- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Posted on 11/12/23 at 7:34 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
So STO is not just all about kids, it's all about non rich kids.
But you know the horrible results in Louisiana, so how can you say that? There is literally NO vetting done for “schools” that apply to accept vouchers. They are all approved! And who is allowed to attend those rubber stamped voucher schools? Poor kids.
quote:it’s not about the kids. People are using the donations to decrease their tax burdens.
The tax incentive is for ""rich"" people to give money to non rich people.
Is that bad?
quote:
You're mixing Fed and State taxes.
STO DONATIONS OFFER WORKAROUND TO TAX DEDUCTION LIMITATIONS
One of the main changes to come from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was a limitation on the amount you can deduct in state income and property taxes on your federal return – $10,000 to be exact. But there’s a workaround available in Louisiana to increase your itemized deductions: making charitable contributions to qualified State Tuition Organizations (STOs).
Posted on 11/13/23 at 4:51 am to 4cubbies
quote:The School Tuition Organizations are simply repositories for funds. They can only spend donations on facilities and programs which the state approves.
So STO is not just all about kids, it's all about non rich kids.
----
But you know the horrible results in Louisiana, so how can you say that?
Unfortunately, as you note, virtually every quality program in the state has been excluded from STO aid. It seems people genuinely interested in kids would do everything possible to incorporate the best programs/schools. Yet, just the opposite occurred vis-a-vis poison pills. Who do you think inserted the poison?
quote:Run the numbers, then show your work.
People are using the donations to decrease their tax burdens.
People are using the donations to DIRECT their tax burden. Those contributions are directed into STOs as opposed to other public interests. It is a process described as siphoning money from public schools and directing it instead to STOs. That pisses off public school apologists, who put their public school loyalties ahead of any concern about children relegated to the system. That's why public school loyalists undercut quality school participation in the voucher program.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 5:11 am to 4cubbies
quote:
quote:
The tax incentive is for ""rich"" people to give money to non rich people.
Is that bad?
it’s not about the kids. People are using the donations to decrease their tax burdens.
Who gives a shite why they're donating? Does the dollar spend less based upon the intent?
Posted on 11/13/23 at 6:20 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Run the numbers, then show your work.
What numbers? Ives linked two totally unrelated sources that acknowledge the STO donations are a workaround to tax deduction limitations. Will failing voucher schools ultimately get some of the money? It looks like it. I refuse to applaud that. The donors get 100% of the their donations refunded, which is why they are donating to begin with: to lower their tax burdens and then recoup the donation at the end, after paying fewer taxes.
quote:if 100% of schools who apply to accept vouchers are approved, how is anyone outside of the administration of these programs excluding quality programs from participating?
That's why public school loyalists undercut quality school participation in the voucher program.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 6:39 am to 4cubbies
quote:If "Ives linked two totally unrelated sources that acknowledge the" existence of bigfoot, would you believe him? Would you taut those "two totally unrelated sources" as proof bigfoot exists?
Ives linked two totally unrelated sources that acknowledge the STO donations are a workaround to tax deduction limitations
quote:The tax numbers and residual post-tax income.
What numbers?
Say for example, in the case of a couple w/ a $300K income w/ & w/o a $25K donation to an LA STO.
Show how the STO donation leaves that couple with more money. Just plug in the numbers yourself and try to prove Ives' claim.
You might be looking at something I'm not. If so, the numbers will make your case.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 6:46 am to 4cubbies
quote:How many instances in the state involve donations beyond the standard deduction threshold?
The donors get 100% of the their donations refunded, which is why they are donating to begin with: to lower their tax burdens and then recoup the donation at the end, after paying fewer taxes.
I ask because you may be conflating and combining tax advantages of credits with those of deductions
Posted on 11/13/23 at 6:48 am to pankReb
quote:
Who gives a shite why they're donating? Does the dollar spend less based upon the intent?
The program is a total failure as it relates to improving outcomes for participating kids. Now we understand the intent behind the creation of the program, which is to protect the wealth of high income people and corporations.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 6:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
If "Ives linked two totally unrelated sources that acknowledge the" existence of bigfoot, would you believe him? Would you taut those "two totally unrelated sources" as proof bigfoot exists?
