President Biden

[Guisslapp]

Give me examples of somebody (the rich as you said), using $600 payments, taking advantage of the current allowable banking rules. There's not a bank around that won't pick up on multiple transactions and shut them down even for a couple of hundred.

Person that makes their money from renting properties.

[dawg80]

$600 is barely pocket change! This is stupid! So typical of big-guvmint commie bastards to want to stick their nose in everyone's business. Under obummer there were so many regs placed on banks they could barely operate. Who paid the biggest price for that? Yep, the "small" guy, especially would-be small business owners/entrepreneurs having a mountain of new paperwork to climb just to TRY to get a business loan. Didn't impact the BIG GUYS very much or at all.

What a frickin' joke! $600....sheeesh! POCKET CHANGE!

[Guisslapp]

Yeah, I don’t really agree with it either.

[PawDawg]

Person that makes their money from renting properties.

So you think cashing those $600 or $1000 or $1500 checks is wrong? Cash is not bad. It can be used to pay expenses on those rental properties.

You people are amazing. Control is what you want, not taxes.

[dawg80]

Yeah, I don’t really agree with it either.

You nudged up a peg...now at -356 credibility.

[Guisslapp]

So you think cashing those $600 or $1000 or $1500 checks is wrong? Cash is not bad. It can be used to pay expenses on those rental properties.

You people are amazing. Control is what you want, not taxes.

I didn’t say it was.

[PawDawg]

They are trying to make it harder for rich people to avoid paying the taxes they owe. Bottom earners that get most of their income from wages are already ratted out by their employers.

Yes you did.

[Guisslapp]

Yes you did.

And how did you infer “cashing checks is wrong” from that statement?

[PawDawg]

The adults are still looking out for the little man…proposing to have banks report ALL transactions over $600.00

I said this

You said this...

They are trying to make it harder for rich people to avoid paying the taxes they owe. Bottom earners that get most of their income from wages are already ratted out by their employers.

[Guisslapp]

I said this

You said this...

They are trying to make it harder for rich people to avoid paying the taxes they owe. Bottom earners that get most of their income from wages are already ratted out by their employers.

And how did you infer “cashing checks is wrong” from that statement?

[PawDawg]

And how did you infer “cashing checks is wrong” from that statement?

How else can evil landlords take advantage?

[Guisslapp]

How else can evil landlords take advantage?

Not reporting income is the problem, not cashing checks. But if you were to start cashing your checks to avoid detecting income, it is going to be a lot harder to argue any sort of “good faith” to mitigate penalties.

[PawDawg]

Try to keep up. The idiots in charge are backing down to $600 transactions. You said that was to keep the rich from beating the system. The only way they can then beat the system is to not report cash collected from renters. How will this stupid new regulation prevent that?

[Guisslapp]

Try to keep up. The idiots in charge are backing down to $600 transactions. You said that was to keep the rich from beating the system. The only way they can then beat the system is to not report cash collected from renters. How will this stupid new regulation prevent that?

Because it is a major pain for rich people not to use the US banking system.

[Guisslapp]

My problem with the proposal is not in its use to detect tax cheating. And if that were the goal, I think there are probably better strategies for doing that. My problem with the proposal is that it appears that the government is trying to use it for more generalized information collection to SHAPE tax policy.