WHich pays least tax in the long run? Businessman or employee?

Phillip:

Could I please steal 2 minuts and grab an answer to this,

Just a bit curious.

From what I heard in  australia it is better to be a businessman in this regard.

what about here in DK?

 (getting a bit insprired by Robert Kiyosaki)

Mvh Phillip 

That is an interresting question, however, not easy to answer.

If you pay an employee 1 mill. dkk, and a businessman takes the same amount from his company for personal use, it will be the same.

But when it comes to employee benefits, the businessman has a couple more opportunities than the employee (given that the employee isn't in a position to decide his own benefits) - but they will still be taxed the same amount if they recieve the same benefits.

Now - the big difference will be in the assets and liabilities columns (following the Kioysaki definition of assets and liabilities :o) as, the corporations will pay lower tax of the income, and then will be able to invest more of that income into new assets, than the employee will be able to if he made the same investments.  Also when it comes to liabilities, the corporations will be able to pay these before tax deductions, which the employee can't.

So, in some terms Kiyosaki is right - you will build your assets quicker in a corporation than as an employee, however all the real estate rules in the states differs a lot from the danish rules.

But if you stick to the idea of putting more focus to your assets than to your income, and try to balance your assets and liabilities you are on the right track :o)

Jan

Fama:

Well..... Where would the business man be without his employees?

 

You can stick that in your pipe and smoke it Mr. Kiyosaki! ;)

Nowhere i guess, but that is really not the point. There will always be employers and employees. The difference is which one YOU choose to be....

And no - it will never happen that everybody chooses to be a business man.

And i really like the basic idea - dont work for money - let the money work for you. But as with everything else in this world, grab the things you like and implement it your way, then skip the rest.

Jan

Fama:

Up shit creek without a paddle.... One is not less dependent on the other. But that's not the point. The point is that Kiyosaki's advice is useless for at least 90% of the population.... Actually I'm inclined to say a 100%. The people who's actually capable of putting his techniques in effect would probably do so even if Kiyosaki wasn't even born ;)

It's funny you mention that. When i first saw his videos it was a kind of "Well - Cool. I have been doing that since my late teens. The thing is that after watching the videos, i was able to put words on what i did, and actually re-focus.

But that doesn't change the fact the the basic idea is right.

Fama:

And his advice about investing in real estate? Well..... You could say that the last years have been a wet dream for Kiyosaki, as everyone and their mother started investing in real estate..... But that didn't turn out so great did it? ;)

Yeah - that is where the "american bull" starts - and there is a lot of that throughout his videos and probably also his books...

Fama:

Sorry.... But if people took a moment to think about it, they surely would come to the conclusion that while many successful people have written books about how to be a success, almost none of them became themselves successful by reading a friggin' self-help book

You are absolutely right - but it doesn't mean that you can't be inspired by these people (as i wrote earlier - grab the useful stuff, use it in a way you find meaningful and skip the rest)

Jan