Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 13:50:28 GMT
will join Trump's Cabinet. I was worried there for a while there weren't enough of them. I sure am glad we didn't get stuck w/Hillary w/all her Goldman Sachs cronies. Aren't you? www.businessinsider.com/gary-cohn-to-receive-100-million-exit-package-from-goldman-2017-1"Gary Cohn will get at least $100 million for leaving Goldman Sachs to join Trump's administration Outgoing Goldman Sachs chief operating officer Gary Cohn will pick up an exit package worth at least $100 million (£79.8 million) as he moves to work for the Trump administration. Cohn will receive a cash payout of roughly $65 million, according to a document filed by Goldman with the Securities and Exchange Commission." So, he got $100 MILLION for leaving. He's worked there 26 years. I'm guess he's sitting on many hundreds of millions all together. But yeah, tell me again about swamp-draining and working for 'Rill Amuricans'. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 14:15:16 GMT
Well technically he received $100 million for the 26 years at Goldman Sachs - not for leaving. He cashed out his LTIP plan. Now the silver lining is think of the big fat check he's going to have to write the IRS next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jan 25, 2017 16:11:48 GMT
Well technically he received $100 million for the 26 years at Goldman Sachs - not for leaving. He cashed out his LTIP plan. Now the silver lining is think of the big fat check he's going to have to write the IRS next year. Do you really suppose he pays taxes? |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 16:23:15 GMT
Well technically he received $100 million for the 26 years at Goldman Sachs - not for leaving. He cashed out his LTIP plan. Now the silver lining is think of the big fat check he's going to have to write the IRS next year. Do you really suppose he pays taxes? Of course. His base comp is way too high avoid taxes - so he's been a regular check writer. I don't know how GS structures their LTIP plan, most are structured to avoid paying taxes at grant - usually by having the stock vest - or use options or phantom stock so you don't have full control and thus don't have to pay taxes initially. But the IRS will eventually catch up with you. |
|
|
|
Post by terri on Jan 25, 2017 16:34:19 GMT
I can't say this surprises me as I didn't for one minute think he was going to drain the swamp, but I am surprised at how quickly he is showing himself to be an utter hypocrite and liar.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 16:54:55 GMT
Well technically he received $100 million for the 26 years at Goldman Sachs - not for leaving. He cashed out his LTIP plan. Now the silver lining is think of the big fat check he's going to have to write the IRS next year. But he ALSO received a salary and options and bonuses for 26 years. He's sitting on a few hundred million. AT LEAST. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 16:55:26 GMT
Well technically he received $100 million for the 26 years at Goldman Sachs - not for leaving. He cashed out his LTIP plan. Now the silver lining is think of the big fat check he's going to have to write the IRS next year. Do you really suppose he pays taxes? No way. Or at least not at the stated rates for someone at that income level. Taxes are for chumps who can't buy their own loopholes. Why do you think the tax code is so huge? They pay effective rates FAR lower than average wage earners - Buffett has already proven this. |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jan 25, 2017 17:25:04 GMT
Well technically he received $100 million for the 26 years at Goldman Sachs - not for leaving. He cashed out his LTIP plan. Now the silver lining is think of the big fat check he's going to have to write the IRS next year. Ha ha! |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 17:39:16 GMT
Do you really suppose he pays taxes? No way. Or at least not at the stated rates for someone at that income level. Taxes are for chumps who can't buy their own loopholes. Why do you think the tax code is so huge? They pay effective rates FAR lower than average wage earners - Buffett has already proven this. Buffet shows that INVESTORS pay far lower rates, hedge fund managers get a huge break on their carried interests, there are huge loopholes for business owners depending on the business and how it's structured. Now investment bankers are a whole different kettle of fish. Their base comp and bonuses are taxed at normal income tax rates. It is true that the LTIPs were formed to delay taxes, and depending on how it's structured, they may be able to pay capital gains for part of it - it completely depends on how it's structured. But if you think investment bankers aren't paying income taxes rates on their cash bonuses - you're wrong. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 17:44:51 GMT
