|
#12
| |||
| |||
| "Dave Woods, EA" <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote: - quote - > Alan, if your marginal rate is less than 28% and you went
If taxpayer is in the 27% bracket in 2002 (or 25% in 2003),> all the way to the portion about 28% gain, you went too far. > If you read (A) (i) and (A) (ii) literally, word for word, I > think you will see why. At least that's how I am seeing it. with or without the capital gain, then 1(h)(1)(A)(ii) is irrelevant. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#11
| |||
| |||
| "Dave Woods, EA" <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote: <snip] - quote - > Alan, if your marginal rate is less than 28% and you went
We may be talking past each other. If you look at my reply> all the way to the portion about 28% gain, you went too far. > If you read (A) (i) and (A) (ii) literally, word for word, I > think you will see why. At least that's how I am seeing it. that contains the information to use the Schedule D worksheet, you will see that a taxpayer never can pay more than the ordinary tax rate. In Arthur's example, a $900 capital gain subject to 28% has the effect of wiping out the long term capital gain subject to 20%. In other words, the taxpayer winds up paying 27% on all income even though the t/p had a long term capital gain that should have been taxed at 20%. The point of all this, is that one can not use "marginal" tax rates to compute the overall tax. One must use the absolute rates and then compare the computed tax using capital gain rates to the computed tax using ordinary rates. Once again for clarification: $900 x 28% = $252 $100 x 20% = $ 20 Total = $272 $1000 x 27% = $270 Therefore, one uses $270 as the tax. The taxpayer never sees the benefit of the 20% rate. All income items are taxed at 27%. If the $900 gain was ordinary income. Then: $900 x 27% = $243 $100 x 20% = $ 20 Total = $263 $1000 x 27% = $270 Therefore, one use $263 as the tax. The taxpayer sees the benefit of the 20% rate and saves $7. Alan http://taxtopics.net << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#10
| |||
| |||
| "A.G. Kalman" <agk202[at]netscape.net> wrote: - quote - > "Dave Woods, EA" <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote:
Alan, if your marginal rate is less than 28% and you went> > "Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin[at]sprintmail.com> wrote: > > > Herb Smith wrote: > > > > > Talking to myself, as noone else seems to agree with me -- > > > > > the details, for 2002: > > > > > > > > > Suppose a taxpayer is in the 27% tax bracket, with or > > > > > without capital gains: > > > > > > > > > If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains, and > > > > > $900 in 28% gain, his additional tax would be calculated > > > > > using the ordinary tax tables as $270 ($1000 x 27%), as the > > > > > Schedule D instructions calculation would otherwise give an > > > > > additional tax of $20 ($100 x 20%) + $252 ($900 x 28%) =3D > > > > > $272. > > > > Flawed logic. The tax would be $20 ($100 x 20%) + $243 > > > > ($900 x 27%) =3D $263. The tax is not higher than the > > > > marginal rate of 27%. > > > Follow the instructions for schedule D, or, if you prefer, > > > the code at 26 USC 1(h). There's no mention of marginal tax > > > rates, other than the actual end of the 15% bracket as coded > > > in schedule D and its instructions, or the reference to "tax > > > brackets less than 25%" in the Code. > > > > > The limitation you specify on 28% gain is not there. > > Wanna bet? Sec 1 (h) (1): > > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(1) IN GENERAL > > =A0 > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0If a taxpayer has a net capital gain for any taxable ye= ar, the tax > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0imposed by this section for such taxable year shall not= exceed the > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0sum of-- > > =A0 > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(A) a tax computed at the rates and in t= he same manner as if > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0this subsection had not been enacted on = the greater of-- > > =A0 > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(i) taxable income reduce= d by the net capital gain, or > > =A0 > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0(ii) the lesser of-- > > =A0 > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0=A0=A0(I) the am= ount of taxable income taxed at a rate below > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0=A0=A025 percent= , or > > =A0 > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0=A0=A0(II) taxab= le income reduced by the adjusted net > > =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A 0=A0=A0=A0capital ga= in, > Focus on the words "lesser of". You need to keep on reading > until you get to Sec. 1(h)(4) where it tells you: > For purposes of this subsection, the term "adjusted net > capital gain" means net capital gain reduced (but not below > zero) by the sum of-- > (A) unrecaptured section 1250 gain; and > (B) 28-percent rate gain. all the way to the portion about 28% gain, you went too far. If you read (A) (i) and (A) (ii) literally, word for word, I think you will see why. At least that's how I am seeing it. -- David M. Woods, EA Boston, MA 02109 Postings here are general information only and not to be relied upon as advice. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#9
