• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Phil Mickelson Faces 61 Percent Tax Rate Following Back-To-Back Wins

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
61 percent rate...

And with California looking to confiscate over 13%, it's no wonder Phil has put his Southern California home up for sale.

Phil Mickelson Faces 61 Percent Tax Rate Following Back-To-Back Wins « CBS Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Thanks to his recent wins at both The Open Championship and the Scottish Open, Phil Mickelson pocketed more than $2.16 million in just two weeks.

The world’s top golfer —who came under fire earlier this year when he complained about his supposed 60 percent tax rate as a California resident — is taking another hit on his recent earnings.​


Is he justified to complain about his tax bill, or is he just another greedy 1%'er?
 

penn1954

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 30, 2013
Messages
1,311
Reaction score
844
Location
Ft.Wayne In
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
61 percent rate...

And with California looking to confiscate over 13%, it's no wonder Phil has put his Southern California home up for sale.

Phil Mickelson Faces 61 Percent Tax Rate Following Back-To-Back Wins « CBS Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Thanks to his recent wins at both The Open Championship and the Scottish Open, Phil Mickelson pocketed more than $2.16 million in just two weeks.

The world’s top golfer —who came under fire earlier this year when he complained about his supposed 60 percent tax rate as a California resident — is taking another hit on his recent earnings.​


Is he justified to complain about his tax bill, or is he just another greedy 1%'er?

Very justified!

Ca will miss his tax money when he leaves.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Forbes estimates he will take home $842,700, which, of course, does not include any of his tax-deductible travel expenses and the additional 10 percent he owes to his caddy. So why not extrapolate the deductible expenses. Drama?

This is all at the top rate so he made other money that wasn't at that rate.

Now, is that a lot of tax? Yes. Do I feel sorry for him? Not really. Does he have the right to bitch about this? Yes, of course.

BTW CA top rate is 10.13% not 13%.



.
61 percent rate...

And with California looking to confiscate over 13%, it's no wonder Phil has put his Southern California home up for sale.

Phil Mickelson Faces 61 Percent Tax Rate Following Back-To-Back Wins « CBS Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Thanks to his recent wins at both The Open Championship and the Scottish Open, Phil Mickelson pocketed more than $2.16 million in just two weeks.

The world’s top golfer —who came under fire earlier this year when he complained about his supposed 60 percent tax rate as a California resident — is taking another hit on his recent earnings.​


Is he justified to complain about his tax bill, or is he just another greedy 1%'er?
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Forbes estimates he will take home $842,700, which, of course, does not include any of his tax-deductible travel expenses and the additional 10 percent he owes to his caddy. So why not extrapolate the deductible expenses. Drama?

This is all at the top rate so he made other money that wasn't at that rate.

Now, is that a lot of tax? Yes. Do I feel sorry for him? Not really. Does he have the right to bitch about this? Yes, of course.

BTW CA top rate is 10.13% not 13%.



.


You need to update your data on California income tax rates.

California Voters Sock It To The Rich (And The Fate Of Other State Tax Ballot Measures) - Forbes

Proposition 30 creates three new upper income tax brackets for the next seven years. For example, folks with $250,000 to $300,000 a year in income will pay 10.3%, up from 9.3%. The new top income tax rate–for folks with income of $1 million-plus–will be 13.3%, up from a current top rate of 10.3%.​

Prop 30 established that on the whole, voters refused to pay for their childrens education and other services, and demanded the rich pay for it for them.

So, yes, 13.3%. I actually rounded down.

I guess should Phil actually move out of California, as so many are, those voters will have to search for others to pay for the things they refuse to take responsibility for themselves. I suppose that makes sense given the ubber liberal/progressive nature of the state.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Thanks for the update. He could live in NV (I'll rent him a place for $750) and pay 0% state tax. So, it sounds like a personal choice. Must be rough making only a million or two a year.


You need to update your data on California income tax rates.

