Taxes Books

I recently found myself needing to know more about the Dutch estate tax system. After writing a professer in the Netherlands, I was referred to this book by Gerrit te Spenke. I had my university library obtain it and I found it to be very informative. The book covers various aspects of the Dutch tax system and is useful for anyone thinking of investing there or doing business or estate planning for persons with property interests in the Netherlands. As the only English-Language information that I could locate on the Netherlands tax system, I found this book to be informative and helpful

Mostly for those with an accounting background. He share his views, quotes much of the Internal Revenue Code, and explains there is no cut and dried answer for trust accounting and taxation. Essential for those who work with trusts.

The U.S. Income Tax is a great way to introduce yourself to tax policy in the united states. It does a great job at showing the issues of why the system must be reformed. Also it show how political tax reform gets inside congress, and how this causes reform to stall. In the end it shows several diffrent, and inovative, ideas for tax reform. One of the key strengths of this book is it takes a totally non-partisan look at tax reform. Something that is rather difficult to do.

The problems with this book come in being way to verbose. It could have easily been shortened.

Overall a great book for anyone intersted in knowing more about tax policy!

This book is not the best roulette book I have ever read, it lacks the suave and professionality of other roulette books. However, its only redeeming quality is that the system provided within it, strangely worked for me. I have read countless gambling books that promised the world and only provided an interesting read. This book has been the first simple and practical book I have found that gives advise that when I applied to my Victor Chandler casino account roulette strategy, worked a treat. The author seems to be a practical guy, not wasting much time over the flowery details normally embellished by other more professional authors of this genre. You will find no personal stories here, no anecdotes no humour no history, no casino fashion tips, simply a great system for earning a daily living from online roulette. I currently make around €150 - €250 a day from the system in this book, more than I have ever done with any other roulette book previously read.

Seidman presents a useful introduction to one of the current proposals to replace the existing income tax. He demonstrates that the 'consumption tax' is clearly superior to the existing income tax on both a practical and conceptual basis. However, he should have emphasized the practical case for the consumption tax, because judgements on the conceptual merits of income taxation vs. consumption taxation will always be subjective. I.e., advocates of the consumption tax cannot 'win' the argument solely on conceptual grounds.

The main difficulties with the income tax are that it is difficult to comply with (even when you're honest); avoidance schemes (legal ways to minimize tax); and evasion (cheating). No alternative to the income tax will eradicate cheating, but the author is correct that the consumption tax would police cheating better than the current system does. Perhaps he should have emphasized this more.

Avoidance schemes under the income tax (sometimes called 'tax planning' by their creators) are rampant and a cause of significant complexity, as the Revenue Service and Congress try to deal with each scheme on an ad hoc basis. Because the consumption tax is much simpler n concept than an income tax, the opportunities for avoidance schemes would be reduced. Additionally, the 'garden variety' avoidance schemes that would be expected to crop up under a consumption tax have been identified and could be dealt with up front in the implementing legislation

For those who desire more information on what's wrong with the current system, read Michael Graetz's recent book on that topi

This book delivers facts and good information you can use now to reduce you taxes. This is not full of stories and theories like some of the other TAX revolt books, but instead it contains real facts which can be put into use now.

Some of these facts need tweaks and updates since they are back from 1980, but most are useful and practical.

The Text provides a good treatment of federal taxation. But it was a bit over done instead of getting to the point. Good preparation fot the CPA exam.

I intend to use the book to discuss with my students. It is an excellent representation of the state of our society, lends itself to great discussion, and opens the door for further investigation of our true nature.

I really found it interesting the different examples about cheating. We don't get to find out what happens to these people and if they really pay like we have to ie monies, jail time, loss of job, house, cars etc. As the book tells us no they don't; they get away with it without much suffering compared to people who don't have the "money and power". I find it a very sad sad sad comment on what America has become. We need to walk the talk ie Treat People the Way We want to be Treated.

This is one of the most intellectually dishonest books that I have ever read --- probably the worst. What makes this book especially bad is that the author panders to rabid socialists, lower and middle class (whatever that means, apparently those who feel that they deserve to be wealthier), and even worse, those who feel that they must cheat because all the rich people are cheating. The author basically says, "Don't worry about cheating because everybody else does it --- cheating starts at the top and trickles down. You are near the bottom, so again, don't feel bad about cheating. I'll explain why you shouldn't."