| |||
| |||
| Dave Woods, EA wrote: - quote - > "Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin[at]sprintmail.com> wrote:
I've already assumed that the taxpayer was in the 27% tax> > Follow the instructions for schedule D, or, if you prefer, > > the code at 26 USC 1(h). There's no mention of marginal tax > > rates, other than the actual end of the 15% bracket as coded > > in schedule D and its instructions, or the reference to "tax > > brackets less than 25%" in the Code. > > > The limitation you specify on 28% gain is not there. > Wanna bet? Sec 1 (h) (1): > (1) IN GENERAL > If a taxpayer has a net capital gain for any taxable year, the tax > imposed by this section for such taxable year shall not exceed the > sum of-- > (A) a tax computed at the rates and in the same manner as if > this subsection had not been enacted on the greater of-- > (i) taxable income reduced by the net capital gain, or > (ii) the lesser of-- > (I) the amount of taxable income taxed at a rate below > 25 percent, or > (II) taxable income reduced by the adjusted net > capital gain, > Focus on the words "lesser of". bracket.... I'm afraid it doesn't work. That essentially prevents "28% gain" from being considered if you're in the 15% bracket, it gives no help if you're in the 27% bracket. It's nice to know that my statements are so controversial. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#8
| |||
| |||
| "Dave Woods, EA" <d.woods[at]verizon.net> wrote: - quote - > "Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin[at]sprintmail.com> wrote:
Focus on the words "lesser of". You need to keep on reading> > Herb Smith wrote: > > > > Talking to myself, as noone else seems to agree with me -- > > > > the details, for 2002: > > > > > > > Suppose a taxpayer is in the 27% tax bracket, with or > > > > without capital gains: > > > > > > > If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains, and > > > > $900 in 28% gain, his additional tax would be calculated > > > > using the ordinary tax tables as $270 ($1000 x 27%), as the > > > > Schedule D instructions calculation would otherwise give an > > > > additional tax of $20 ($100 x 20%) + $252 ($900 x 28%) = > > > > $272. > > > Flawed logic. The tax would be $20 ($100 x 20%) + $243 > > > ($900 x 27%) = $263. The tax is not higher than the > > > marginal rate of 27%. > > Follow the instructions for schedule D, or, if you prefer, > > the code at 26 USC 1(h). There's no mention of marginal tax > > rates, other than the actual end of the 15% bracket as coded > > in schedule D and its instructions, or the reference to "tax > > brackets less than 25%" in the Code. > > > The limitation you specify on 28% gain is not there. > Wanna bet? Sec 1 (h) (1): > *****(1) IN GENERAL > * > *****If a taxpayer has a net capital gain for any taxable year, the tax > *****imposed by this section for such taxable year shall not exceed the > *****sum of-- > * > **********(A) a tax computed at the rates and in the same manner as if > **********this subsection had not been enacted on the greater of-- > * > ***************(i) taxable income reduced by the net capital gain, or > * > ***************(ii) the lesser of-- > * > ********************(I) the amount of taxable income taxed at a rate below > ********************25 percent, or > * > ********************(II) taxable income reduced by the adjusted net > ********************capital gain, until you get to Sec. 1(h)(4) where it tells you: For purposes of this subsection, the term "adjusted net capital gain" means net capital gain reduced (but not below zero) by the sum of-- (A) unrecaptured section 1250 gain; and (B) 28-percent rate gain. Alan http://taxtopics.net << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#7
| |||
| |||
| "Arthur L. Rubin"<ronnirubin[at]sprintmail.com> wrote: - quote - > Herb Smith wrote:
Arthur's point would be clearer if you realize that Schedule> > > Talking to myself, as noone else seems to agree with me -- > > > the details, for 2002: > > > > > Suppose a taxpayer is in the 27% tax bracket, with or > > > without capital gains: > > > > > If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains, and > > > $900 in 28% gain, his additional tax would be calculated > > > using the ordinary tax tables as $270 ($1000 x 27%), as the > > > Schedule D instructions calculation would otherwise give an > > > additional tax of $20 ($100 x 20%) + $252 ($900 x 28%) = > > > $272. > > Flawed logic. The tax would be $20 ($100 x 20%) + $243 > > ($900 x 27%) = $263. The tax is not higher than the > > marginal rate of 27%. > Follow the instructions for schedule D, or, if you prefer, > the code at 26 USC 1(h). There's no mention of marginal tax > rates, other than the actual end of the 15% bracket as coded > in schedule D and its instructions, or the reference to "tax > brackets less than 25%" in the Code. > The limitation you specify on 28% gain is not there. D is not used to compute the tax when $900 is in column (g). You have to use the worksheet that is on page D-9 of the instructions. When you do that, you see that the $900 is taxed at 28%; $100 is taxed at 20% for a total of $272. As this is higher than $270 (the 27% rate), one uses $270. Thus one has no savings at all. All income is taxed at 27%. Substitute $900 of ordinary income for the $900 of capital gains and you revert back to Schedule D. The $100 is taxed at 20% for $20. The taxpayer pays $7 less than ordinary rates. The net of all this is that you can never pay more than ordinary rates but you don't necessarily pay less if you have an entry in column (g). I beleive that the worksheet properly implements the tax code as the code states that "adjusted net capital gain" used in the formula does not contain the amount subject to 28% tax. Alan http://taxtopics.net << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#6
