I’m so glad he’s got this ridiculous attorney for this case. If he somehow avoids prison for everything else, at least he’ll probably be losing all his NY shinies here.
That he turns to rant just shows that he long ran out of arguments. I hope the court will draw the right conclusions and revoke his bail for threatening the presiding judge.
Yes. They withhold taxes, and at that point it's all in the highest bracket, and you haven't had the cash to get a bunch of credits and deductions.
Some lotteries offer an annuity style payout, over 20 years. This can reduce the tax implications over the whole life, but inflation and not having the money invested can eat it up.
It's a trade off that would be great to have to worry about.
The taxes are not included in that figure. That’s the actual prize pool money they’d have on hand in case of a win. The advertised jackpot is an estimate of an annuity paid off investing that prize pool in securities over the course of 30 years
The lottery will withhold 24% for federal income tax – but you’d likely owe more as the vast majority of that income will wind up taxed at 37%. Then there’s also state income taxes in most places.
If I win this jackpot and take the lump sum it would break down something like:
2 things: taxes are taken from the winnings, and the jackpot quoted is the amount you would get if you picked the regular payments rather than lump sum.
The regular payments include trust fund interest/growth I think, so you get more.
It’s confusing as all hell. I’d much prefer it tax free and lump sum. Tell me exactly what I get, don’t dress it up to make it look better than it is!
The tax-free annuity payment version is by far the better deal. But some people elect to get the lump sum in cash, and you end up getting far less than half of it, esp after taxes.
If you get the lump sum though that’s a large amount growing when invested. You can easily take that and grow it into more than you’d get over time from the payments.
If it takes you longer than 30 years to turn $200m into $1.08b then my friend you have a poor financial advisor. Also by then the $1.08b won’t be worth the same, considering inflation.
This has never been true. If u take the annuity they take the lump and invest that and instead of getting the full profits of that investment you get the same flat rate every year.
You can’t guarantee profits from an investment. That’s just a gamble. However, you can guarantee the gigantic amount of taxes they will deduct from it, and you’re only getting half as much from the cash payout anyway.
The annuity isn’t tax free. You pay taxes on that income every year just like (and in addition to) any other income you have.
Also, you could most likely beat the rate of return on those investments if you know what you’re doing. But on the other hand most lottery winners won’t know what they’re doing. Additionally the annuity can be a stopgap to keep you from losing everything all at once.
The taxes are far less on a yearly basis, but over the course of the annuity you’ll actually pay a lot more in taxes. Rough calculation, if I won this jackpot it would break down to:
Lump sum: Immediate payment of $478.2M with a tax bill of around $210M for my state and Federal income taxes. Net payout of $267.8M.
Annuity: $1.04B paid over 30 years. At current tax rates that’s a bill of $456.5M over that 30 years. Net payout of around $583.5M. If tax rates change during the term of the annuity those could rise or fall a bit.
Not like I’ll ever have to worry about the problem,but I think I would take the annuity because I’ve never had to manage a large amount of money, and it more gently eases you into it while giving some buffer to assure you don’t somehow blow through everything quickly.
She was charged with manslaughter. I’m not sure of the degree though. Manslaughter basically means you didn’t intend to kill someone but you did someone something reckless that resulted in someone’s death. Premeditated murder is a completely different, and much more serious, charge.
no. they won't. not under the present system. unlike student loans, auto loans can be discharged during bankruptcy (it is difficult to do with student loans) and you can easily sell the asset to pay off all or part of the balance (can't sell your transcript or degree, just yourself to an employer).
Federal student loans are not just difficult to discharge, they’re practically impossible to discharge. There are so little valid cases for it, you could count them on one hand. And that does not even take into account the fact that the sitting President and their cabinet can just say, “No, **** you.” Even after you qualify and a court agrees with you.
Edit: Just gonna point out that the only guaranteed way to discharge student loans without the federal government possibly overturning the ruling is to simply die. Its an excellent system perfectly designed to ensure that both the public sector and private sector can continue reaping the benefits of social mobility while preying on the most vulnerable segments of the population.
Buying (financing) a new car, and then having it repossessed at half the purchased value (still 50%) debt to pay
If people have cars repossessed en mass, the second hand car market will be affected, prices for used cars go down (because the supply goes up). This makes repossessions not cover the whole loan, see above point
Finally, as more and more Americans no longer have access to cars, they also lose access to… A lot of society (work, education, healthcare). If this affects a large enough percent of the population, there will be macro effects.
