Taxes « Invoice Factoring Texas | Factoring Industry News

New Health Care Law Will Have Negative Impact

February 24, 2011

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act represents the most significant transformation of the American health care system since Medicare and Medicaid. It will fundamentally change nearly every aspect of health care, from insurance to the final delivery of care. The length and complexity of the legislation, combined with a debate that often generated more heat than light, has led to massive confusion about the law’s likely impact. But it is now possible to analyze what is and is not in it, what it likely will and will not do, says Michael Tanner, a senior fellow with the Cato Institute.

In particular, we now know that:

While the new law will increase the number of Americans with insurance coverage, it falls significantly short of universal coverage — by 2019, roughly 21 million Americans will still be uninsured.

The legislation will cost far more than advertised — more than $2.7 trillion over 10 years of full implementation, and will add more than $823 billion to the national debt over the program’s first 10 years.

The new law will increase taxes by more than $569 billion between now and 2019, and the burdens it places on business will significantly reduce economic growth and employment.

While the law contains few direct provisions for rationing care, it nonetheless sets the stage for government rationing and interference with how doctors practice medicine.

Millions of Americans who are happy with their current health insurance will not be able to keep it.

In short, the more we have learned about what is in this new law, the more it looks like bad news for American taxpayers, businesses, health care providers and patients, says Tanner.

Source: Michael D. Tanner, “Bad Medicine: A Guide to the Real Costs and Consequences of the New Health Care Law,” Cato Institute, February 14, 2011.

For text:

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11961

Comments: (0) Tags: Economic, Economy, News, Small Business, Taxes

Obamacare Packs Crushing New Taxes

January 18, 2011

Friday, 14 Jan 2011 08:53 AM Newsmax.com

By Grover Norquist

From the ATR website.

Next week, the U.S. House of Representatives will be voting on a historic repeal of the Obamacare law.

While there are many reasons to oppose this flawed government health insurance law, it is important to remember that Obamacare is also one of the largest tax increases in American history.

Below is a comprehensive list of the two dozen new or higher taxes that pay for Obamcare’s expansion of government spending and interference between doctors and patients.

Individual Mandate Excise Tax (January 2014): anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following.


	1 Adult	2 Adults	3+ Adults
2014	1% AGI/$95	1% AGI/$190	1% AGI/$285
2015	2% AGI/$325	2% AGI/$650	2% AGI/$975
2016+	2.5% AGI/$695	2.5% AGI/$1,390	2.5% AGI/$2,085

Exemptions for religious objectors, undocumented immigrants, prisoners, those earning less than the poverty line, members of Indian tribes, and hardship cases (determined by HHS).

Employer Mandate Tax (January 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2,000 for all full-time employees. This provision applies to all employers with 50 or more employees.

If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3,000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer).

Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years.

Surtax on Investment Income ($123 billion/January 2013): This increase involves the creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income.

	Capital Gains	Dividends	Other*
2010	15%	15%	35%
2011-2012 (now)	20%	39.6%	39.6%
2011-2012 (budget)	20%	20%	39.6%
2013+ (now)	23.8%	43.4%	43.4%
2013+ (budget)	23.8%	23.8%	43.4%

*Other unearned income includes (for surtax purposes) gross income from interest, annuities, royalties, net rents, and passive income in partnerships and Subchapter-S corporations. It does not include municipal bond interest or life insurance proceeds, since those do not add to gross income. It does not include active trade or business income, fair market value sales of ownership in pass-through entities, or distributions from retirement plans. The 3.8 percent surtax does not apply to non-resident aliens.

Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans ($32 billion /January 2018): New 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). For early retirees and high-risk professions exists a higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family). CPI +1 percentage point indexed.

Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax ($86.8 billion/January 2013): Current law and changes:

	First $200,000 ($250,000 Married) Employer/Employee	All Remaining Wages Employer/Employee
Current Law	1.45%/1.45% 2.9% self-employed	1.45%/1.45% 2.9% self-employed
Obama Tax Hike	1.45%/1.45% 2.9% self-employed	1.45%/2.35% 3.8% self-employed

Medicine Cabinet Tax ($5 billion/January 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin).

HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike($1.4 billion/January 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.

Flexible Spending Account Cap — “Special Needs Kids Tax” ($13 billion/January 2013): Imposes cap of $2,500 (indexed to inflation after 2013) on FSAs (now unlimited). There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children.

There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education.

Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.

Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers($20 billion/January 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3 percent excise tax. Exemptions include items retailing for less than $100.

Raise “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction From 7.5 percent to 10 Percent of AGI ($15.2 billion/January 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI).

