Posts by Mark Nguyen6

The core of my question was actually a bit different from how it came across.

Setting aside the specifics of the protege's career for a moment—Wells Fargo was really just being used as an example of what a 'domestic bank' looks like.

So, given all the complaining about how our banking system is essentially owned by foreign interests, I was wondering—what would we actually gain if we shifted everything over to a single institution under domestic ownership (let's say some imaginary XYZ Bank)? Would there be any tangible benefit—for the government, for individuals, for society at large, or for the economy as a whole—and if so, what exactly would that look like?

Why wouldn't you want to scale up the business?

If we’re looking at this through the lens of basic logic—I mean, wouldn't there be significantly larger and more lucrative opportunities if you were actually 'moving' a higher volume of capital?

Just a hypothetical question here...

What would actually happen in a scenario where everyone—or almost everyone—who holds accounts, savings, or loans at foreign-owned banks decided to move everything over to Wells Fargo? (As far as I know, Wells Fargo is a domestic bank, though please feel free to correct me if I have that wrong.)

A huge congratulations to the US on such an incredible game and a well-deserved win!

I’ll definitely be rooting for you guys in the finals.

I’ll go ahead and restate my request one more time.

Thanks in advance for your help with this.

I’ll go ahead and restate my request one more time.

Thanks in advance for your help.

I’ll go ahead and reiterate my request one more time.

Thanks in advance, I suppose.

I am just circling back to my previous request.

Thanks in advance, I suppose.

I would like to kindly request that the moderators of this forum consider reopening the locked thread .

To be perfectly honest—and I realize how this might look—I was actually banned immediately after posting, so I never really had the chance to get my point across. That said, I truly believe the subject matter of that discussion is far from trivial.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

PS.
Once the moderation team has had a chance to review this, I would appreciate it if this particular request could be deleted.

But isn't that precisely what he was getting at?

George Phillips said:Maybe just watch those calculation periods: you mentioned an annual gross income of about $50 which was the basis for that rough math using $41 yearly revenue, but when talking salary (usually) we mean monthly—so there's no way $1667 is actually an annual salary.
My math would look something like this (not an expert, just what I've picked up):
$122,000 minus 22% sales tax = $100,000 minus 12x minimum gross salary (maybe $3,000?) minus business expenses (phones, travel, per diems, car use, equipment depreciation, rent... let's say 12x$2,000) = $13333 (profit)
I guess you pay 20% on profit ($8,000), leaving you with $32,000, plus you pay 15% for healthcare on your salary and set aside 20% for Social Security. You'd probably walk away with about $2,100 net, and since the tax-free portion is $1,800 (if you don't have dependents), you'd pay 15% tax on the $300 difference. So, from $3,000, you're left with maybe $2,050, or roughly $24,500 for the year. That means you've got $24,500 in salary and $32,000 in post-tax profit, totaling $56,500 out of the $122,000 total collected 😢. Man, I really hope I'm wrong, so please correct me if I am... I guess it only gets better if you can bump up business expenses, like buying stuff through the company that you'd normally pay for out of pocket (like a new truck or something?)

Or maybe I just misunderstood the math here?

Gregory Williams7 said:Furthermore, those payments made to her didn't just "vanish" into thin air. 😁They must be factored into the total amount she withdrew from the company.

It feels like watching one of those "Aha!" moments on the news. 😉

Could you perhaps elaborate on that?

Yes, I actually just stepped in to say that—it looks like there was a bit of a slip in the math there. I’m actually out driving right now and it just occurred to me—we should be looking at 12 monthly paychecks a year, not just one, obviously.

You're absolutely right.

