Tax Efficiency Quotes

If you're going to buy something which compounds for 30 years at 15% per annum and you pay one 35% tax at the very end, the way that works out is that after taxes, you keep 13.3% per annum. In contrast, if you bought the same investment, but had to pay taxes every year of 35% out of the 15% that you earned, then your return would be 15% minus 35% of 15%-or only 9.75% per year compounded. So the difference there is over 3.5%. And what 3.5% does to the numbers over long holding periods like 30 years is truly eye-opening.

The best scheme of finance is, to spend as little as possible; and the best tax is always the lightest.

In investing, you get what you don't pay for. Costs matter. So intelligent investors will use low-cost index funds to build a diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds, and they will stay the course. And they won't be foolish enough to think that they can consistently outsmart the market.

Any one may so arrange his affairs that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which will best pay the Treasury; there is not even a patriotic duty to increase one's taxes.

The nation should have a tax system that looks like someone designed it on purpose.

The tax code is very inefficient. Both the personal tax code and the corporate tax code. By closing loopholes and lowering rates, you could increase the efficiency of the tax code and create more incentives for people to invest.

There is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible.

When you look at the government, when the government collects a buck, it's not free. They have to spend resources, the IRS, audits, all this sort of crap, to collect the dollar. I'm not assuming any Laffer curve effect here at all. There are just transactions costs of collecting that money.

The problem with wanting the tax code to be 'simpler, fairer,' and 'pro-growth' is that it's impossible to achieve all three at the same time.

The wisdom of man never yet contrived a system of taxation that would operate with perfect equality.

An optimised tax structure gives us the possibility of flexibility in using our assets that have already been taxed in one market. They can be used in new markets for further business development without the additional burden of double taxation.

Democrats must rally behind a low-rate, broad-based tax system that is fair, simple and efficient.

I'm a big believer in investing for the long term, and the decisions you make shouldn't be made if the economy is good or bad at a specific time.

Working hard to earn more money and then giving it away in higher taxes isn't financially intelligent, even if you do put some of it into a retirement account.

Berkshire Hathaway can transfer excess capital from businesses that don't need it to businesses that do need it, tax free and in a way that enhances compound annual growth rates.

Enjoy the magic of compounding returns. Even modest investments made in one's early 20s are likely to grow to staggering amounts over the course of an investment lifetime.

While it is probably a poor idea to own actively managed funds in general, it is truly a terrible idea to own them in taxable accounts... taxes are a drag on performance of up to 4 percentage points each year... many index funds allow your capital gains to grow largely undisturbed until you sell... For the taxable investor, indexing means never having to say you're sorry.

Taxation, gentlemen, is very much like dairy farming. The task is to extract the maximum amount of milk with the minimum amount of moo.

Our aim is to make tax collecting a declining industry.

For the taxable investor, indexing means never having to say you're sorry.

Economists are almost unanimous in conceding that the land tax has no adverse side effects. ...Landowners ought to look at both sides of the coin. Applying a tax to land values also means removing other taxes. This would so improve the efficiency of a city that land values would go up more than the increase in taxes on land.

It seems idle to speculate in the abstract as to whether or not a progressive income tax schedule rising to rates in excess of 70 percent are justifiable …. The fact is that such rates cannot be successfully collected.

Taxes must produce ample revenues without discouraging enterprise; and if it is to be just it must distribute the burden of taxes equitably.

A lot of people are happy to give money to charities but are wary of giving through taxes because they feel it doesn't produce any value.

People like me, whose income largely comes from dividends, should pay more taxes. The problem is that taxes aren't used efficiently.