GM Inside News Forum banner

61 - 80 of 105 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
Most of you have been calling accelerated depreciation a subsidy for oil companies. It's not. It does not increase the total amount of depreciation the oil company can claim, it only moves up the time period when they receive that. Not a subsidy. Not writing a check.

Giving a consumer a tax credit for buying a product is a subsidy. It gives a consumer an incentive to buy in now. It helps the manufacturer to sell more up front and cover their costs of R&D.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,523 Posts
Most of you have been calling accelerated depreciation a subsidy for oil companies. It's not. It does not increase the total amount of depreciation the oil company can claim, it only moves up the time period when they receive that. Not a subsidy. Not writing a check.

Giving a consumer a tax credit for buying a product is a subsidy. It gives a consumer an incentive to buy in now. It helps the manufacturer to sell more up front and cover their costs of R&D.
And if within days/weeks or a month that the tax credit is re-instated or increased the manufacturer rebates go down.

Who's pocket is that "tax-payer funded" money ultimately going into?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,669 Posts
Most of you have been calling accelerated depreciation a subsidy for oil companies. It's not. It does not increase the total amount of depreciation the oil company can claim, it only moves up the time period when they receive that. Not a subsidy. Not writing a check.

Giving a consumer a tax credit for buying a product is a subsidy. It gives a consumer an incentive to buy in now. It helps the manufacturer to sell more up front and cover their costs of R&D.
The accelerated part might not be a subsidy, but the writing off of the depreciation certainly is. It’s a subsidy to keep business expenses lower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,085 Posts
Most of you have been calling accelerated depreciation a subsidy for oil companies. It's not. It does not increase the total amount of depreciation the oil company can claim, it only moves up the time period when they receive that. Not a subsidy. Not writing a check.
As I said earlier, accelerated depreciation is at best an interest free loan from the government. Writing a check or not, that's not "free" to the government (i.e., tax payers). While the business gets to claim the write-off sooner we, the tax payers, are paying interest on government bonds (to China, the Middle East and whoever else owns government debt) for decades until the business ultimately gets around to paying the deferred tax (assuming they don't weasel out of it altogether through some accounting "magic").
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
Depreciation is the cost of developing a product, a cost of doing business. If some of you think that a business would pay that cost out of their own pocket you don't have a clue how business can function. If you want business to pay tax on revenue that covers their cost of developing a product, then none of you would have jobs. Why do you want to expense the labor to manufacture and the cost of materials but not the cost to create a product? The cost of the workers who are drilling a new well is not a legitimate cost to the business? Is that workers paycheck a subsidy paid by taxpayers? How many more insane ideas can you come up with?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,085 Posts
Depreciation is the cost of developing a product, a cost of doing business. If some of you think that a business would pay that cost out of their own pocket you don't have a clue how business can function. If you want business to pay tax on revenue that covers their cost of developing a product, then none of you would have jobs. Why do you want to expense the labor to manufacture and the cost of materials but not the cost to create a product? The cost of the workers who are drilling a new well is not a legitimate cost to the business? Is that workers paycheck a subsidy paid by taxpayers? How many more insane ideas can you come up with?
You are setting up a strawman and vigorously fighting it. The point isn't that businesses shouldn't be incentivized to invest. The point is that there's more than one way to do it and the distinction you are drawing between two of those options is arbitrary and non-existent.

BTW, the notion that no business would invest without government subsidies is complete horse-puckey but that's a different point I won't even bother to discuss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,523 Posts
The accelerated part might not be a subsidy, but the writing off of the depreciation certainly is. It’s a subsidy to keep business expenses lower.
WHAT!? "writing off of the depreciation" is a subsidy? HOW!?

Depreciation is an allowable tax-deduction, that is utilized by EVERY business, big or small.

A one-man lawn service; buys a truck, a mower, a blower a couple trimmers and 5 gallons of gas.

The gas is an expense, and can be deducted in-full, year one, the other items, he can not; he must put them on the books as an asset and depreciates (tax deduct) a portion of the items (life) cost over a period of time.

Say the ($6,000) mower is 6 years, normal depreciation would be $1,000/year, for 6 years "accelerated depreciation" would be $2,000/year for 3 years.

As I said earlier, accelerated depreciation is at best an interest free loan from the government.
"Accelerated Depreciation" is done as an effort to get business to "invest" (spend) which in theory stimulates the economy, but what happens when taxes become too burdensome?......... The US plant closes and the operation gets moved overseas.............