The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI; it is waived for taxpayers 65 or older in 2013-2016 only.

Tax on Indoor Tanning Services ($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons.

Elimination of Tax Deduction for Employer-Provided Retirement Rx Drug Coverage in Coordination With Medicare Part D ($4.5 billion/January 2013)

Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike ($0.4 billion/January 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services.

Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals(Min/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new “community health assessment needs,” “financial assistance,” and “billing and collection” rules set by HHS.

Tax on Innovator Drug Companies($22.2 billion/January 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year.

Tax on Health Insurers($60.1 billion/January 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. The stipulation phases in gradually until 2018, and is fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits.

$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives ($0.6 billion/January 2013)

Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Min./January 2011): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns.

Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting ($17.1 billion/January 2012): Requires businesses to send 1099-MISC information tax forms to corporations (currently limited to individuals), a huge compliance burden for small employers.

“Black Liquor”($23.6 billion): This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel.

Codification of the “Economic Substance Doctrine” ($4.5 billion): This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Obamacare Packs Crushing New Taxes

Comments: (0) Tags: Government, Small Business, Taxes

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of the Tax Deal

January 3, 2011

Compared to ideal tax policy, the deal announced this week between congressional Republicans and President Obama is terrible. But compared to what many expected to happen, the deal is pretty good. In other words, grading this package depends on your benchmark. This is why reaction has been all over the map, says Daniel J. Mitchell, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

The Good.

The good part of the agreement is the avoidance of bad things, sort of the political version of the Hippocratic oath — do no harm.

Tax rates next year are not going to increase.

The main provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax acts are extended for two years — including the lower tax rates on dividends and capital gains.

Another bit of good news is that the death tax will be 35 percent for two years, rather than 55 percent, as would have happened without an agreement.

Last but not least, there is a one-year provision allowing businesses to”expense” new investment rather than have it taxed.

The Bad.

The burden of government spending is going to increase.

Unemployment benefits are extended for 13 months.

And there is no effort to reduce spending elsewhere to “pay for” this new budgetary burden.

The Ugly.

As happens so often when politicians make decisions, the deal includes all sorts of special-interest provisions.

Moreover, the temporary nature of the package is disappointing, and there will be very little economic boost from this deal.

Source: Daniel J. Mitchell, “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of the Tax Deal,” Cato-at-Liberty.org, December 7, 2010.

For text:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly-of-the-tax-deal/

source: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=20118&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD

Comments: (0) Tags: Economic, Economic Impact, Government, News, Taxes

Unemployment Insurance Kills Small Business

December 27, 2010

December 10, 2010

from the website: http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=20126&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm

While politicians in Washington negotiate a deal to provide welcome temporary payroll, income and estate tax relief to America’s workers, struggling employers wonder how long they’ll have to pay for the compassion of others — and whether they can survive, says Michelle Malkin.

The Beltway deal hinges on extending federal unemployment insurance (UI) for another 13 months. This would mark the sixth time that the deadline has been extended since June 2008.

The cost of the joint federal-state program is borne by employers who pay state and federal taxes on a portion of wages paid to each employee in a calendar year. (At the federal level, employers must pay 6.2 percent of the first $7,000 of income to keep the system afloat.)

The combined burden of these hidden state and federal payroll taxes has exploded during the recession as economic recovery interventions backfire and the jobless rate remains stuck near double-digits. State Unemployment Insurance funds have gone broke in nearly half the states. As of April 2010, 35 states and jurisdictions had unemployment fund-related debts worth $39.5 billion, says Malkin.

In an interminable money shuffle, these bankrupt state Unemployment Insurance funds are now borrowing money from the feds, whose own regular unemployment benefits account and extended benefits account are both in the red.

In Colorado, small and midsize firms have been saddled with eye-popping unemployment insurance bills that have doubled, tripled and more in the past year.

Greg Howard, owner of McCabe’s Tavern in Colorado Springs, told the Colorado Springs Gazette his bill spiked a whopping 600 percent.

A small commercial painting contractor say that her nine-person company’s first quarter Unemployment Insurance bill has gone from $1,000 to more than $6,500 over the past three years.

Source: Michelle Malkin, “Unemployment Insurance Kills Small Business,” Washington Examiner, December 8, 2010.

For text:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2010/12/michelle-malkin-unemployment-insurance-kills-small-business

Comments: (0) Tags: Economy, Federal Spending, Government, Small Business, Taxes

The Walking Death Tax

December 8, 2010

Without action in the lame duck Congress, the estate tax will rise from the dead on January 1 with a vengeance, the rate climbing back to 55 percent from zero this year. The exemption amount will revert to a miserly $1 million, unindexed for inflation, so more middle class taxpayers and small businesses will get hit year after year, says the Wall Street Journal.