| |||
| |||
| "Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin[at]sprintmail.com> wrote: - quote - > Herb Smith wrote:
Wanna bet? Sec 1 (h) (1):> > > Talking to myself, as noone else seems to agree with me -- > > > the details, for 2002: > > > > > Suppose a taxpayer is in the 27% tax bracket, with or > > > without capital gains: > > > > > If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains, and > > > $900 in 28% gain, his additional tax would be calculated > > > using the ordinary tax tables as $270 ($1000 x 27%), as the > > > Schedule D instructions calculation would otherwise give an > > > additional tax of $20 ($100 x 20%) + $252 ($900 x 28%) = > > > $272. > > Flawed logic. The tax would be $20 ($100 x 20%) + $243 > > ($900 x 27%) = $263. The tax is not higher than the > > marginal rate of 27%. > Follow the instructions for schedule D, or, if you prefer, > the code at 26 USC 1(h). There's no mention of marginal tax > rates, other than the actual end of the 15% bracket as coded > in schedule D and its instructions, or the reference to "tax > brackets less than 25%" in the Code. > The limitation you specify on 28% gain is not there. *****(1) IN GENERAL * *****If a taxpayer has a net capital gain for any taxable year, the tax *****imposed by this section for such taxable year shall not exceed the *****sum of-- * **********(A) a tax computed at the rates and in the same manner as if **********this subsection had not been enacted on the greater of-- * ***************(i) taxable income reduced by the net capital gain, or * ***************(ii) the lesser of-- * ********************(I) the amount of taxable income taxed at a rate below ********************25 percent, or * ********************(II) taxable income reduced by the adjusted net ********************capital gain, Focus on the words "lesser of". -- David M. Woods, EA Boston, MA 02109 Postings here are general information only and not to be relied upon as advice. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
| Herb Smith wrote: - quote - > > Talking to myself, as noone else seems to agree with me --
Follow the instructions for schedule D, or, if you prefer,> > the details, for 2002: > > > Suppose a taxpayer is in the 27% tax bracket, with or > > without capital gains: > > > If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains, and > > $900 in 28% gain, his additional tax would be calculated > > using the ordinary tax tables as $270 ($1000 x 27%), as the > > Schedule D instructions calculation would otherwise give an > > additional tax of $20 ($100 x 20%) + $252 ($900 x 28%) = > > $272. > Flawed logic. The tax would be $20 ($100 x 20%) + $243 > ($900 x 27%) = $263. The tax is not higher than the > marginal rate of 27%. the code at 26 USC 1(h). There's no mention of marginal tax rates, other than the actual end of the 15% bracket as coded in schedule D and its instructions, or the reference to "tax brackets less than 25%" in the Code. The limitation you specify on 28% gain is not there. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
| - quote - > > I was looking through the 2002 Schedule D instructions, to
Flawed logic. The tax would be $20 ($100 x 20%) + $243> > get some idea how they might transfer in more complex cases > > for 2003, and I ran across an anomaly: > > > Isn't "28% gain" taxed at 28%, even in the 27% bracket? > > Now, the total tax cannot be more than that disregarding the > > capital gains rules, but a taxpayer with 28% gains could > > lose benefits derived from the (8/10)/20% capital gains > > brackets. > Talking to myself, as noone else seems to agree with me -- > the details, for 2002: > Suppose a taxpayer is in the 27% tax bracket, with or > without capital gains: > If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains, and > $900 in 28% gain, his additional tax would be calculated > using the ordinary tax tables as $270 ($1000 x 27%), as the > Schedule D instructions calculation would otherwise give an > additional tax of $20 ($100 x 20%) + $252 ($900 x 28%) = > $272. ($900 x 27%) = $263. The tax is not higher than the marginal rate of 27%. - quote - > If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains and
It's the same> $900 in ordinary income, his additional tax would be $243 > ($900 x 27%) change in the regular tax, and $20 ($100 x 20%) > calculated on Schedule D, for a change of $263; $7 less. - quote - > Alternatively, his marginal tax on the $900 of 28% gain is
Marginal rate is 27%, NOT 28%. The term "28% gain" is> $250, for a marginal tax rate of approximately 27.78%. merely a label, not a tax rate. - quote - > I'm convinced that's correct as following the schedules --
28% gain would be taxed at 25% instead.> but is it correct as per the regulations, or in law? > The numbers would be different in regard the 25% bracket in > 2003, but the idea is still the same. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