If it’s getting repossessed at 50 percent value, that means it’s getting repossessed in the first year, and probably shouldn’t have been financed in the first place. BUT, let’s say they did, gap insurance is a thing that exists, for cheap, to cover that exact situation. Regardless, that debt can be cleared via bankruptcy, and is peanuts compared to most student loan debt. Smaller plans, multiple outs and protections available from the get go.
On top of that, student loan debt already prevents people from buying cars due to high debt to income, and already low post-grad income tied up paying loans, which are often as high as a new car payment, not to mention insurance and registration. On top of that, it makes them higher risk, raises their interest rates, and makes financing even more challenging.
Banks suddenly getting burned when a bunch of bad loans stop getting paid at around the same time? What could possibly go wrong?
Getting some 2008 vibes. Thats what we need.
Meanwhile housing market is nuts. Nobody wants to sell because they’ll just have to buy and loose their sweet 2.75 refi. So now homes are still at jacked up prices because supply is low, but average 30yr mortgages are still at 7.8. So buyers, especially first time buyers, get stuck with an overinflated principle and a higher interest, getting the worst of both ends, and hoping either values hold or rates fall and they can refi in a few years.
If you remember 2008, it wasn’t the bank execs that were burned, it wasn’t even really the bank employees that were burned (although some did lose their jobs)
It was everyday people that lost their homes, their jobs, their lives.
I’m all for a bit if chaos in the name of redistributing wealth, or resetting some madness that has worked it’s way into society, but I don’t think this is it
To play devil’s advocate, used car prices do not follow supply and demand. They follow perceived supply and demand by a conflict of interest. If you try to buy a used car, your salesman gives you info to push you to pay more. They have other lots to make it seem like there’s low supply.
Carvana and CarMax operate similarly.
And if you feel like knowledge is power, Manheim/Cox numbers don’t matter when you’re purchasing through a greedy middleman.
Totally, however, to play devil’s advocate of that… There is only so much inventory that these companies can hold. It’s similar situation to house price crashes. Banks are left with too much stock.
However, with property, banks can rent them out… Maybe we will see a huge industry of second hand rent-from-large-corporation-and-never-own-anythings popping up soon…
Banks have gotten high on their own power. They realize they can compete in residential real estate and starve out the market by artificially decreasing supply and hiking prices. They know the US loves circle jerking (American) auto makers, and will funnel tax money to make them survive.
Banks will want in on the action and will back automakers to follow suit, cut supply/artificially decrease it, and increase prices (more than they are).
In that scenario 1 of 2 things happens, 1) we pay more cash for cars that are necessary for American life 2) we lease/finance ridiculous prices and the bank makes even more profit.
It’s win win for them to support auto industry and supply them with the real estate they’re holding on the side lines.
But don’t cars depreciate a lot? I get that this article is clickbaity. But I think with the elevated cost of cars the autoloan debt is still something to take seriously. Even the response of “its not a big deal, you can always go bankrupt” is pretty wild.
Not if they take the car for not paying lol that’s where the not paying part comes in. You just get bad credit. Not the end of the world like people make it out to be
As long as you don’t need to get a new loan for 7ish years
Yep, and depending on the severity of the debt and other factors you’ll mostly just pay higher interest rates on loans for several years. You have to fuck up pretty bad before nobody will loan you money (though that probably depends on a lot of demographic factors too).
They’d legally still on the hook for the difference, and if it’s a large enough amount for the creditor to care about they’ll come after you for it using the variety of means available. In the US that can include taking the money from the debtor’s bank account or having their employer take it out of their paycheck before paying the debtor.
There are some ways around that. You can self-employ and ignore the garnishment request, but that works best if you have a constantly changing client list, like a roofing contractor or wedding-dress-maker or whatever. You have to be careful about keeping cash in your business because they can show up with the sheriff and take any cash, or in extreme cases they can seize non-exempt property (like, they wouldn’t generally be able to seize the lawnmower you use for your lawnmowing business).
Also, just not having any money is a pretty good defense. There are limits to wage garnishment for example.
But yeah, in a lot of cases it’s not even close to being worth the effort to chase someone down to collect, so you get a ding on your credit report for a few years, and then almost nobody cares.
His lawyers probably didn’t expect to juggle a dozen trials at the same time. That, and, no one even halfway competent would ever work for Trump. Most of his previous attorneys are codefendants in his criminal trials at this point.
Honestly if I look at his actions through the lens of what I remember it was like to be a 13 year old edge lord, it kind of makes sense. It fits so well.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.