take another look at the items shown in the OP. There is what is probably a napkin on which the idea it is a gift is written. There is the official credit/debit card receipt on which is written "taxation is theft" and the zero tip. Megan can easily toss the napkin but the business owner must retain the credit/debit card receipt in case the bill is disputed. I am saying that if Megan claimed that there was no cash tip left, I as an IRS auditor would call bullshit and add $2.47 to Megan's annual income based on the comment written on the official credit/debit card receipt. If written on the receipt was "Might I suggest you consider a different career" or "Your service sucked", I would accept that no cash tip was left. And, like a total fucking duh, if Megan reported the cash tip I wouldn't tax her twice. Now if Megan keep the napkin, brought it to the audit, threw it in my face, and said "Neener, Neerer, you can't tax this", I might tax her once for the tip and add a "You're a dumbshit" surcharge. Okay... Do you have a record of every single tip paid to Megan? Of course not. Most tips are cash. On her IRS tax form, Megan reports $Y total in tips. You might be able to account for some of this total, but certainly not all of it. So you're scouring the credit card receipts the restaurant has kept, looking for wrongdoing, and lo you come across "taxation is theft". "Aha!" You cry. "I'm charging you on an extra $2.47 in income." "But that was just a silly suggestion," Megan cries. "I didn't follow it. The tip he paid me is included in the total I reported for my income; I've already been taxed on it." "Too bad for you," you say. "I can't verify that. Learn to get better customers." "But you're penalizing me for doing the right thing!" Megan insists. "It would be fairer if I'd not reported the tip." "Ha! You admit it!" "No. No, I just mean..." "Tax evader!" "No!" "Witch! Witchcraft, I say! She admitted it!" First, there is some reason for a tax audit being done on Megan. Likely it is something like she has reported a very small amount of tip money compared to hours worked. I go through the receipts with her name on them. Some have a tip amount. I put those in one pile. I put the ones that show no tip in another pile. I add up the reported tips as a percentage of the total bill. I go through the ones that show no tip and separate out the ones that say, "you suck" in place of a tip. I ignore those. I take the others and add the total of those and see what the same percentage of tip money would be. I add that to what receipts with tip income reported. I compare that amount to what she reported If there is a serious discrepancy, I assume under-reported tip income and assess a tax charge plus penalties. If she attempts to say that the one with "taxation is theft" should go in the ignore pile, I laugh.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 9, 2017 18:20:56 GMT -5
Okay... Do you have a record of every single tip paid to Megan? Of course not. Most tips are cash. On her IRS tax form, Megan reports $Y total in tips. You might be able to account for some of this total, but certainly not all of it. So you're scouring the credit card receipts the restaurant has kept, looking for wrongdoing, and lo you come across "taxation is theft". "Aha!" You cry. "I'm charging you on an extra $2.47 in income." "But that was just a silly suggestion," Megan cries. "I didn't follow it. The tip he paid me is included in the total I reported for my income; I've already been taxed on it." "Too bad for you," you say. "I can't verify that. Learn to get better customers." "But you're penalizing me for doing the right thing!" Megan insists. "It would be fairer if I'd not reported the tip." "Ha! You admit it!" "No. No, I just mean..." "Tax evader!" "No!" "Witch! Witchcraft, I say! She admitted it!" First, there is some reason for a tax audit being done on Megan. Likely it is something like she has reported a very small amount of tip money compared to hours worked. I go through the receipts with her name on them. Some have a tip amount. I put those in one pile. I put the ones that show no tip in another pile. I add up the reported tips as a percentage of the total bill. I go through the ones that show no tip and separate out the ones that say, "you suck" in place of a tip. I ignore those. I take the others and add the total of those and see what the same percentage of tip money would be. I add that to what receipts with tip income reported. I compare that amount to what she reported If there is a serious discrepancy, I assume under-reported tip income and assess a tax charge plus penalties. If she attempts to say that the one with "taxation is theft" should go in the ignore pile, I laugh. Right. And my point from earlier was that the amount of non-recorded income you can "predict" is 10% of the value of all receipts where the tip amount isn't recorded. She might make 15% on all such bills, meaning she could fail to declare a full third of them before you found a "serious discrepancy". Realistically, there are going to be 1,000 no-tip-recorded bills in her name, and the 50 where she didn't declare the tip because the customer wrote "taxation is theft" aren't nearly enough of a discrepancy for you to detect it. And before you say "I could assume her tip percentage on non-CC bills was within 1% of her average percentage on CC bills to tighten the margin": while you could theoretically do this, it's based on an assumption that you can't prove and that could turn out to be extremely unfair and inaccurate. It's also completely arbitrary. Who knows if the IRS rules would even allow it.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,478
|
Post by billisonboard on May 9, 2017 18:23:43 GMT -5
First, there is some reason for a tax audit being done on Megan. Likely it is something like she has reported a very small amount of tip money compared to hours worked. I go through the receipts with her name on them. Some have a tip amount. I put those in one pile. I put the ones that show no tip in another pile. I add up the reported tips as a percentage of the total bill. I go through the ones that show no tip and separate out the ones that say, "you suck" in place of a tip. I ignore those. I take the others and add the total of those and see what the same percentage of tip money would be. I add that to what receipts with tip income reported. I compare that amount to what she reported If there is a serious discrepancy, I assume under-reported tip income and assess a tax charge plus penalties. If she attempts to say that the one with "taxation is theft" should go in the ignore pile, I laugh. Right. And my point from earlier was that the amount of non-recorded income you can "predict" is 10% of the value of all receipts where the tip amount isn't recorded. She might make 15% on all such bills, meaning she could fail to declare a full third of them before you found a "serious discrepancy". Realistically, there are going to be 1,000 no-tip-recorded bills in her name, and the 50 where she didn't declare the tip because the customer wrote "taxation is theft" aren't nearly enough of a discrepancy for you to detect it. And before you say "I could assume her tip percentage on non-CC bills was within 1% of her average percentage on CC bills to tighten the margin": while you could theoretically do this, it's based on an assumption that you can't prove and that could turn out to be extremely unfair and inaccurate. It's also completely arbitrary. Who knows if the IRS rules would even allow it.
|
|