After reading the first chapter, I wondered: Is the author a liar, a fool, or both? After reading over half the book, I think that the author is more liar than fool. The evidence for this is that he does appear to be aware of the fact that dishonesty waxes and wanes over U.S. history, yet he blames Ronald Reagan, "the wealthy," "corporate CEO's," and "conservatives" for the purported increase since 1980, coincidentally the year in which Reagan was elected. But there is a lot more evidence than this. He demonstrates his skepticism, not to mention disdain, for corporate CEO's, CFO's and others involved in pushing what he believes to be phony numbers based on self-interest about their bottom line, yet blindly accepts IRS commissioners and former commissioners bold claims that there is a huge tax gap --- and their numbers based on sheer guesswork regarding this gap --- as if the jobs of IRS workers and the IRS budget has absolutely no dependence whatsoever upon these bold claims. He also quotes Leona Helmsley as saying, "Only little people pay taxes," then leaves it at that. Anyone who knows anything at all about who pays for what knows that the people with the very highest incomes pay for the majority of the budget every year. Leaving Leona Helmsley's statement standing while producing purported fact after purported fact about IRS testimony before Congress is the height of intellectual dishonesty --- until one realizes that the author claims that "the wealthy" cheat first, followed by the not-so-wealthy, but gives no consideration to the opposite claim: The not-so-wealthy cheat, followed by the wealthy. The not-so-wealthy are feeling, so the author claims, the pressures of the ill effects caused by so many wealthy folks cheating, so they should not really feel so bad. Yes, this is a problem, but only because the wealthy started it all. But why did the wealthy start cheating all of the sudden in 1980? Is it possible that they saw widespread welfare cheating, cheating in MediCare/MedicAid, food stamps, unemployment, tax laws that penalized people with higher incomes by taxing them at a unconscionably high rate, and so on? If so, then shouldn't the wealthy also not feel bad?

The author claims that people don't really want to cheat. Or so he claims to believe. What planet is this guy from? He acts as though he believes that the 1950's and 1960's were some sort of Golden Era or days of the Garden of Eden --- the lost Golden Days of the Past. Again, what planet is this guy from? Apparently this guy spent much of his life sheltered from the real world, and apparently still has never met any of the huge number of criminals, sociopaths, and psychopaths out there. But these are good candidates for his audience, so perhaps he merely doesn't want to offend them. Again, more pandering liar than fool.

A title of one of the reviews posted here is something about the purported non-political, non-partisan nature of this book. This is a blatantly false claim. The book is rabid-socialist claptrap. It is the most politically lopsided book I have read in a long time. If you are a socialist of any stripe who believes that corporations are evil and that government is good, and that government can fix and should be allowed to fix all the problems caused by the greedy wealthy, or if you simply want to feel better about your extremely unrealistic views of reality, then by all means, read and enjoy this book. On the other hand, if you live in the real world, and know anything at all about the rampant corruption that does exist and has always existed in any bureaucracy, government or private, then you will be quite disappointed in this book.

I was interested in this book because I have observed increased incidents of cheating on college campuses. Cheating has become bold, blatant and unpunished.

The author makes the case that cheating has increased since 1974. The thesis of the author is that the greed of the political conservatives has caused the epidemic of cheating, and the author even cites a sound-bite from President Reagan, where Reagan says that he hopes that people can still get rich in this country, to support this claim.

The book is an interesting read for the data on how cheating has become socially acceptable among the middle class, but the author's thesis that political conservatives, due to their greed, have caused it is not well made. I would accuse him of neglectful induction: he doesn't examine non-capitalist countries like the former Soviet Union for examples of cheating. He claims that there was a golden age of honesty, and as an example of that points to big law firms that use to only hire the all white upper class sons of wealthy members of the law firm, but now, due to diversity laws, hire the top graduates out of law school. The new high pressure work environment and the drive to get to the top is the cause of cheating in billing. The author claims this is due to post 1974 conservative greed. Yet, the author ignored that sweat shop conditions have existed in the past, and that this law firm is nothing more than a yuppie sweat shop. Further, isn't hiring only the white upper class son's of the partners a way of cheating as well? The author does not address that.

The idea that corporate greed has caused cheating in schools is simply backwards, a confusion of cause and effect. One cheats in school and then goes into the business world, where one cheats in business. People do not, generally, go from cheating in business to cheating in high school.

Cheats have done well in big business since forever; this is nothing new since the Reagan administration. The author does not examine the relationship between the decline of religion and the increase in cheating, either; which is very neglectful induction. It simply does not follow that corporate greed is the root cause of the increase in cheating among the middle class.