Additionally (for clarification) business do not "pay taxes" taxes are just a business expense, gets added the cost of the item, or reduces the amount of money a company has to put in the product or its employees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: supermoto

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
Still trying to sell the idea that depreciation is a tax subsidy? Business wouldn't invest unless they could recover the initial cost of development. Labor costs for the R&D shouldn't be a tax deductible expense? Ever hear about capital expenses? Spending money to develop a future product is called a capital expense and it is not deductible in the period it was incurred unless there is revenue derived from it. Expenses are applied during the time that revenue will be derived from that capital expense. No subsidy from that accounting activity even if there is accelerated depreciation, which is where most of you are confused.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,085 Posts
"Accelerated Depreciation" is done as an effort to get business to "invest" (spend) which in theory stimulates the economy, but what happens when taxes become too burdensome?......... The US plant closes and the operation gets moved overseas.............

Additionally (for clarification) business do not "pay taxes" taxes are just a business expense, gets added the cost of the item, or reduces the amount of money a company has to put in the product or its employees.
Still trying to sell the idea that depreciation is a tax subsidy? Business wouldn't invest unless they could recover the initial cost of development. Labor costs for the R&D shouldn't be a tax deductible expense? Ever hear about capital expenses? Spending money to develop a future product is called a capital expense and it is not deductible in the period it was incurred unless there is revenue derived from it. Expenses are applied during the time that revenue will be derived from that capital expense. No subsidy from that accounting activity even if there is accelerated depreciation, which is where most of you are confused.
Okay, I'll take one last stab at this. I'm not saying businesses should not be incentivized to invest. I'm saying the EV tax credit is also incentivizing businesses to invest (in this case, in a new technology), but by channeling the tax benefit through the consumers (instead of directly to the business), allowing the businesses to charge a higher MSRP. That, in turn, helps keep production in higher costs places like the US and helps prevent the "US plant closes and operation gets moved overseas" scenarios. That's further reinforced when the credit is tied to US production.

So, to repeat one last time, my point is not that businesses should not be incentivized. My point is that the EV tax credit is also an incentive to businesses.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,669 Posts
Still trying to sell the idea that depreciation is a tax subsidy? Business wouldn't invest unless they could recover the initial cost of development. Labor costs for the R&D shouldn't be a tax deductible expense? Ever hear about capital expenses? Spending money to develop a future product is called a capital expense and it is not deductible in the period it was incurred unless there is revenue derived from it. Expenses are applied during the time that revenue will be derived from that capital expense. No subsidy from that accounting activity even if there is accelerated depreciation, which is where most of you are confused.
"Business wouldn't invest unless they could recover the initial cost of development". Nonsense. They would invest, but the increased costs would result in absurdly high prices past on to the consumer. So the government allows business to write these expenses off and not pay taxes on them. It's not a subsidy in the traditional tax sense, but it's still the government giving business a tax break. Same end result.

Imagine if I could write off my personal house payment, car payment, insurance payment, grocery bills, phone bills, gasoline bills, internet, etc, etc, from my federal income taxes as an investment into my personal wage income and only pay taxes on the delta "profit" at the end of the year. That would be wonderful! But sadly that luxury only works for businesses, not individuals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,230 Posts
"Business wouldn't invest unless they could recover the initial cost of development". Nonsense. They would invest, but the increased costs would result in absurdly high prices past on to the consumer. So the government allows business to write these expenses off and not pay taxes on them. It's not a subsidy in the traditional tax sense, but it's still the government giving business a tax break. Same end result.

Imagine if I could write off my personal house payment, car payment, insurance payment, grocery bills, phone bills, gasoline bills, internet, etc, etc, from my federal income taxes as an investment into my personal wage income and only pay taxes on the delta "profit" at the end of the year. That would be wonderful! But sadly that luxury only works for businesses, not individuals.
Depreciation is different in that it is an expense incurred in the generation of income. It is not a personal expense. You do have a SALT and mortgage interest deduction, subject to limits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,523 Posts
"Business wouldn't invest unless they could recover the initial cost of development". Nonsense. They would invest, but the increased costs would result in absurdly high prices past on to the consumer. So the government allows business to write these expenses off and not pay taxes on them. It's not a subsidy in the traditional tax sense, but it's still the government giving business a tax break. Same end result.
Any and all costs of a business are an expense; if business were not allowed to deduct expenses, then the Government would essentially be taxing businesses on revenue (not profit) that is illogical.

Try this, you sell 100 shares of Apple Stock, at $130/share; $13,000 - Is your taxes based on $13,000 that is your revenue! Your "expense" was $120/share; $12,000 - You pay tax on your profit (gain) which is $1,000.

Imagine if I could write off my personal house payment, car payment, insurance payment, grocery bills, phone bills, gasoline bills, internet, etc, etc, from my federal income taxes as an investment into my personal wage income and only pay taxes on the delta "profit" at the end of the year. That would be wonderful! But sadly that luxury only works for businesses, not individuals.
I see what you are saying, but no............ Not a good example personal tax structure is much different.