No way. Or at least not at the stated rates for someone at that income level. Taxes are for chumps who can't buy their own loopholes. Why do you think the tax code is so huge? They pay effective rates FAR lower than average wage earners - Buffett has already proven this. Buffet shows that INVESTORS pay far lower rates, hedge fund managers get a huge break on their carried interests, there are huge loopholes for business owners depending on the business and how it's structured. Now investment bankers are a whole different kettle of fish. Their base comp and bonuses are taxed at normal income tax rates. It is true that the LTIPs were formed to delay taxes, and depending on how it's structured, they may be able to pay capital gains for part of it - it completely depends on how it's structured. But if you think investment bankers aren't paying income taxes rates on their cash bonuses - you're wrong. As you said, DEPENDS. I'm sure he's smart enough and his employment contract is smart enough to not get comp'ed as normal income for bonuses, options, etc. He, like Romney and other "masters of the universe" get to call income "cap gains" and are taxed at a measly 15% for much of it. Paying the bonus as shares rather than as a cash handout means staff would be taxed at 18% on capital gains rather than the top rate of income tax. www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-carried-interest-and-how-should-it-be-taxedMore here: Carried interest, income flowing to the general partner of a private investment fund, is generally treated as capital gains for the purposes of taxation. As I said, BUYING THE LAWS. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 17:47:50 GMT
Buffet shows that INVESTORS pay far lower rates, hedge fund managers get a huge break on their carried interests, there are huge loopholes for business owners depending on the business and how it's structured. Now investment bankers are a whole different kettle of fish. Their base comp and bonuses are taxed at normal income tax rates. It is true that the LTIPs were formed to delay taxes, and depending on how it's structured, they may be able to pay capital gains for part of it - it completely depends on how it's structured. But if you think investment bankers aren't paying income taxes rates on their cash bonuses - you're wrong. As you said, DEPENDS. I'm sure he's smart enough and his employment contract is smart enough to not get comp'ed as normal income for bonuses, options, etc. He, like Romney and other "masters of the universe" get to call income "cap gains" and are taxed at a measly 15% for much of it. money.cnn.com/2012/09/21/pf/taxes/romney-tax-return/Again you're conflating investors with earned income. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 17:51:04 GMT
As you said, DEPENDS. I'm sure he's smart enough and his employment contract is smart enough to not get comp'ed as normal income for bonuses, options, etc. He, like Romney and other "masters of the universe" get to call income "cap gains" and are taxed at a measly 15% for much of it. money.cnn.com/2012/09/21/pf/taxes/romney-tax-return/Again you're conflating investors with earned income. No I am not. We do not know how he is BONUSED. There is nothing that says his bonus is cash. As shares, he is AN INVESTOR in Goldman. Sheesh. |
|
|
|
Post by cade387 on Jan 25, 2017 17:55:58 GMT
Not mention, I'm sure he owns a number of "small farms" and has many real estates losses that he can offset for years like many of them do....
|
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 18:00:43 GMT
Again you're conflating investors with earned income. No I am not. We do not know how he is BONUSED. There is nothing that saysa his bonus is cash. As shares, he is AN INVESTOR in Goldman. Sheesh. You just linked to Romney's income tax return to showing his effective rate - as AN INVESTOR. How is that no conflating earned income and capital gains rates? And FYI, we do know how he is BONUSED. Pull up the Goldman Sach's annual return his cash salary and bonus are listed for the last 5 years, so is his restricted stock, so is his other comp that went into the LTIP plan. We also know that LTIP are NOT carried interest, so I have no idea why you're adding that little ETA which is utterly irrelevant. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 18:03:07 GMT
No I am not. We do not know how he is BONUSED. There is nothing that saysa his bonus is cash. As shares, he is AN INVESTOR in Goldman. Sheesh. You just linked to Romney's income tax return to showing his effective rate - as AN INVESTOR. How is that no conflating earned income and capital gains rates? And FYI, we do know how he is BONUSED. Pull up the Goldman Sach's annual return his cash salary and bonus are listed for the last 5 years, so is his restricted stock, so is his other comp that went into the LTIP plan. We also know that LTIP are NOT carried interest, so I have no idea why you're adding that little ETA which is utterly irrelevant. I will have a look at his last 5 years. And the little ETA is not irrelevant unless he is not an investor. Which, given that he's been there for 26 years is HIGHLY unlikely that non of his comp came in the form of shares or options on shares which were exercised and held long enough to be taxed as cap gains. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 18:04:57 GMT
You just linked to Romney's income tax return to showing his effective rate - as AN INVESTOR. How is that no conflating earned income and capital gains rates? And FYI, we do know how he is BONUSED. Pull up the Goldman Sach's annual return his cash salary and bonus are listed for the last 5 years, so is his restricted stock, so is his other comp that went into the LTIP plan. We also know that LTIP are NOT carried interest, so I have no idea why you're adding that little ETA which is utterly irrelevant. I will have a look at his last 5 years. And the little ETA is not irrelevant unless he is not an investor. Which, given that he's been there for 26 years is HIGHLY unlikely that non of his comp came in the form of shares or options on shares which were exercised and held as cap gains. Carried interest is NOT for investors. It's a completely different category used for fund managers - which he is NOT. And it certainly is not for an LTIP plan which was we're discussing. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 18:10:41 GMT