President Obama and Congressional Democrats don’t think this is a high priority, but voters do.

A November Gallup Poll found that Americans think that keeping the estate tax “from increasingly significantly” is “very important” by 56 percent to 17 percent “not too important.”

That’s more than think it is a priority to extend current tax rates (50 percent), extend jobless benefits (48 percent) or ratify the START treaty (40 percent).

Mr. Obama, who professes to care about small businesses and jobs, should pay attention to new estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation.

The committee finds that reverting to the 55 percent rate with a $1 million exemption will tax roughly 10 times more small businesses and farms than would Sen. Jon Kyl’s proposal of a 35 percent rate with a $5 million deduction.

A recent study by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the former director of the Congressional Budget Office, finds that the estate tax reduces savings and capital formation and forces family businesses to liquidate at the time of an owner’s death, which puts hundreds of thousands of jobs in peril.

As for the deficit, Congress could give relief to families and enhance revenue collections by lowering the gift tax rate to 10 percent or 15 percent from 35 percent on any gifts above $13,000 a year. This would allow parents to pass along more money to their kids and grandkids while they are still alive, increasing federal tax collections in the next few years by billions of dollars, says the Journal.

Source: “The Walking Death Tax,” Wall Street Journal, December 6, 2010.

For text:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703814404576001591839952886.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Comments: (0) Tags: News, Small Business, Taxes

Obama Vows to Kill Alternative Minimum Tax Relief

October 29, 2010

Written By: Dan Pilla

Published In: Budget & Tax News > October 2010

Publication date: 08/09/2010

Publisher: The Heartland Institute

For years I’ve been railing about the “stealth tax” known as the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). AMT is the tax that blindsides most people who end up owing it because the vast majority of Americans don’t even know it exists until it’s too late.

The National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina Olson, has also railed against the AMT. In her annual reports to Congress, the NTA has called for the repeal of the AMT consistently for the past 10 years.

Earlier this year the Congressional Research Service joined the NTA in warning more people will be clobbered by the tax unless something is done—and soon.

Millionaires to Middle-Earners
The tax, created in 1969 to require a handful of wealthy persons to pay a minimum tax, now hits millions of middle-income earners. The IRS estimates 39 percent of married couples with children will be paying the AMT in 2010.

This has happened largely because the AMT exemption amounts have not been indexed for inflation. As wages rise because of inflation, taxpayers get pushed into the AMT. Congress has passed temporary “patches” to keep new taxpayers from being affected, but it’s not enough.

Don’t look for Congress to do the right thing regarding the AMT, which would be to repeal the tax entirely. The federal government is too desperate for money. And that’s exactly what the President stated recently.

‘Deficit, Debt Too Big’
In a town hall meeting in Buffalo, Obama told taxpayers because “the nation’s deficit and debt are too big,” the tax cannot be eliminated. He said elimination “would create this huge hole in the budget.”

I have news for the President. There’s already a huge hole in the budget. Federal spending that is out of control created the hole.

In just the past two budget cycles, Congress created and the President authorized budgets in deficit to the tune of $1.3 trillion and $1.41 trillion, respectively. And that’s just the beginning. Next year’s budget deficit is projected to be even worse, at $1.47 trillion.

In addition, Congress created and the President authorized the establishment of a new federal entitlement program (health care) that promises to dwarf the spending of nearly every other entitlement program.

Government’s Money, Not Yours
Not only did Obama vow to keep taxes from being cut through AMT reform, he also guaranteed taxes will go up across the board. This came in the form of a shot he took at so-called “tax expenditures” in the tax code.

“Tax expenditure” is a phrase tax theologians use to describe a tax deduction. You see, in the mind of the typical tax theologian, a tax deduction is not a mechanism that allows you to keep more of your money. On the contrary. A “tax expenditure” means the government is spending its money by allowing you to take advantage of a deduction.

Think of it this way (since this is how tax theologians think of it): All money is “government money.” When the government allows you to keep some of its money by reducing your tax hit through a deduction, the government has actually incurred an “expense” known as a “tax expenditure.” The more “tax expenditures” there are in the law, the less money the government gets.

That’s why politicians often say, “We can’t afford this tax cut.” It’s as if they are spending their own money to do you a favor.

Tax Theology Sacrilege
Because the idea of the government getting less money is sacrilegious to tax theologians, they constantly seek ways to reduce these “tax expenditures.” Put another way, they work to cut legitimate tax deductions from the tax code so the net effect is that your taxes go up.