David Callahan provides myriad examples of rampant cheating, lying and corruption in varied fields of American Life. From the ball fields on high school, college and pro levels, to corporate America, schools, politics, there are stories of cheating to get ahead, to get more, to get in, and to get by. These many examples and stories are informative and indicative of a problem with cheating in our culture. Some of the examples are taken from the headlines, like the Enron case and steroids in baseball; other examples are more subtle stories of corrupt morality leading to cheating. Callahan provides an excellent glimpse of the Enron story beyond what I had previously known. Likewise, his writing on steroids in sports is in-depth and interesting. Other examples show how people slip into corruption and cheating or do it outright and brazenly.

The good writing on cheating is unfortunately undermined by two things: an overbearing liberal bias in his lengthy opinions and redundancy. His liberal bias causes him to blame the free market, capitalism, unequal distribution of wealth, conservatives and Republicans for about every sympton described in the book; while he ignores cheating by liberal politicians, he emphasizes any cheating or policy blamed for cheating that may in some way be connected to a Republican politician. He even defends Bill Clinton for lying under oath, as it was about his personal life (lesson: cheating is okay for some people if their ends justifies their means.) His suggestions for stopping cheating are, for the most part, ambiguous, typical liberal agenda items. And his opinions go on too long and are redundant, as are many of the examples he gives.

He does make some suggestions that would be helpful...honor codes in schools and character training, but these are short discussions while he spends pages rambling about other topics.

A good editor should have limited the opinions, bias, and redundancy, so the focus would be objective and concise.

I followed the book's instructions to the letter and tried to open a current account at three Singapore banks recommended in the book. Only one replied, saying I could only open an account denominated in US dollars or Singapore dollars, and not any other currency, contrary to what the book says. In addition, this bank wanted somebody already known to them to introduce me to them before they'd deal with me. This book is a waste of time and money. I'm now doing internet research to get the informmation I need to do what I want to do. It takes a lot more time, but I feel confident of success.

Don't waste your money.

The author is a sham artist. He was convicted, and in a plea bargain handed over his entire client list to the US Governtment. None of the advice in this book is legal or legitimate.

Anyone who believes this BS is either really stupid or really naive. The author has been charged with defrauding the federal government, has agreed to a plea bargain, and will enter the U.S. District Court in San Francisco next month to plead guilty. As part of the plea bargain Mr. Schneider has turned over his client list to the IRS, complete with addresses, phone numbers and other information. Some tax advice: When something sounds too good to be true - it always is.

Gary W. Carter, author of "JK Lasser's Taxes Made Easy for Your Home-Based Business"

This book is poorly structured. The author reiterates the same concept of going offshore over and over again. He does not reveal any detail on how to do it. Instead, he gives you a great number of short stories that he had heard from someone else. This was one of the worst books I had ever read! Stay away!

this book is the equivalent of the saturday morning "get rich quick" scheisters you see on TV (and incidentally, the author, naturally, pitches his wares at the end).

the advice in the book goes beyond being bad...its irresponsible, misleading, and negligent.

here's one of the author's brainfarts (paraphrased):
"open an off shore reinsurance company, and then with your domestic company, purchase insurance from your off shore company--that way the premiums are both tax-deductible and a source of profit at the same time!" ---and how exactly would this help you in event of a claim?

or better still (and i quote):
" (US) banks are in bad shape--worse shape, in fact (though none are provided---a common refrain in this book, claims w/o data!), than most foreign banks. Of course, your money is insured up to $100k by the FDIC, but what would happen in the event of a universal banking crisis? Federal agencies could never handle the massive run on banks that would ensue..." ---oh, so this is to imply that a small private off-shore bank is going to serve as the new financial risk-free rate determinant (setting all financial markets back 100+ yrs), and this small off-shore bank is going to be far safer than the US Govt (FDIC)?

this book is an insult to anyone w/ a critical mind. its beyond terrible. its a great way to lose money, whether you invest as he advocates, or simply throwing away your $30 to buy it.

Yes, gov't needs to be halved - then again, and then again! America has become a land of gov't/tax parasites enforcing their bloated payrolls and pension deals on us "others - outside the castle." Throw them out.

When George Washington was president, taxes were few. Since then, times have really gotten expensive. The 20th century especially was an arms race between the governments in the United States and its citizens to determine who would control the citizens' income. Government was on the offense and the citizens were on the defense. The citizens lost to date. Taxes went from less than 5 percent of income to 40 percent over that time. Most would agree that we cannot afford another century like that one.

