Senate Repeals Oppressive 1099 Law, Linda Beale Calls it a Conspiracy

Senate Repeals Oppressive 1099 Law, Linda Beale Calls it a Conspiracy

Share this

Joe Kristan reports that the United State’s Senate voted to repeal the new 1099 law yesterday:

The Senate yesterday voted to repeal the expansion of information reportingcontained in last year’s Obamacare legislation. It’s looking more and more likely that this widely-hated expansion of information reporting will never happen.

Kay Bell and TaxGrrrl have more.

More interestingly, however, is Joe’s notice of our favorite progressive tax law professor’s take on the repeal:

 Linda Beale explains what’s really going on:

I’m more and more convinced that it is not the deficit that the Republicans hollering for “entitlement reform” care about–it is that they just simply want to destroy all of the things that the New Deal did to provide a safety net for ordinary people, while making sure that they reinstate brute-force capitalism like existed in the 1920s, back when Teddy Roosevelt made his famous statement about the corporate titans and malefactors of great wealth.

Yes, the repeal of the 1099 expansion passed in 2010 is just a slippery step away from repealing Social Security and reintroducing the bonded servitude that Teddy Roosevelt battled heroically in the 1920s, after his death in 1919.

Professor Beale has, once again, regaled us with one of her paranoid, anti-capitalist conspiracy-theory rants which is wholly unsupported by even a single fact. 

But, while we’re engaging in ad hominem attacks that lack an evidentiary basis, I shall gladly add my own hyperbole to the mix:

I’m more and more convinced that progressives like Linda Beale don’t really care about stimulating the economy and reducing the deficit, but instead want to destroy anyone who is more successful than they are. 

I have said this on these pages many times before and it bears repeating now: Progressives are not happy when the boats of the poor and the middle class are lifted, but only when the boats of the rich (the job creators) are sunk.

Related Posts:

About Peter Pappas

Peter is a tax attorney and certified public acccountant with over 20 years experience helping taxpayers resolve their IRS and state tax problems.

He has represented thousands of taxpayers who have been experiencing difficulty dealing with the Internal Revenue Service or State tax officials.

He is a member of the American Association of Attorney-Certified Public Accountants, the Florida Bar Association and The Florida Institute of Certified Public Accountants and is admitted to practice before the United States Tax Court, the United States Supreme Court, U.S. District Courts - Middle District of Florida

Did you enjoy this article?

Subscribe by e-mail and get notified whenever new ones are published.



  1. HappyTaxDude says:

    Well said, Peter. It’s insane to think that people like Professor Beale have the title “professor” and the accompanying protection of tenure. To think that these progressive zealots are influencing the minds of impressionable youth at taxpayer expense is indeed a travesty. And, of course, it’s evidence that Professor Beale has never had to work in the world of government-induced burdensome regulation with a view to profit. The 1099 expansion would have imposed a burden not only to the titans of industry (in her Upton Sinclair-addled brain), but also the “mom and pop” businesses as well as small churches and other non-profits. I long for the day when such professors are museum tokens, but according to the actuaries there’s no way I’m going to live that long.

  2. Anything Obamacare needs to go. Leave the people to the people, I say.

  3. Happy, it is indeed sad that progressives generally believe that the mere fact of a man’s wealth is evidence of his guilt.

  4. I have 2 LLCs on is an equities trading company and the other is a real estate brokerage. I want to be able to take profits from the real estate firm and use it trade stocks with. How can I do this without commingling the funds and breaking the protection of separate entities? Both are taxed as S corps…

  5. Gilbert,

    You answered your own question. Take profits from one LLC and then invest/loan them in the other one. Use separate bank accounts and make sure you keep track of your investment/loan and the amount outstanding.

  6. Peter, you are (intentionally?) missing the point.

    As to reporting, yes, I think the government needs to increase reporting requirements in order to ensure that the voluntary compliance system can work properly. It has been amply shown that when there is no third party reporting, there is a good deal of cheating. On basis, for example, studies showed about a 25% cheat rate. So we need third party reporting if we want a fair tax system–else those who comply will be paying more because those who don’t comply don’t pay their fair share.

    And while reporting is not burdensomeless, it is not as onerous as the many right-side bloggers on this issue made it out to be. Businesses that are efficient in their operations are the only ones that will make it these days (as those on the right are eager to point out most of the time). Efficient operations can rather easily add this information, and that goes for Mom and Pop stores as well as the big boys. As we move more and more to electronic records–a move that will need to be accomplished even by the Mom and Pop stores if they want to stay in business–it will become even easier to maintain and file this information.

    (Yes, I did have a date typo on the reference to Teddy R–my bad, since of course Teddy was in office in the first decade of that century.)

    As for my “conspiracy theory” (and ignoring the ad hominem attacks calling me paranoid, etc.), you’ve also missed the point. The question is whether those who voted for massive increases in the deficit in order to fund a substantial tax benefit for the wealthiest Americans and corporate interests are really interested in decreasing the deficit. The same ones say even the few millions spent on Head Start and other proven programs that help move people into education and out of poverty are “too much” spending because of the deficit, and many of the same refuse to cut anything but the obvious from the bloated military budget.

    Even you, Peter, have to see the incongruity of those positions. Either you think the deficit is the worst thing that could possibly happen, thus justifying draconian, harsh measures that will push millions more into intolerable poverty (including, at the state level as shown in Wisconsin, firing of state workers, severe reductions in pensions, substantial increases in amounts that those in the very low income must pay for their health care) or you don’t care about the deficit and therefore are willing to pass yet another tax cut that redistributes upwards to the upper crust (the tax cut for those making $250,000 or more which was the “must-have” bargaining item for the GOP to pass the tax cut for the lower four quintiles). Those two things aren’t reconcilable as both demonstrating concern about the deficit. Since the GOP made tax cuts for the wealthy and the biggest corporations (that are sitting on trillions in cash) their highest priority, there was ample grounds for my conclusion that they must not really care about the deficit.

    By the way, we have the lowest taxes now that we’ve had since the Korean War, and the richest among us are getting off with paying less for a system that benefits them tremendously than is expected in most advanced countries. So where is this hype about the US having high taxes coming from? As for corporations, look at the big and profitable corporations like GE, Yahoo, Boeing, etc–that pay taxes around the 10-15% level. That’s tax haven tax rates, not “uncompetitive” tax rates–especially when you take into account that most of the rest of the developed world has a significant VAT in addition to income taxes.

  7. Virginia says:

    All this theory is fine, get practical. Not burdensome? How many businesses have you actually run, prof? And how much tax reporting have you done? Try running a business for a year or two then tell me having to collect data, oversee and report for anywhere from 3-500 vendors a year won’t be burdensome.


    One of the little guys
    P.S. and yes, even us little guys can have that many vendors.


  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by James Williams and James Williams, Daniel Stoica. Daniel Stoica said: Senate Repeals Oppressive 1099 Law, Linda Beale Calls it a Conspiracy via @TaxLawCPA […]

  2. […] More interestingly, however, is […] Tax Lawyer’s Blog […]