Alright, so if I were to put it bluntly—using a shovel to move the dirt, so to speak—

$76,000 (profit paid out to myself) + $5,000 (salary also paid to myself) = $81,000 / $122,000 = roughly 2/3 of the total amount

Based on those numbers, the government takes about a third. Honestly, that doesn't look nearly as bad as I feared; I probably would have agreed to that anyway. I guess I had this vague, somewhat foggy idea that the tax hit might be closer to 50%. To be perfectly honest, I had no clue that profit could actually be distributed like this—especially not in such a "clean" manner. In my ignorance, I was under the impression that taking money out of a company like that was some kind of criminal offense (please, don't laugh at me)—and that the only legitimate way to get funds from a business was through a standard salary payment
.
Of course, once you factor in things like using the company to purchase business expenses... it looks even more favorable than before.
Well, I have to admit, looking at it this way, it sounds quite reasonable. I don't see any real need to go looking for complicated workarounds. Using a corporation seems like a natural and perfectly acceptable choice.

Many thanks to everyone for the advice.

So, if we take the $41 revenue—minus 22% sales tax and then another 20%—we end up with $27
.
From that amount, I suppose I’d have to cover the minimum wage requirements along with payroll taxes (let's say that totals roughly $1.75) and then I'd be left with $25. Is that what I can actually pay myself as profit? Does that stay entirely mine? (By "entirely," I mean—just to be clear—that I wouldn't owe any further taxes or government levies on it?)

Just thinking out loud here.

So, if I'm following this correctly—and I might be misinterpreting things—the general consensus is that setting up an LLC (and essentially paying yourself a salary through it) would be the most cost-effective legal route available?

Also, just as a side note—how does dividend distribution actually work? I mean, what's the deal with the tax implications and all those extra fees involved in that process?

I can't say for certain, but as my colleague mentioned—if you happen to be an heir—you’ll most likely be responsible (or one of the heirs will be).

When my father passed away, once the probate process was wrapped up and we went to close out his account at JPMorgan Chase, they informed us that if there were any outstanding debts on the account, we as heirs would have to settle them before the account could be closed—just as any remaining funds would be subject to the estate proceedings. There wasn't any debt in our case, but that is simply the standard procedure for a checking account. I suppose it wouldn't make much sense for a loan to work any differently.

But of course, the best way to get a definitive answer is to speak directly with the bank in question.

Is there actually a way to express—perhaps as a percentage—what portion of the initial gross amount might end up in my own pocket after everything has been legally paid out?

Basically, if we take x amount of total revenue, and y is what's left over for me personally, then y/x would be the ratio, right?
I suppose you could ask it that way, though I'm not entirely sure if that's the proper way to frame the question.

So, just to clarify—does the conversation regarding salaries start from that $80,000 figure? I suppose we’re talking about the full breakdown—Social Security, Medicare, federal income tax (which, as an employee, would be my portion of the invoice), and so on?

Well, it’s a bit of a mixed bag at this stage—I have answers for some questions, but for others, I suppose I'm still waiting on more information before I can really say. That said, let me try to frame things this way:

1) I am looking for something that can serve as a long-term career path, rather than just a temporary gig.
2) Let's assume we are discussing an annual income in the neighborhood of roughly $50—and we might consider that a baseline figure.
3) Regarding the legality of the venture—to be honest, I would love to understand the mechanics behind every possible route. If it's an option, my preference would be to pursue a completely legitimate path and operate strictly by the book. Of course, that is assuming the "gray area" stuff doesn't involve a significant portion going to the IRS. In that specific case, I might consider some semi-legal alternatives. But, for now, I think I'm leaning toward the legal routes.

Charles Ramos7 said:You could technically pay for your own healthcare privately, and nobody would care about your employment situation, and it might even cost you less than $133/month.

Mark Nguyen6: how are they even paying you? cash under the table, through a domestic account, or an offshore one...🤷

Right, I completely missed that detail earlier—my apologies for the oversight.

As for the payment methods, they offer either a standard checking account or a foreign currency account. I have both, though so far everything has been sent to my checking account.

That said, if there were ever a reason to switch over to a different type of account, I wouldn't really mind. (Or even a third option I haven't had to use yet—it doesn't particularly matter to me.)