Mon, May 28, 2012, 7:43 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed for Memorial Day

Discover Yahoo! With Your Friends

Explore news, videos, and much more based on what your friends are reading and watching. Publish your own activity and retain full control.

To get started, first

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    How The Wealthy Slash Their Income Tax Bills

    Fantasy Finance

    Stories about millionaires and billionaires who pay little or no income tax make great headlines, especially when these people have committed tax fraud. However, the methods that most wealthy taxpayers use to reduce what they owe are perfectly legal tax-lowering strategies that anyone can use.

    Charitable Donations
    Taxpayers may donate up to 50% of their adjusted gross incomes (AGI) according to IRS publication 526, Charitable Contributions. Deductions for donations exceeding 50% of a taxpayer's adjusted gross income can be carried over for the next five years until they are used up. When carryovers are included, contributions are still limited to 50% of AGI per year. Most people cannot afford to donate anywhere near 50% of their AGI, but the super-rich have this option.

    While making a large charitable donation helps wealthy taxpayers significantly lower their tax bills, it's not as if these taxpayers are keeping the money for themselves and not paying taxes on it. The government may not get as much revenue, but it has granted taxpayers permission to give it less revenue in this circumstance.

    Both the government and private charities run many programs intended to help people with limited means. Well-managed charities have lower administrative costs than government bureaucracies, and that means they can do more good with the same amount of money. Charities also have an incentive to use donated funds as efficiently as possible because they must compete with each other for contributions, whereas government welfare agencies have a monopoly. Thus, we shouldn't be upset when the wealthy pay lower taxes because of their large donations to charity. This tax deduction helps to provide more assistance to people who truly need it.

    Maxed-out Retirement Plan Contributions
    The average taxpayer might have difficulty making the maximum $16,500 annual pre-tax contribution to an employer-sponsored 401(k) or even maxing out a traditional IRA with its low $5,000 a year pre-tax contribution limit. High-income taxpayers, on the other hand, often have no trouble maxing out their retirement accounts because their essential expenses like food and housing make up a lower percentage of their incomes.

    People who earn income as independent contractors or who have their own businesses have even better opportunities to make large retirement contributions. These options are not exclusively available to the rich; they are also available to taxpayers of lesser means. It's just that the latter group may not be able to afford to take full advantage of tax-advantaged retirement contributions for the self-employed since they don't have as much disposable income.

    "Wealthy consultants, solo practitioners and business owners, especially those who are close to retirement, might consider establishing a defined-benefit pension plan," says Jonathan Bergman, a Certified Financial Planner and vice president of Palisades Hudson Financial Group, a wealth management firm in Scarsdale, N.Y.; Atlanta, Ga.; and Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. "Self-employed consultants and physicians' practices are ideal for this type of plan."

    Such plans permit very large retirement plan contributions for owners who can afford to stash the money away until they're older.

    "Retirement-plan contributions reduce current year taxable income, and once the money is in the plan, it is not taxed until it is withdrawn. This income tax deferral can reduce or even avoid state income tax permanently if the contributor relocates to a tax-friendly state during retirement," says Bergman.

    Investment Income
    Some wealthy people are able to pay taxes on a lower percentage of their incomes than the non-wealthy because the wealthy generate significant earnings from investments that are taxed at a lower rate than employment income. The non-wealthy get most of their income from employment.

    The money you earn from a job is subject to federal and state income taxes. The more you earn, the higher the tax rate you pay on the last dollar you earn.

    Regardless of how much you make, employment income is also subject to payroll taxes (FICA), which are currently 6.2% for Social Security and 1.45% for Medicare. Self-employed workers pay almost double those amounts since they have to pick up the employer's share of the tax. Employees lose out on the higher wages and salaries their employers could have paid them if not for the additional tax.