California Voters Sock It To The Rich (And The Fate Of Other State Tax Ballot Measures) - Forbes

Proposition 30 creates three new upper income tax brackets for the next seven years. For example, folks with $250,000 to $300,000 a year in income will pay 10.3%, up from 9.3%. The new top income tax rate–for folks with income of $1 million-plus–will be 13.3%, up from a current top rate of 10.3%.​

Prop 30 established that on the whole, voters refused to pay for their childrens education and other services, and demanded the rich pay for it for them.

So, yes, 13.3%. I actually rounded down.

I guess should Phil actually move out of California, as so many are, those voters will have to search for others to pay for the things they refuse to take responsibility for themselves. I suppose that makes sense given the ubber liberal/progressive nature of the state.
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Thanks for the update. He could live in NV (I'll rent him a place for $750) and pay 0% state tax. So, it sounds like a personal choice. Must be rough making only a million or two a year.

Ah. Well, envy could cause one to think that way. However, it certainly puts binders on big investment plans. But then again, who needs more business development?
 

fmw

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2013
Messages
12,361
Reaction score
3,358
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I don't think Mickelson is looking for any sympathy. He is just making a business decision. In his shoes I might make the same one. I see no point in voluntarily contributing to the power base of corrupt politicians. Whatever you can do to avoid taxes legally is a good thing.
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,378
Reaction score
19,955
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Ah. Well, envy could cause one to think that way. However, it certainly puts binders on big investment plans. But then again, who needs more business development?

What are Lefty's business ventures?

I'm sorry, the whole "pro athletes are overtaxed" argument isn't really going over for me.
 

specklebang

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Envy? Of what? His income? Can't be that since you don't know what MY income is. Envy of location? CA is definitely nicer that NV but too pretentious for me. I live very quietly and we always have parking spaces.

All I said was that NV income tax is 0%. Do you envy me? You can drive here in 5 hours. No need for envy:). Tell you what, for you, just $650.


Ah. Well, envy could cause one to think that way. However, it certainly puts binders on big investment plans. But then again, who needs more business development?
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
What are Lefty's business ventures?

I'm sorry, the whole "pro athletes are overtaxed" argument isn't really going over for me.

There are many. This is just one. The Foundation

As to what isn't going over on you, I'd suspect your "overtaxed" sentiment wouldn't be restricted to just pro athletes.
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Envy? Of what? His income? Can't be that since you don't know what MY income is. Envy of location? CA is definitely nicer that NV but too pretentious for me. I live very quietly and we always have parking spaces.

All I said was that NV income tax is 0%. Do you envy me? You can drive here in 5 hours. No need for envy:). Tell you what, for you, just $650.

I'm sorry, but when I see "it must be tough to make, etc., " in a discussion about tax liability, the sentiment is usually obvious. Perhaps you're an exception to the rule.
 

Fisher

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
17,002
Reaction score
6,913
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It is an odd world. Owning property/businesses in more more than one state causes me to have to file a few different state taxes, but it usually is a not great difference than if it was all fully taxed in just my state of residence. A family friend is a big shot in an international law firm and he has to file taxes all over God's creation--most everywhere they have an office. His complaint isn't the taxes so much as it is the cost of doing all the taxes, and all the quarterly filings to boot to avoid the penalties.
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,702
Reaction score
20,419
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I could be wrong, but I believe Mickelson makes tens of millions in endorsement revenue each year so I don't think his tournament wins the past couple of weeks affects his tax rate. On the point of the OP, I absolutely would support any person who protects his and his family's wealth from the hungry mouths of the leeching political class who add precious little to the wellbeing of society.
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,378
Reaction score
19,955
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There are many. This is just one. The Foundation

As to what isn't going over on you, I'd suspect your "overtaxed" sentiment wouldn't be restricted to just pro athletes.

No it extends to entertainers who make zillions as well.

I'm not into "tax the rich into extinction," but I also don't have much sympathy for people who live beyond what most people would call "comfortable." If they don't pay higher taxes, then the rest of us do. Would you rather they take more of Phil's check or more of yours?
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
No it extends to entertainers who make zillions as well.