I will have a look at his last 5 years. And the little ETA is not irrelevant unless he is not an investor. Which, given that he's been there for 26 years is HIGHLY unlikely that non of his comp came in the form of shares or options on shares which were exercised and held as cap gains. Carried interest is NOT for investors. It's a completely different category used for fund managers - which he is NOT. And it certainly is not for an LTIP plan which was we're discussing. First of all, he is not a fund manager AT GOLDMAN. We have no idea what other holdings he owns and whether he owns hedge funds. You're the one who brought up carried interest. I was only trying to give an example of "masters of the universe" buying the tax laws. Secondly, his takeaway is more like $285 MILLION. And yes, part of it is in stock. Which will be taxed at a lower rate (provided he holds it a year) when it is liquidated and comes to him as income, than the income that his secretaries and assistants make. Again, making my point, that it is good to buy the tax laws. Income is taxed one way when you work your butt off. And another way when you sit on your butt waiting for your money to make money. "Gary Cohn’s jump from Goldman Sachs Group Inc. to Donald Trump’s administration is helping him unlock more than $284 million in pent up bonuses, stock holdings and other investments through the Wall Street bank." www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-24/goldman-sachs-paid-ex-president-gary-cohn-20-million-for-2016 |
|
|
|
Post by missmiss on Jan 25, 2017 18:23:15 GMT
Well technically he received $100 million for the 26 years at Goldman Sachs - not for leaving. He cashed out his LTIP plan. Now the silver lining is think of the big fat check he's going to have to write the IRS next year. That is correct. So really he got around: $3,846,153.84 extra per year for his 26 years. Good times! Aren't taxes being lowered for that bracket while single parents and some families are going to see an increase? Accordingly, Goldman said, Mr Cohn would walk away with a cash payout of about $65m, the proceeds of sales of stock in the bank that he had been awarded under two separate incentive plans. He has also received restricted shares worth a gross $35m, Goldman said, adding that it had lifted restrictions on another $23m of shares already sitting in Mr Cohn’s brokerage account. After taxes, the sum comes to about $106m, according to a person familiar with the arrangement. From this article: www.ft.com/content/095bcb94-e28e-11e6-8405-9e5580d6e5fb |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 18:23:52 GMT
I brought up carried interest to acknowledge where some of the nicer loopholes are in the finance industry. Even if Mr. Cohn INVESTS in hedge funds he does NOT get carried interest. He is not a fund manager.
And FYI restricted stock is actually taxed as INCOME when it is fully vested at NORMAL INCOME TAX RATES. RSUs and PSUs do not avoid EARNED INCOME TAX RATES. It is only the CAPITAL GAIN in stocks that is taxed at a lower effective rate.
I really don't think we need to feel sorry for him, he's made a boat load of money, but the questions was whether he'll pay taxes - and yes he will absolutely pay taxes and and most of it at extremely high effective tax rates as the vast majority of his income FROM GOLDMAN SACHS is considered EARNED not INVESTMENT. Now he probably has a whole OTHER pile of cash that he is earning dividend, and capital gains rates on = hell he's been at Goldman Sachs for 26 years, if the man doesn't have a huge investment portfolio he's an idiot - but the question was regarding whether he'll pay taxes on his GOLDMAN SACHS payout.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 25, 2017 18:27:56 GMT
I brought up carried interest to acknowledge where some of the nicer loopholes are in the finance industry. Even if Mr. Cohn INVESTS in hedge funds he does NOT get carried interest. He is not a fund manager. And FYI restricted stock is actually taxed as INCOME when it is fully vested at NORMAL INCOME TAX RATES. RSUs and PSUs do not avoid EARNED INCOME TAX RATES. It is only the CAPITAL GAIN in stocks that is taxed at a lower effective rate. I really don't think we need to feel sorry for him, he's made a boat load of money, but the questions was whether he'll pay taxes - and yes he will absolutely pay taxes and and most of it at extremely high effective tax rates as the vast majority of his income FROM GOLDMAN SACHS is considered EARNED not INVESTMENT. Now he probably has a whole OTHER pile of cash that he is earning dividend, and capital gains rates on = hell he's been at Goldman Sachs for 26 years, if the man doesn't have a huge investment portfolio he's an idiot - but the question was regarding whether he'll pay taxes on his GOLDMAN SACHS payout. Agreed. He will pay taxes. Likely at a much lower effective rate than most of his assistants, or the janitors. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 25, 2017 18:52:26 GMT
I'd love you to find a janitor paying the same effective rate as Buffet - let alone Cohn's payout. But you're more interested in sticking to your talking point then actually delving into the various forms of compensations and how they're taxed.