This book nicely lays out the history of taxes that take more income and waste a lot of time and effort in the process. The author looks at sales taxes, withholding taxes at work, the marriage penalty in the income tax, whether the housing deduction for interest and taxes is a good thing or not, the problems with taxes on domestic help, property taxes and school support, the social security system, and estate taxes.

She doesn't like much of what she sees, and is concerned that reform could simply lead to adding new types of taxes (like a national sales tax while keeping all of the old taxes).

The newer the tax or tax idea, it seems like the worse it is working.

Her solutions are basically principles to be followed in reforming taxes. I doubt if they will be followed anytime soon. Recent polls show that most Americans are concerned about paying off the national debt and fixing social security before doing anything about cutting taxes.

Although most of her observations were good ones, I was a little doubtful about her automatic focus on the high income people being taken to the cleaners unfairly. There was not as much attention paid to benefits that lower income people may be receiving.

If you spend time thinking about how to keep your tax bill down, there's not much new in this book. If you are new to all of the ways that government helps you spend your money, this is a good introduction to the subject.

The book is well written and pleasant to read. The only drawback I found was that it was a little depressing to be reminded of how much I actually pay to all of the various governments. Every year, I find April 15 more and more depressing.

I just don't understand how it's considered "greedy" for me to want to keep all of the money I have worked to earn -- but it's somehow NOT greedy and/or lazy and/or selfish for someone to want the government to provide his health care (or pay him when he is unemployed) with money that has simply been confiscated from some other person who performed the work to earn that money. Can somebody explain that to me, please?

Equalization tax policies directly forcing tax payers redistribute educational monies equally on education. Equalization does not work. It's a socialistic virus starting in Wilmington, Delaware and moved to Maine in 1970 and eventually hit Texas. The most important question facing tax payers is can equality of education spending buy equal performance? The truth suggests the more money pumped into a school has no direct correlation in producing better students. Equalization did not improve test scores. Force distribution of wealth never works.

The Vermont Supreme Court declared local tax policy paying for local school funding as unconstitutional. The court ruled it is not alright to spend more money for one student than another. The racial discrimination protection provided in Brown verse the Board of Education was wrongly applied to economic equality for education. It is wrong because education equality is not a constitutional protected right. The old system made available local taxes paying for ¾ of the cost of school. Money was collected locally and sent to the state and $5,000 returned for each student. Forced equal spending was supported by the Democrats and opposed by the Republicans with Governor Howard Dean supporting equalization.

In 1997, Vermont passed Act 60 generating tax policy effecting 251 towns, splitting the town into two groups: receiving towns (receivers of tax benefits) and senders (receivers of tax cuts). The impact was immediately felt; Dorset received a double property tax portion, Montpelier exposed $680 million dollars in property tax to change, Stratton and Winhall were hit the hardest with a seven fold increase in property tax.

In Serrano verses Priest the court ruled that parts of California must spend about the same amount per pupil. The court case ended local property tax and started plans to force richer neighborhoods to support poorer neighborhoods. Proposition 13 was a defensive measure by citizens too put a tax cap against rising property taxes and set off a national tax cutting effort leading to the Tax Reform Act of 1986 by Ronald Reagan.

Serrano went against traditional school funding structure. Historically, most State Constitutions defined school funding to be provided by local taxes. Here is an excerpt: "A school or schools shall be established in each town by the legislature, for the convenient instruction of youth, with such salaries to the masters to be paid by the town, making proper use of school lands in each town, thereby to enable them to instruct youth a low price." Bottom line, local taxes spent locally is acceptable. It is acceptable because the individual can see what their money has bought and if people don't like what they see, a tax cut will occur. The PTA attempts to reconnect parents to the value added for their child's education. In 1990, $30 million in charitable gifts were funneled through the PTA. If reconnection fails forced tax equalization will have devastating impact on the public system. If money can't buy performance and if complex qualification terms for school monies drive administers into a rat maze, parent will start to examine methods to take back control. Small towns will replace public schools with private schools. Towns are competing for families through their schools, parks, and safety assurances. People will pay money, if they believe their children are getting a desired quality of education, if they don't get the expected education value, they will move to towns were they can get a quality education. People vote with their feet, the Tiebout theory advocated by Charles Tiebout, in 1950.

As the title says this is silly, political posturing by
someone who has hers and doesn't particularly care if people
are out of work. Maybe she doesn't care if you're on the dole.