I'm not into "tax the rich into extinction," but I also don't have much sympathy for people who live beyond what most people would call "comfortable." If they don't pay higher taxes, then the rest of us do. Would you rather they take more of Phil's check or more of yours?

No, I think 61% is more than enough Phil, and I am absolutely sure my tax burden is far more than enough.

What I'd like to see is "them" taking more of others. In fact for a massive number of people, since we're referencing income taxes, I'd be happy to see "them" start with some income taxes paid at all.

"Not enough" is a great motivator. Shame we've bowed to those who demand we take responsibility for answering that call.
 

Gimmesometruth

Gerald's Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
29,501
Reaction score
6,421
Location
US Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
61 percent rate...

And with California looking to confiscate over 13%, it's no wonder Phil has put his Southern California home up for sale.

Phil Mickelson Faces 61 Percent Tax Rate Following Back-To-Back Wins « CBS Los Angeles

LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Thanks to his recent wins at both The Open Championship and the Scottish Open, Phil Mickelson pocketed more than $2.16 million in just two weeks.

The world’s top golfer —who came under fire earlier this year when he complained about his supposed 60 percent tax rate as a California resident — is taking another hit on his recent earnings.​


Is he justified to complain about his tax bill, or is he just another greedy 1%'er?
Um, he gets to deduct his states taxes from his federal amount.

His real rate will be closer to 53%

The truth behind the taxes of Phil Mickelson - Jan. 23, 2013


Cry me a river....
 

notquiteright

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
16,988
Reaction score
5,892
Location
okla-freakin-homa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
61 percent rate...And with California looking to confiscate over 13%, it's no wonder Phil has put his Southern California home up for sale.Phil Mickelson Faces 61 Percent Tax Rate Following Back-To-Back Wins « CBS Los Angeles
LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — Thanks to his recent wins at both The Open Championship and the Scottish Open, Phil Mickelson pocketed more than $2.16 million in just two weeks. The world’s top golfer —who came under fire earlier this year when he complained about his supposed 60 percent tax rate as a California resident — is taking another hit on his recent earnings.​
Is he justified to complain about his tax bill, or is he just another greedy 1%'er?

Difficult to believe Phil is worried how to dodge the tax man with this 2.1 mil when he receives on average 60 million a year in play and endorsement pay- 50 mil on the endorsement side.

I do hope everyone realizes Phil claims a 60% tax rate but has yet to produce ANY proof of that. There are many foundation schemes out there that provide IMMEDIATE tax relief and he does have a foundation. By law it is required to disburse a whooping 5% of it's entitlement per year... a cool dodge on the tax rate he claims it would be hit with. he can set up a tax dodge where the charity uses the interest off the donation for a certain period of time and then the money can revert back to the family or be renegotiated and continue. (Many signing bonuses go this route) if the 50 mil from endorsements gets thin he can always put himself, wife and any other relatives to include minor children on the board, get paid for sitting there and as long as 60% of the operating budget is for charity- you are golden. (The IRS barely looks at a tiny fraction of 1% of the privately funded foundations so little worry there.)

All in all I find it difficult to believe he pays 60% of his gross income in taxes, he doesn't have a bevy of accountants making damn sure he doesn't.

Course any lottery winner can tell you, huge winnings get quite the tax bite. ;)
 

Gimmesometruth

Gerald's Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
29,501
Reaction score
6,421
Location
US Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Difficult to believe Phil is worried how to dodge the tax man with this 2.1 mil when he receives on average 60 million a year in play and endorsement pay- 50 mil on the endorsement side.

I do hope everyone realizes Phil claims a 60% tax rate but has yet to produce ANY proof of that. There are many foundation schemes out there that provide IMMEDIATE tax relief and he does have a foundation. By law it is required to disburse a whooping 5% of it's entitlement per year... a cool dodge on the tax rate he claims it would be hit with. he can set up a tax dodge where the charity uses the interest off the donation for a certain period of time and then the money can revert back to the family or be renegotiated and continue. (Many signing bonuses go this route) if the 50 mil from endorsements gets thin he can always put himself, wife and any other relatives to include minor children on the board, get paid for sitting there and as long as 60% of the operating budget is for charity- you are golden. (The IRS barely looks at a tiny fraction of 1% of the privately funded foundations so little worry there.)