    Investment income is subject to different tax rates depending on the type of investment, how long it was owned and the investor's marginal tax rate, but the rates are often substantially less than the rates on employment income. Here are some examples of the federal tax rates on different types of investment income:

    • Qualified dividends: 0% for taxpayers in the 10% and 15% brackets; 15% for everyone else
    • Long-term capital gains: 0% for taxpayers in the 10% and 15% brackets; 15% for everyone else
    • Tax-exempt municipal bond interest: 0%

    Also, while interest income from U.S. Treasuries is subject to federal income tax, it is exempt from state and local income taxes. This feature can help taxpayers in high-tax states and localities reduce their tax bills.

    As you can see, investments are generally taxed at a lower rate than employment income. If you start building an investment portfolio, over time, your investment returns might generate a significant portion of your income, too. When they do, you'll be glad that this income is taxed at a more favorable rate.

    The Bottom Line
    Many of the strategies that millionaires and billionaires use to reduce their taxes are perfectly legal and available to everyone, but taxpayers with modest incomes may not have the resources to take advantage of these techniques. Not everyone can afford to make large donations and retirement contributions or to hire sophisticated financial planners and tax accountants, but that doesn't mean that the wealthy are tax criminals.

    Additionally, the wealthy may be less afraid to take advantage of every possible deduction because they have the resources to defend themselves against an IRS audit, but again, that doesn't make them tax evaders. Furthermore, tax evasion is not a crime of the super-rich. People at all income levels refuse to pay the taxes they owe, whether they do it by not filing a return, filing a fraudulent return or attempting to circumvent the tax code. These people usually get caught and have to pay up sooner or later. The rest of us could learn something about legal tax minimization strategies from those who employ them.



    More From Investopedia

     
    • Valley Boy  •  Ottawa, Canada  •  4 months ago
      Legal deductions and exemptions etc. made by the rich for the rich does not equate with ethical, or progressive or dare I say it fair.
    • Jay  •  Clifton, New Jersey  •  4 months ago
      According to the book the Millionaire Next Door and Stop Acting Rich both by Thomas Stanley, a large % of millionaires have never made more then 100k a year. They live in modest homes in modest neighborhoods. Many own smal business' or have large investments. That's the key to it. They live below their means and their very happy.The idea is to reduce realized income and increase investment income.
      • Kate 4 months ago
        You are correct, but these millionaires are not part of the 1%, they are in the 99%. Those people who make well over $1,000,000 a year or inherit millions of dollars are the 1%. The millionaire next door gets $crewed just like the rest of the 99%. That said, I would still prefer to be the millionaire next door rather than someone else in the 99%.
      • JGalt 4 months ago
        I love your circular logic, Kate.
      • WMB 4 months ago
        You are correct about millionaires but not wage millionaires. I have a net worth of several $M and have never owned a large screen TV, will not buy all the movie channels on cable, no Mercedes or BMW or SUV, etc. Nor was I making hundreds of thousands a year. I worked and saved/invested. Am very comfortable. As a result, I RESENT people who talk about Means Testing SS. I sacrificed all my life to be very comfortable and do not appreciate people that want to means test after they have spent foolishly.
    • MarcD  •  4 months ago
      Remember the Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. Been that way throughout human history.
    • Chalis  •  Seattle, Washington  •  4 months ago
      The wealthy can buy boats, airplanes and income property, there you get depreciation that is a “Tax Deduction”. To get wealthy, you have to learn the tax code.
    • Robert  •  4 months ago
      I'll make a deal with congress... I will pay more in taxes they eliminate government assistance to anyone who spends more than $50 a month on tv (sat. tv, cable, or netflix account), has a smart phone, or purchased the new Air Jordans. If you can afford these things, you don't need government assistance.