So now the proposition of politicians legislating tax breaks for the wealthy is so preposterous that you’re equating it with fairytales? Because politicians never help the wealthy.
quote:
Ives
I’m 100% guilty of posting a typo.
quote:
Say for example, in the case of a couple w/ a $300K income w/ & w/o a $25K donation to an LA STO.
Show how the STO donation leaves that couple with more money. Just plug in the numbers yourself and try to prove Ives' claim.
The couple will itemize deductions to include the $25,000 donation. Their taxable income is no longer $300,000 but $275,000. So instead of paying taxes on $300k, they now will only pay taxes on $275k. Then they will get the $25k donation refunded on their state tax refund.
This post was edited on 11/13/23 at 7:00 am
Posted on 11/13/23 at 7:03 am to 4cubbies
quote:Cubbies, you need to stop. Run the numbers, and check out the veracity of the claims you're relying on.
The program is a total failure as it relates to improving outcomes for participating kids. Now we understand the intent behind the creation of the program, which is to protect the wealth of high income people and corporations.
Also you might reassess your belief that there are enough self-interested "rich" folks in Louisiana that they are able to out vote middle class, working class, and the impoverished.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 7:08 am to 4cubbies
quote:
So now the proposition of politicians legislating tax breaks for the wealthy
Vapid talking points.
Try internalizing thoughts and using your own words, please.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 7:38 am to 4cubbies
quote:FWIW, I had no idea Ives was incorrect.
I’m 100% guilty of posting a typo.
quote:So with a tax deduction Their taxable income is no longer $300,000 but $275,000. Which would save them 6% X $25K, or ~$1500.
The couple will itemize deductions to include the $25,000 donation. Their taxable income is no longer $300,000 but $275,000. So instead of paying taxes on $300k, they now will only pay taxes on $275k. Then they will get the $25k donation refunded on their state tax refund.
With tax credit, there is no state tax deduction. However, the STO tax credit is awarded dollar for dollar.
So for $300K income on an LA return:
(1) No deductions/credit, tax on $300K would run ~ $16,750 leaving $283,250 post-tax
(2) $25K tax deduction, taxable income $275K. State tax on $275K would run ~$15,250 and with the $25K giveaway tallied, post-tax income would be $259,750
(3) $25K tax credit, tax on $300K income would run ~ $16,750, leaving $283,250 -$25K donation, +$25K credit equals $283,250 post-tax
Posted on 11/13/23 at 7:40 am to pankReb
quote:
it’s not about the kids. People are using the donations to decrease their tax burdens.
Who gives a shite why they're donating?
Because, talking points.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 7:42 am to 4cubbies
quote:
being raised in single-parent
Let’s get this right, single mother homes.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 7:45 am to dgnx6
quote:
being raised in single-parent
Let’s get this right, single mother homes.
Progressives try their best to dance around this massive elephant in the room.
Nothing is as big of an indicator of success as being raised with both parents. All policy should hinge around this.
Posted on 11/13/23 at 8:14 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
FWIW, I had no idea Ives was incorrect.
I guess it could be my alias.
quote:how could reporting $25,000 less income NOT result in paying fewer taxes? I really don’t understand how that could be.
Cubbies, you need to stop. Run the numbers, and check out the veracity of the claims you're relying on.
quote:the legislative branch enacted this scheme, it wasn’t on a statewide ballot.
Also you might reassess your belief that there are enough self-interested "rich" folks in Louisiana that they are able to out vote middle class, working class, and the impoverished.
And you may be overestimating how many common people vote at all in Louisiana.
Did you read the CPA link I posted? That was completely apolitical and simply offered a tip to save money on one’s taxes. But you believe the CPA is incorrect or giving bad advice in favor of your own calculations?
This post was edited on 11/13/23 at 8:19 am
Posted on 11/13/23 at 8:15 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Brookings Institution
Haven't these people cause enough chaos
Posted on 11/13/23 at 8:26 am to dgnx6
quote:
Let’s get this right, single mother homes.
Yep. It’s amazing that such a huge population of men can abandon their children, isn’t it?
Posted on 11/13/23 at 8:27 am to bayouvette
quote:there are several Brookings apologists in this very thread.
Haven't these people cause enough chaos
Posted on 11/13/23 at 8:31 am to 4cubbies
quote:
It’s amazing that such a huge population of men can abandon their children, isn’t it?
It's not amazing at all, because government policy subsidizes it. When you subsidize something you get more of that something.
Every. Time.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News