All in all I find it difficult to believe he pays 60% of his gross income in taxes, he doesn't have a bevy of accountants making damn sure he doesn't.

Course any lottery winner can tell you, huge winnings get quite the tax bite. ;)
...and since most of the top earners pay @ 25% effective rates, you can't feel very sorry for poor Phil.
 

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,464
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Difficult to believe Phil is worried how to dodge the tax man with this 2.1 mil when he receives on average 60 million a year in play and endorsement pay- 50 mil on the endorsement side.

I do hope everyone realizes Phil claims a 60% tax rate but has yet to produce ANY proof of that. There are many foundation schemes out there that provide IMMEDIATE tax relief and he does have a foundation. By law it is required to disburse a whooping 5% of it's entitlement per year... a cool dodge on the tax rate he claims it would be hit with. he can set up a tax dodge where the charity uses the interest off the donation for a certain period of time and then the money can revert back to the family or be renegotiated and continue. (Many signing bonuses go this route) if the 50 mil from endorsements gets thin he can always put himself, wife and any other relatives to include minor children on the board, get paid for sitting there and as long as 60% of the operating budget is for charity- you are golden. (The IRS barely looks at a tiny fraction of 1% of the privately funded foundations so little worry there.)

All in all I find it difficult to believe he pays 60% of his gross income in taxes, he doesn't have a bevy of accountants making damn sure he doesn't.

Course any lottery winner can tell you, huge winnings get quite the tax bite. ;)

:lamo

All I can say is I hope you're right. I'll bet all the people he employs hope he stays rich and gets richer.

That's the curious thing about progressives, you envy the rich, but then latch all your plans to their money.

I would think you'd be smart enough to understand such a scheme requires them to keep earning the big bucks.

Instead, you want to denegrate and penalize.

Very curious indeed.
 

Gimmesometruth

Gerald's Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
29,501
Reaction score
6,421
Location
US Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I understand. Imagining one could achieve such personal success is clearly impossible for some. Envy is a much better emotion to obsess over.
I can't imagine that some are blessed with being able to whack little white balls with some given skill....which sponsors shower with riches to promote a sport that earns all concerned untold wealth from less talented hacks and spectators?

You are right, I just don't understand why we obsess over such silliness, holding these freaks up as some "ideal".....and then desperately try to defend their wealth.....when they could give a frig what you think.

This is not the Horatio tale you are looking for.
 

Jack Fabulous

Friend Zone
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
15,502
Reaction score
5,645
Location
midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

Rod Knox

New member
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
49
Reaction score
11
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Isn't it understood that celebrities like him have a plethora of corporations laying claim to income from the various sources and Mickelson's final IRS and California filings barely touch the margins of their wealth. Few celebrities are as financially foolish as Michael Jackson.
 

Gimmesometruth

Gerald's Monster
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
29,501
Reaction score
6,421
Location
US Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Until you have to fork over 53% yourself I don't think you're in any position to suggest that rate is appropriate for others.
I don't have to win a lottery to comment on what % the govt should collect.

The amount he pays on winnings is not representative of his tax rate on his total earnings.

And I can comment on that without earning it too.

You know where you can put your opinion on my ability to comment....Mr "Constitution".
 

rocket88

Mod Conspiracy Theorist
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
44,378
Reaction score
19,955
Location
A very blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
No, I think 61% is more than enough Phil, and I am absolutely sure my tax burden is far more than enough.

What I'd like to see is "them" taking more of others. In fact for a massive number of people, since we're referencing income taxes, I'd be happy to see "them" start with some income taxes paid at all.

"Not enough" is a great motivator. Shame we've bowed to those who demand we take responsibility for answering that call.

Tax the poor. Sounds like a winning strategy.
 
Top Bottom