      I find it tough to swallow that you need help to buy food or housing assistance for your family but you can afford $180 sneakers and pay $100 plus a month for tv each month as well as an Iphone for $100 a month.
      • Hoax and Chains 4 months ago
        Your comments are far too rational to be considered at this time...
      • a moderate 4 months ago
        The big amount of money is simply not going to the people you think it is. The Republicans vote for the biggest money ito go to wars for corporate oil and construction profit and for subsidies to big agribusiness that runs almost the entire food-producing business in this country. Are you against that?
      • Unkindness 4 months ago
        Also, I'll point out to Robert that if you're simply a smart shopper you can have all those things for way less than he's talking about. Hulu Plus subscription, eBay, Boost or Revol Wireless, out of date smartphones, etc. Really it just sounds like he's kind of dumb and jealous of people that are patient and can interweb better than him.
    • Bill  •  Chicago, Illinois  •  5 months ago
      If you want more of something subsidize it, if you want less of it tax it- Basic economics- as long as we continue to subsidize a persons bad choices i.e. dropping out of school, failing to learn productive job skills, out of wedlock pregnancy, or failure in being a productive member of society you will get more of these people, if you penalize success with higher and higher taxes you will get less people who want to become successful. One political party loves loyal voters who depend on the government for their daily existence, can you figure out who they are?
      • annonomous 5 months ago
        right on bill!
      • MS 5 months ago
        you
      • Karen 4 months ago
        I know 5 and they're republicans. Did I answer correctly?
    • MarcD  •  4 months ago
      So how come the article left out ALL mention of the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) which eliminates nearly every deduction and taxes all income at 28%, no matter how rich you are? In fact, the AMT was created in 1969 specifically to ENSURE that the rich do pay taxes, no matter how many deductions they try to take.
      • michael h 4 months ago
        FINALLY! An educated poster on Yahoo. Nobody will read or understand your post because it doesn't bash the "rich" Thanks for posting anyway.
      • Kate 4 months ago
        Because most mega millionaires get their income from investments. Income on investements isn't earned income and isn't taxed per the income tax rates. It's taxed at a flat 15%.
    • crymeariver  •  5 months ago
      You want the boomers to retire and move out of the job market? Well get the FED to stop artificially lowering the interest rates. If secure sources were paying 4-5% many could leave now but a current rates they are stuck.
      • Fred 4 months ago
        It's not artificial. The role of the fed is to keep interest rates low during these slowdowns to inject liquidity into the economy, to promote investment and higher employment.
      • Odd Duck 4 months ago
        Fred, keeping interest rates low does not promote investment, and the Fed original and primary role is to control inflation.
    • Concerned citizen  •  Greenville, South Carolina  •  5 months ago
      Tax evasion is a crime, yet overspending and reckless spending by those that forcibly take those tax dollars is not a crime. Hmmm. Please vote for smaller government and more individual freedom.
    • Thomas  •  5 months ago
      It's amazing how many posters display the the extraordinary level of their ignorance.
    • BenH  •  4 months ago
      Two points of bias I'd like to mention. Article states, " _Charities_ This tax deduction helps to provide more assistance to people who truly need it. " Does that include the attendees of elite with massive endowment funds? Opera companies with special events for large donors? Those attending the gala opening wine/cheese event at the art museum they donated to? Churches whose massive structures rivaling medieval cathedrals?
      Article states, “_Investment Income_ Employees lose out on the higher wages and salaries their employers could have paid them if not for the additional tax.” Yeah, cause I’m sure the employers are just dying to pass on more to their employees. This wouldn’t just be added to their retained earnings, would it? Used to be that a business existed to make a family rich – they had some incentive to treat employees and customers of the business they were passing to their kids with some concern. Now corporations are self-perpetuating existing to make shareholders rich – anything can be excused if it is in “the interest of shareholders”. Rip off the customers, rip off the employees. In the end rip off the shareholders who will see decreased value – doesn’t matter cause the dirty secret is, the corporation doesn’t exist to make shareholders rich – that’s just the cover for their dirty deeds. The corporation really exists to make the CEO, VPs and Board rich. If you don’t believe me, you have either never worked for a corporation or are an ignorant peon, too far down the reporting structure to have a clue.
    • Chief_blamestormer  •  5 months ago
      The author seems make the new definition as being rich as being able to max out your pretax 401K. If you manage to save a reasonable 15% of your income for retirement in a 401K, and max it out, you made $111,000/yr. So that's the new rich definition? Seem OK?
    • crymeariver  •  5 months ago
      The top 10% currently pays for 70% of all federal income tax collected. Top 10% starts at about $110k a year.
    • Quick  •  5 months ago
      For "B" -- the current law (at least so far) on the inheritance tax is to allow a $5 million exemption before the taxes ($35% for everything over $500,000). That allows for the assets of family & small businesses, without forcing them to be broken up and sold off. Also, most heirs of fortunes usually squander or disperse the fortunes completely by the second generation (grandkids) -- "redistributing" them into the economy.
    • DuaneC  •  Chico, California  •  4 months ago
      But that doesn't mean that the wealthy are tax criminals.

      Who writes the tax laws for them for their advantageous untaxed earnings? The rich have a tax shelter by contributing campaign donations to "their" Representative, who are themselves, rich.

      Boondoggle: funded by the government out of political favoritism that is of no real value to the community or the nation.

      Congressmen: work of little or no value done merely to keep or look busy. "of course, if you look at how much richer they become since they were elected to office, you know who they have been spending time with at the golf course, their interests and not ours."

      Favoritism, Cronyism, and Nepotism: Our Representative Government, the best influence money can buy.

      Now I have to go throw up, it turns my stomach thinking about it. To know, We live in America with a Dumbocracy where The People are second class with an educational system dumbed down to less than a Third World Country. Where children walk around looking like dopes. Where children younger than 9, walk around looking like prison inmates, acting and imitating punks. Where children grow up with nothing more than The Streets of Social Decay, adding to it, creating a cultural influence of misbehavior, violence and sexual promiscuity, publicly shared as the Norm of Society, from all the dollars the rich make off of the media advertising, packaging and selling societal decay to be marketed to a neighborhood near you. Good luck with the kids, since they don't value Conservative Rules of our grandparent because they want to fit in with their peers at school in order to have friends.
    • Stockloss  •  5 months ago
      All perfectly legal and good things to do. Charitable contributions are, of course, to be encouraged, as is saving for retirement. Taking risk and investing in companies that create jobs and build our economy is also to be encouraged (hence the lower tax rate if the investment yields a profit and is held long-term). Too bad the article makes it sound like the "rich" are doing something evil.
    • dan  •  5 months ago
      takes money to made money!!---get that seed money and do drips!!
    • what  •  Austin, Texas  •  5 months ago
      Earned Income Credit costs the US $70 billion more in revenue loss than the lower capital gains taxes do, but I dont hear anyone screaming about lower income folks getting a bonus check at the end of the year.
    • Sabre  •  4 months ago
      Gee, so the moral of the story is that if we don't make enough we don't get the luxury of the tax breaks? Well isn't that convenient and expected, that the wealthy design the tax code that benefits their status and behavior over that of the rest of us.
      IN AMERICA, THE GAME IS RIGGED AND WE ALL KNOW IN WHO'S FAVOR!
      And the wealthy wonder why the rest of us 99% despise them? We're not stupid, we're just not privileged. We're quite aware of how most of them made their riches.
    • bart  •  4 months ago
      When we talk about 'millionaires and billionaires', we are talking net worth, but the article is about taxes, which is paid on income, not net worth, so its misleading. Those people who earn 100,000 to 1 million a year AND are paid with a W2, have virtually no way to avoid paying taxes. Unless ofcourse you own the company. But if you draw a paycheck, you are paying the bulk of taxes and there is no body protecting you. The city, county, state and federal politicos are ALL coming after you, demaining your success while all the while confiscating it for their own political purpose.

    RATES

    Stay in touch with Yahoo! Finance

      YAHOO! FINANCE ON TWITTER

    Subscribe

    [X]

    How to subscribe

    Roll over each section to subscribe using Add to My Yahoo! or RSS Feed feeds.

    Yahoo! News offers dozens of RSS feeds you can read in My Yahoo! or using third-party RSS news reader software. Click here to find out more about RSS and how you can use it with Yahoo! News.