This article is within the scope of WikiProject Taxation, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of tax-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was Not to Merge. — Morphh(talk)4:12, 07 March 2007 (UTC)
In light of Famspear's reply, I'm going to strike my support. His suggestions on other merges sound like a good idea. We really need to clarify and inter-relate these articles, as I had no idea they were two different concepts. The terms income and wages seemed interchangeable to me. Morphh(talk) 01:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - Famspear 01:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC) First, let me say that this article needs some work. Second, at least in the United States, the terms "taxable income" and "taxable wage" are so different that I believe merging the articles could create some conceptual presentation problems. (Actually, before merging "taxable income" and "taxable wages", I think we should at least consider merging the articles on "gross income," "adjusted gross income" and "taxable income" -- in U.S. law, those concepts are so related that it makes more sense to discuss all of them on one place -- but that's another discussion.) If anything, the material in the article on "taxable wages" should be merged into the article on "gross income" -- to which that material more closely relates-- and not into the article on "taxable income." Yours, Famspear 01:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Oppose - PrincipalWisdom 12:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC) I agree with Famspear's assessment of the situation.
In "Concepts Federal Taxation" Part II, Chapter 3, Example 4, the book says that Cara experiences an increase in wealth of $35 by installing her own spark plugs at a cost of $15 instead of having a show do it at a cost of $50. The text says that through consuption of the "labor and overhead involved in the $50 charged by the shop, her net worth has increased." I know that this concept may be better asked under imputed income, but the book treats it under "What Constitutes income", a net increase in wealth over a particular time period, through either increase in net worth or through consumption. The first is widely known and understood. But the second is not and the book offers very little dscussion or clarification. I don't even understand the logic. Also, web searches come up with nothing. can any one help? --Ryan Close (talk) 17:23, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
An anonymous editor changed the definition of taxable income. I reverted the edit. Taxable income equals adjusted gross income less the greater of standard deduction or itemized deductions, less the personal exemptions. These are legal terms of art, and they don't mean exactly what I believe the anonymous editor thought they meant. Famspear 18:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
You are correct. I was that anonymous editor, and I've since registered. I did not recognize the difference between "specific deductions" and "itemized" or "standard" deductions. PrincipalWisdom 12:22, 25 February 2007