They sell this idea to the public by presenting the deductions as “loopholes,” or means by which “rich people” illegitimately get out of paying taxes. This way, Jane and Joe America believe stopping the tax cuts is a way to get further into the pockets of those rich people who don’t pay their fair share.

Tax theologians don’t tell you that the “rich” already pay such a large percentage of the income tax that any further “loophole” closing falls squarely into the laps of the average American. For example, “tax expenditures” that have from time to time been on the chopping block, depending upon the political climate, include the deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions, and IRA/401(k) contributions. How’s that for closing “loopholes?”

Loopholes for None
If you think this “loophole” closing will be a carefully crafted exercise targeted at just a select few exotic deductions favored only by the very rich, the President’s statements contradict that idea. He stated, “We’ve got to take out a hose and just eliminate these tax loopholes that are out there.”

The fact is, the vast majority of exotic tax loopholes were eliminated long ago. That was the selling point for creating the AMT in the first place—more than three decades ago. The President is really saying he wants more of your money. He just wants to make it look like he’s not actually attacking you to get it.

Dan Pilla (Pillatax@aol.com) is the best-selling author of 11 books on taxes and dealing with the IRS, including The IRS Problem Solver and How to Get Tax Amnesty. He runs TaxHelpOnline.com and publishes the Pilla Talks Taxes electronic newsletter.

Comments: (0) Tags: Tax Cuts, Taxes

Huge Tax Hikes Coming Unless Congress Acts

September 22, 2010

Budget & Tax News > October 2010

Written By: Alyssa Carducci

Published In: Budget & Tax News > October 2010

Publisher: The Heartland Institute

President Obama campaigned on the promise that middle-income earners—those earning $250,000 or less annually—would experience no tax increases. On the upcoming New Year’s Day, however, virtually every American will be facing the possibility of higher taxes.
Lowered tax rates on a wide variety of items including personal income, capital gains, dividends, and estate taxes that became law in 2001 and 2003 are set to expire on January 1 unless Congress extends them.

“Everyone’s tax rates will go up; everyone will see significantly higher taxes,” said Curtis Dubay, a senior policy analyst for the Heritage Foundation. “For the middle class that were promised not to pay tax increases, they’ll certainly see a much smaller paycheck starting in January.”

$1,540 per Family
Nationally, the typical middle-income family, which has a median income of $63,366, would see its federal income tax burden increase by $1,540 if the tax cuts expire, according to an analysis by the Tax Foundation.
“The Democrats are falling all over themselves promising the press and the American people that they will extend certain of the 2001 and 2003 tax relief, patch the AMT, etc. However, there seems to be no solid plans for doing so before the election [in November],” said Ryan Ellis, tax policy director for Americans for Tax Reform.

“In essence, they are asking people to trust that Congress will act after people have had [their only] chance to punish Congress if they don’t,” he said. “There are many of us on the right who believe that they don’t care to extend any of the tax cuts. They need the revenue to fund their permanently higher government spending.”

Business Burdens
American families and individual taxpayers would not be the only ones affected by the tax hike that will result if Congress takes no action. Ellis says both large and small businesses also have no certainty right now.

“If you’re a large employer, the expiration of the tax extenders—particularly the research and experimentation credit—gives you no ability to plan,” he said. “So there’s no sense of stability there,” he said.

He also pointed out many small businesses pay taxes at the rates applied to individuals.
“No one is sure where those rates are going to be, but there’s an increasing sense among business owners that rates are going up in January. There’s also uncertainty about small business expensing and the death tax,” he said.

Hundreds of Billions More
He said the combination of letting the 2001 and 2003 tax relief provisions expire, failing to “patch” the alternative minimum tax, and implementing the ObamaCare tax hikes would raise the nation’s tax burden hundreds of billions of dollars a year.
The alternative minimum tax was created 40 years ago to apply only to a handful of wealthy taxpayers to ensure they would pay a minimum amount of income tax, but it now affects millions of taxpayers because it has never been indexed for inflation. It does away with most deductions and tax credits, forcing people to pay more income tax.
Congress has been “patching” the tax code in recent years to help some people who would otherwise be hit by the AMT avoid its higher taxes.

“The tired old myth that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts were just tax cuts for the rich will finally, once and for all, be proven false,” Dubay said.

Alyssa Carducci (adc.republican@yahoo.com) writes from Florida.