Personal rates are progressive, standard deductions and personal exemptions is essentially the equivalent of deducting food/housing/utilities, you can itemize if you have enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
"Business wouldn't invest unless they could recover the initial cost of development". Nonsense. They would invest, but the increased costs would result in absurdly high prices past on to the consumer. So the government allows business to write these expenses off and not pay taxes on them. It's not a subsidy in the traditional tax sense, but it's still the government giving business a tax break. Same end result.

Imagine if I could write off my personal house payment, car payment, insurance payment, grocery bills, phone bills, gasoline bills, internet, etc, etc, from my federal income taxes as an investment into my personal wage income and only pay taxes on the delta "profit" at the end of the year. That would be wonderful! But sadly that luxury only works for businesses, not individuals.
So a business shouldn't be able to deduct labor expenses for the employees doing the R&D? Should a business have to pay taxes on the income of the employees? Is a business getting a subsidy to pay your salary?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,541 Posts
Ok...so, what are we arguing about again?

Lets just cut this short and say "Supermoto, you won...whatever it is you need to hear in order to end this...you won"

I'll admit that I'm for limited subsidies/tax credits/etc to buyers, but the people you're arguing against have the same effing point of view as you, but you're so damn argumentative that you don't even notice it.

Now that's been said, can we get back to the overall topic at hand? Yes, I believe the subsidy/tax credit/bribe/whateveryouwantofkingcallit will spur EV sales. I've said it before, if the goal is "saving the planet" then you need to make low end EVs cost competitive to their mainstream counterparts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: emh

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,669 Posts
So a business shouldn't be able to deduct labor expenses for the employees doing the R&D? Should a business have to pay taxes on the income of the employees? Is a business getting a subsidy to pay your salary?
I never said they shouldn't or that I disagreed with the taxing methodology, because I do. I was merely stating that everybody gets a break is in some way or another on taxes for various reason, and then somebody else has to fill that void - or at least we would if the US actually had a balanced budget that we stuck to. Obviously if all subsidies to people and businesses were removed then a different tax rate structure would have to be introduced to rebalance everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: emh

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
People that think a deduction for a legitimate business expense is a subsidy are not agreeing with me. People getting a tax credit for buying an EV instead of a gas vehicle are getting a subsidy. I noticed you didn't choose to answer questions I brought up in my last post.

I'm argumentative, that's funny coming from someone who is very.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,541 Posts
People that think a deduction for a legitimate business expense is a subsidy are not agreeing with me. People getting a tax credit for buying an EV instead of a gas vehicle are getting a subsidy. I noticed you didn't choose to answer questions I brought up in my last post.

I'm argumentative, that's funny coming from someone who is very.
A deduction for a legitimate business expense is a subsidy when businesses from a particular industry are singled out to receive that benefit.

I really don't think I'm argumentative, I'm just right a lot more than I'm wrong.

For Example:
The '21 Acura TLX does not look like a Honda - fact
The CT4 has a stupid looking back end and a weird FWD esque profile - fact and I damn sure wouldn't spend $55k on one with a base truck engine.
The Malibu is garbage - fact
The Escalade actually isn't all that great - fact
The Hummer EVs are useless - fact
...and the Hummer H2 does gets <13 MPGs - I really don't care that it "wasn't EPA rated because of weight" that doesn't change the fact that it got ****ty gas mileage, it also actually did get rated, GM just didn't have to publish it.

...and there are others.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,523 Posts
Ok...so, what are we arguing about again?

Lets just cut this short and say "Supermoto, you won...whatever it is you need to hear in order to end this...you won"

I'll admit that I'm for limited subsidies/tax credits/etc to buyers, but the people you're arguing against have the same effing point of view as you, but you're so damn argumentative that you don't even notice it.

Now that's been said, can we get back to the overall topic at hand? Yes, I believe the subsidy/tax credit/bribe/whateveryouwantofkingcallit will spur EV sales. I've said it before, if the goal is "saving the planet" then you need to make low end EVs cost competitive to their mainstream counterparts.
This was the tired OLD argument, that started it............

When free market principles apply to the Oil & Gas industry. Subsidies to Oil & Gas effectively subsidizes combustion cars to the tune of $8k each.

Common Law also dictates you pay for the damage you cause to others. Oil & Gas should pay the healthcare cost they cause in cancer, asthma, brain development problems in children etc etc etc
Which I quickly replied..........

Stop with this nonsense ...............
Sorry we can't put the Genie back in the bottle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,815 Posts
If it is a legitimate business expense why would you call it a subsidy? Oh yeah you like to not only argue, but insist that you are right. Got it.
 
61 - 80 of 105 Posts
Top