|
|
~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876 
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Jan 25, 2017 18:55:13 GMT
Of course, a flat tax on all income, passive and aggressive and doing away with the whole IRC would solve all these problems.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2017 13:20:56 GMT
I'd love you to find a janitor paying the same effective rate as Buffet - let alone Cohn's payout. But you're more interested in sticking to your talking point then actually delving into the various forms of compensations and how they're taxed. It'd be easy to find them paying MORE than Buffett or Cohn or any of these billionaires who take a lot of their comp as stock or options that are exercised and then held one year. Sit on your butt income is taxed less than work your butt off income. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 26, 2017 15:29:11 GMT
I'd love you to find a janitor paying the same effective rate as Buffet - let alone Cohn's payout. But you're more interested in sticking to your talking point then actually delving into the various forms of compensations and how they're taxed. It'd be easy to find them paying MORE than Buffett or Cohn or any of these billionaires who take a lot of their comp as stock or options that are exercised and then held one year. Sit on your butt income is taxed less than work your butt off income. You're just wrong. You're completely ignoring the fact that there are progressive tax rates and deductions. On average, American's pay an effective Federal tax rate of 9% - janitors do not make higher than average income and absolutely do not pay an effective tax rate of 15%-20% (the dividend and capital gains rate depending on income). |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2017 15:34:23 GMT
It'd be easy to find them paying MORE than Buffett or Cohn or any of these billionaires who take a lot of their comp as stock or options that are exercised and then held one year. Sit on your butt income is taxed less than work your butt off income. You're just wrong. You're completely ignoring the fact that there are progressive tax rates and deductions. On average, American's pay an effective Federal tax rate of 9% - janitors do not make higher than average income and absolutely do not pay an effective tax rate of 15%-20% (the dividend and capital gains rate depending on income). You're completely ignoring that they pay FICA on 100% of their income while the sit on their asses folks pay 0% toward FICA on cap gains income and top out at paying FICA on only the first $118,500 of wage income. "And on average, according to the report, the below-$100,000 taxpayers paid 35 percent of their taxable income in taxes (income and payroll), while the millionaires paid 30 percent." www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2015/jan/25/tammy-baldwin/middle-class-pays-higher-tax-rates-millionaires-se/ |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 26, 2017 15:56:49 GMT
You're just wrong. You're completely ignoring the fact that there are progressive tax rates and deductions. On average, American's pay an effective Federal tax rate of 9% - janitors do not make higher than average income and absolutely do not pay an effective tax rate of 15%-20% (the dividend and capital gains rate depending on income). You're completely ignoring that they pay FICA on 100% of their income while the sit on their asses folks pay 0% toward FICA on cap gains income and top out at paying FICA on only the first $118,500 of wage income. "And on average, according to the report, the below-$100,000 taxpayers paid 35 percent of their taxable income in taxes (income and payroll), while the millionaires paid 30 percent." www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2015/jan/25/tammy-baldwin/middle-class-pays-higher-tax-rates-millionaires-se/Of course I'm ignoring FICA we're discussing EFFECTIVE RATE for FEDERAL INCOME TAXES. Which you've now stated numerous times on this thread that a janitor pays at a higher rate. Go back and read your own comments. and Since I've now proven you false, you want to change the argument? Why don't you go google an average salary for a janitor and their all in rate - I'll give you a hint - they'll be in that 10 percentile group of the below $100,000 group in your link. So again, stop repeating the MYTH that janitors are paying higher taxes than millionaires. |
|
|
|
Post by anonrefugee on Jan 26, 2017 16:44:13 GMT
Second day and I still smile when I read the thread title. The sarcasm is thick!
And then I remember what you're talking about, and want to cry in a corner.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2017 17:43:09 GMT
Of course I'm ignoring FICA we're discussing EFFECTIVE RATE for FEDERAL INCOME TAXES. Which you've now stated numerous times on this thread that a janitor pays at a higher rate. Go back and read your own comments. and Since I've now proven you false, you want to change the argument? Why don't you go google an average salary for a janitor and their all in rate - I'll give you a hint - they'll be in that 10 percentile group of the below $100,000 group in your link. So again, stop repeating the MYTH that janitors are paying higher taxes than millionaires. Where do my quotes say I was only talking Fed Income effective tax rate? Janitors pay a higher TOTAL effective rate than billionaires (as sourced above). |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jan 26, 2017 17:48:34 GMT
Of course I'm ignoring FICA we're discussing EFFECTIVE RATE for FEDERAL INCOME TAXES. Which you've now stated numerous times on this thread that a janitor pays at a higher rate. Go back and read your own comments. and Since I've now proven you false, you want to change the argument? Why don't you go google an average salary for a janitor and their all in rate - I'll give you a hint - they'll be in that 10 percentile group of the below $100,000 group in your link. So again, stop repeating the MYTH that janitors are paying higher taxes than millionaires. Where do my quotes say I was only talking Fed Income effective tax rate? Janitors pay a higher TOTAL effective rate than billionaires. Source please. Especially as your own link contradicts you! |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 20, 2024 17:16:27 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2017 18:09:13 GMT
See bolded above.
|
|
My original pea date was November 1999 and my number was 1803