SIDEBAR

If Congress allows the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts to expire, these are major changes that would happen:

Income tax would increase by 3 to 5 percentage points for every bracket, including an end to the lowest tax bracket, currently 10 percent.
Capital gains tax rates would rise from 15 percent to 20 percent, and dividends taxes would jump from 15 percent to 39.6 percent.
The death tax would rise from zero to 55 percent on estates over $1 million.
The child tax credit would drop from $1000 to $500 per child.

Comments: (0) Tags: Economic Impact, Economy, Small Business, Taxes

Clients’ Failure to Pay State Franchise Taxes is Risky Business for Factors

July 12, 2010

A guest blog by Scot Pierce

Factors need to be aware whether their clients are in good standing with the states where the clients conduct business. Most entities doing business in a particular state are required to pay state franchise taxes. Paying the taxes helps maintain an entity’s legal standing to do business in the state. Failure to pay, however, ultimately leads to tax forfeitures which can be a big problem for factors.

Tax forfeitures affect an entity’s liability protection. You are all familiar with the various entity forms. You know that some entity forms provide limited liability for owners, shareholders and partners. These include limited liability companies, S corporations, C corporations, limited liability partnerships, and professions corporations. You also know that sole proprietorships, general partnerships, joint ventures and DBAs have no limit on liability. Entities can lose their liability protection by failing to pay state franchise taxes.

Using Texas as an example, entities have three levels of standing. They are (1) “Good Standing,” (2) “Not in Good Standing,” (3) and ‘Temporary Good Standing.” Most states have the same or similar designations. “Good Standing” means the entity has filed all franchise tax reports and paid its franchise taxes in full. This allows the entity to continue doing business in the state. “Temporary Good Standing” is really no reflection on the entity itself. This simply means that the state has not yet processed the franchise tax reports. Until it does, all entities are granted temporary good standing.

“Not in Good Standing,” however, is very different. “Not in Good Standing” is a red flag for factors. It means that the entity has not paid its state franchise taxes and has, therefore, forfeited its right to do business in Texas. In practical terms, this means the entity is now operating as an assumed name or DBA so any shareholders, owners or partners are not protected personally from liability for debts incurred while the entity was “Not in Good Standing.” Or, to be more direct, you are now factoring a sole proprietorship or general partnership. My experience is that this not only can affect how you factor the client and perfect your security interest, but it is also a red flag that you may very well be factoring into a liquidation.

Because of the effect of failure to pay state franchise taxes, I recommend factors be vigilant in checking this. Usually, the state comptroller’s office will have this information. If you have a client whose account status changes for the worse, you should immediately contact the client to learn why this has happened and whether the client intends to correct the problem. This may allow you to catch a failing business early on and take appropriate steps to protect yourself. Or, it may allow you to avoid factoring a business that just wants your money while intending to file for bankruptcy protection. The bottom line is factoring a client who is not paying its state franchise taxes can be a recipe for disaster.

About the author:

Scot Pierce is a partner with the lawfirm of Bracket & Ellis, P.C. located in Fort Worth, Texas. He has represented a number of factors with commercial litigation and bankruptcy issues. He also regularly writes articles and presents speeches on creditor issues, including an upcoming teleconference on Issues to Consider when Litigating against Account Debtors. He can be reached at 817/339-2474 or spierce@belaw.com.

Comments: (0) Tags: Economic Impact, Small Business, Taxes

Small Businesses Face Dangerous Tax Hikes Ahead

February 1, 2010

Author: Michael Hosemann, Managing Director, Enterprise Consulting Solutions

In the “brave new world” following the November 2008 elections, small businesses face a phalanx of challenges in the tax arena. First of all, the Obama Administration and Democrats in Congress plan to allow some of the Bush-era tax cuts to expire, thus raising taxes on top earners. Secondly, the health care overhaul being debated in Congress contains proposals that pose a huge financial threat to small businesses. Finally, the Cap and Trade legislation that awaits debate in Congress proposes an energy tax in disguise that promises to artificially explode the cost of energy and, therefore, the cost of overhead in small businesses.
Read the rest of this entry »

Comments: (2) Tags: Economic Impact, Economy, Small Business, Tax Cuts, Taxes

Archives

Recent Fundings

New Health Care Law Will Have Negative Impact

Obamacare Packs Crushing New Taxes

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of the Tax Deal

Unemployment Insurance Kills Small Business

The Walking Death Tax

Obama Vows to Kill Alternative Minimum Tax Relief

Huge Tax Hikes Coming Unless Congress Acts

Clients’ Failure to Pay State Franchise Taxes is Risky Business for Factors

Small Businesses Face Dangerous Tax Hikes Ahead