Athletes can get paid for their likeness, image and name. Look who wants to tax them
Oct 30, 2019 14:00:55 #
And the usual trump cons, who always lie, distort and mis-inform, now have a senator who wants to tax student athletes who may benefit from their schools or businesses using their names, images, and likenesses.
And the usual trump con liars who always blame each and every tax on liberals or democrats will be flapping the gums about how justified the tax is.
Oh yeah, the tax proposal is from senator richard burr, REPUBLICAN nc.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/sen-richard-burr-vows-to-tax-scholarships-for-student-athletes-who-profit-from-likeness
And the usual trump con liars who always blame each and every tax on liberals or democrats will be flapping the gums about how justified the tax is.
Oh yeah, the tax proposal is from senator richard burr, REPUBLICAN nc.
https://www.foxnews.com/sports/sen-richard-burr-vows-to-tax-scholarships-for-student-athletes-who-profit-from-likeness
Oct 30, 2019 14:23:31 #
Michael Rich
Loc: Lapine Oregon
factnotfiction wrote:
And the usual trump cons, who always lie, distort ... (show quote)
So is it a Trump or Burr proposal?
And yes, tax these kids sports income.
Oct 30, 2019 14:39:36 #
Oct 30, 2019 14:42:58 #
factnotfiction wrote:
And the usual trump cons, who always lie, distort ... (show quote)
I wouldn't tax an educational scholarship, but if they are paid hard cash for their names or images being used to promote products, sure, tax 'em.
That's income, right?
Blame Democrat Woodrow Wilson, one of your "posse," for personal income tax. Even then, Democrats never met a tax they didn't like.
In summation, what's your point?
Oct 30, 2019 19:16:29 #
Oct 31, 2019 17:03:02 #
Seth wrote:
I wouldn't tax an educational scholarship, but if they are paid hard cash for their names or images being used to promote products, sure, tax 'em.
That's income, right?
Blame Democrat Woodrow Wilson, one of your "posse," for personal income tax. Even then, Democrats never met a tax they didn't like.
In summation, what's your point?
That's income, right?
Blame Democrat Woodrow Wilson, one of your "posse," for personal income tax. Even then, Democrats never met a tax they didn't like.
In summation, what's your point?
If it's income, it makes a difference. Taxation is fine.
Oct 31, 2019 17:52:08 #
crazylibertarian
Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
Seth wrote:
Blame Democrat Woodrow Wilson, one of your "posse," for personal income tax. Even then, Democrats never met a tax they didn't like.
Blame Democrat Woodrow Wilson, one of your "posse," for personal income tax. Even then, Democrats never met a tax they didn't like.
Seth, sorry to have to disagree on some facts with you but The Sixteenth (Income tax) Amendment was declared ratified by Secretary of State Philander (what a name - philanderer?) Knox of The William Howard Taft Administration in 1912. It may have been initially imposed under T. Woodrow Wilson. The ratification has been challenged and, as far as I am concerned, the challenge is valid and should be addressed.
1912 was the year the collectivists scored a trifecta, unmatched in American history and likely world democratic history. Not only was The Sixteenth Amendment ratified but The Seventeenth as well, plus the Federal Reserve Act was passed 'to stabilize the economy.'
Oct 31, 2019 17:54:04 #
crazylibertarian
Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
Lt. Rob Polans ret. wrote:
If it's income, it makes a difference. Taxation is fine.
But then in fairness, the expenditures (tuition, room, books, travel, etc.) to earn the money should be allowed as credit against it.
Oct 31, 2019 18:25:43 #
crazylibertarian wrote:
Seth, sorry to have to disagree on some facts with... (show quote)
Didn't the pre-Wilson income tax deal with business income only, though?
Oct 31, 2019 19:38:59 #
crazylibertarian
Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
Seth wrote:
Didn't the pre-Wilson income tax deal with business income only, though?
I am not sure.
Oct 31, 2019 19:38:59 #
crazylibertarian
Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
Seth wrote:
Didn't the pre-Wilson income tax deal with business income only, though?
I am not sure.
Nov 1, 2019 06:58:08 #
Nov 1, 2019 07:19:01 #
If the federal government is taxing social security, then why shouldn't the college kids get taxed for income they get. I believe thats fair.
Nov 1, 2019 08:36:30 #
crazylibertarian wrote:
I am not sure.
Yep. From what I've been reading, the majority of Republicans were resisting income taxes from the late 1800s on, then the Democrats won first on the business income tax issue, then on the personal income tax issue.
For a Democratic president, signing it into law didn't present much of a personal struggle.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.