| ronnirubin[at]sprintmail.com (Arthur L. Rubin) wrote: - quote - > I was looking through the 2002 Schedule D instructions, to
Talking to myself, as noone else seems to agree with me --> get some idea how they might transfer in more complex cases > for 2003, and I ran across an anomaly: > Isn't "28% gain" taxed at 28%, even in the 27% bracket? > Now, the total tax cannot be more than that disregarding the > capital gains rules, but a taxpayer with 28% gains could > lose benefits derived from the (8/10)/20% capital gains > brackets. the details, for 2002: Suppose a taxpayer is in the 27% tax bracket, with or without capital gains: If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains, and $900 in 28% gain, his additional tax would be calculated using the ordinary tax tables as $270 ($1000 x 27%), as the Schedule D instructions calculation would otherwise give an additional tax of $20 ($100 x 20%) + $252 ($900 x 28%) = $272. If he had $100 in (ordinary) Long Term capital gains and $900 in ordinary income, his additional tax would be $243 ($900 x 27%) change in the regular tax, and $20 ($100 x 20%) calculated on Schedule D, for a change of $263; $7 less. Alternatively, his marginal tax on the $900 of 28% gain is $250, for a marginal tax rate of approximately 27.78%. I'm convinced that's correct as following the schedules -- but is it correct as per the regulations, or in law? The numbers would be different in regard the 25% bracket in 2003, but the idea is still the same. UPDATE I confirmed the actual Code at 26 USC 1(h) (dated 1/3/2002). Seems clear enough unless you can treat the 28% gain as ordinary income under another provision of the code. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| Arthur L. Rubin wrote: - quote - > Isn't "28% gain" taxed at 28%, even in the 27% bracket?
Not really--the way the netting works, what will happen is> Now, the total tax cannot be more than that disregarding the > capital gains rules, but a taxpayer with 28% gains could > lose benefits derived from the (8/10)/20% capital gains > brackets. that the taxpayer will get no benefit from the 28% gain that survives the netting, but the 5/8/10/20 gains will still pass through the return and be included in the Schedule D calculation. By the way, since there were taxpayers in the 15% bracket in prior years <grin> , the problem really isn't new. -- Ed Zollars, CPA Phoenix, Arizona << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#1
| |||
| |||
| The 28% rate applies to gain from the sale of collectibles and certain small business stock. The rate applies to all taxpayers regardless of their marginal rate. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
| | |||
| |||
| "Arthur L. Rubin" <ronnirubin[at]sprintmail.com> wrote: - quote - > I was looking through the 2002 Schedule D instructions, to
No.> get some idea how they might transfer in more complex cases > for 2003, and I ran across an anomaly: > Isn't "28% gain" taxed at 28%, even in the 27% bracket? - quote - > Now, the total tax cannot be more than that disregarding the
ANY rate in the capital gain category cannot be more than> capital gains rules, but a taxpayer with 28% gains could > lose benefits derived from the (8/10)/20% capital gains > brackets. > Is this consistent with the regulations, or with the law? > Obviously, this only applies to 2001 and later years. the applicable marginal rate. 28% (and even 25% for gain recapture) will not apply for those in the 10, 15, or 25% brackets as they relate to the various other cap gains. -- David M. Woods, EA Boston, MA 02109 Postings here are general information only and not to be relied upon as advice. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#-1
| |||
| |||
| I was looking through the 2002 Schedule D instructions, to get some idea how they might transfer in more complex cases for 2003, and I ran across an anomaly: Isn't "28% gain" taxed at 28%, even in the 27% bracket? Now, the total tax cannot be more than that disregarding the capital gains rules, but a taxpayer with 28% gains could lose benefits derived from the (8/10)/20% capital gains brackets. Is this consistent with the regulations, or with the law? Obviously, this only applies to 2001 and later years. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
| Tags |
| 28%, gain |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | Last Post | |
| Reinv Gain from 2003 shows now as gain in IRA - M2004 - Bobb -: I'm REBUYING a mutual fund in an IRA that I owned years ago. I previously sold it all in 2003 and not problem until I just entered my new purchase... | Microsoft Money | 5 | 04-05-2006 06:24 PM | |
| Gain skid0g@juno.com: I probably did the math wrong; I'm puzzled about Gain One of my funds has a Market Value of: 3487.90 This same fund shows a Cost Basis of: ... | Microsoft Money | 8 | 11-17-2005 07:12 PM | |
| Gain column includes previous historical sale gain amount? Chris Barker: I've discovered a curious bug in Money 2004. I had an investment in a mutual fund that I sold and liquidated in its entirety. Several months later I... | Microsoft Money | 2 | 10-12-2004 05:17 PM | |
| Money 98 gain Mary: Why is the performance report showing a gain on an investment in which I actually have a loss. For example Cost 1000 Div Reinvestment 773... | Microsoft Money | 1 | 10-13-2003 12:49 AM | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |