Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
I do, but there are things they just don't need to know about, and if something is FREE then it's inherent value is 0... If someone is willing to pay nothing for something then it has no value, and therefore shouldn't be taxed, you can't quantify some things gifted money is a little different, there's a constant value on money that CAN be quantified.

Plus I believe in "free trade" in terms of bartering. I think taxing NEW goods, and goods that have been refurbished is ok, but taxing a used good is bullshit, someone already payed the taxes on that items value. Unless I'm selling the item and claiming the depreciation loss on my taxes, the other guy shouldn't pay any taxes on the item, the government already got their money. If however I do claim a depreciation on the sale of it, then the other person (should be told) and write that as a purchase.

Trust me, I know a lot about tax law, and have my own opinion of how it should work and be fair and not take advantage. No taxation without reason and intent... That's my feeling.


~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
I was referring to the fact that auditors have been known to actually research the internet presence of the person they audit.

And tax law is inherently simple - if the statute makes something taxable, then it is taxable. And if it doesn't succeed in making it taxable, it isn't taxable. Traditionally, taxing statutes would be strictly construed by courts.

Fairness is a question of politics, not tax law, unless the tax law actually incorporates questions of fairness into its language