For those with high HHI ($500K), tax saving strategies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I make high 1s / low 2s most years - all W2 income. I have yet to find any substantive tax loop holes. I pay a truly massive, and I would say unfair, amount of my income in taxes.

I think the comments about real estates write-offs are true, but I do not have the interest, time, or mental capacity to do real estate management.

+1

Yes, there simply are not legal "loopholes" if your income is W2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Talk about first world problems lol my 30% tax rate is twice the median household income in the US whatever can I do about it?

Well most of us got to that place by choices we made. I grew up poor, neither parent went to college, I've had free lunch several years in school, and we were on/off from food stamps whenever parents were laid off. Yet I managed to go to college, pay off my college debt and do well in life. Nothing was handed to me, I had to work hard for it all. Yes, I recognize there are others who have it "worse" but my life wasn't a picnic. I just knew working hard and an education was key to a better life. Then I chose to live within my means and save save save and take career risks to advance.
The fact that those making $178K+ pay approximately 80% of the taxes in the US means that why yes we are in fact providing for the vast majority of society. It's our taxes that make roads, infrastructure, schools, and everything else happen. We more than pay our "fair share"

You acknowledge that for years you benefited from government programs. And now you don't want to pay into them?

Can you read? We have contributed far more than most. My family used those benefits for a total of about 2 years in my lifetime. We've paid $500K+ into medicare in our lifetime (probably much more), and that's just medicare. Happy to pay, but at some point, no I don't need to pay more. So we will do what we can to avoid estate tax issues (at both federal and StaTE level---our state starts much lower and would affect many people more than just us). That money was taxed once and we don't need to send 40% of everything above $3M to our state when we die.

We also contribute smartly to organizations that provide much more than the govt does with our tax dollars. I'd prefer to have it go locally to organizations that actually maximize it

You haven’t contributed enough. Freedom is priceless. Your contributions are still needed to support our defense spending. We all benefit from it.

Haaa! Yup, that's one of the main issues!

But yes, even after paying ALL of that into medicare, when we turn 65, we get to pay ~$1K+ just for part B and a gap plan. Add in more for prescription coverage. So we still will pay $2400/month for the 2 of us to have basic medical coverage. It's ridiculous

It is insanely true. There's no way to escape the medicare/part B etc without the increased premium. All income including 1099/k-1 etc counts towards the income. RIDICULOUS that the premiums are so unfair.

Yes, especially when many who have to pay that have already paid in so much for Medicare (as there is no cap). Happy to pay for others, but don't need to pay for 1000s of people as well as myself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

Yep. Proposed CA wealth tax is surprisingly rational and addresses the problem of unrealized gains. We’ve got to tax portfolio loans for the UHNW too. Such a loophole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

Yep. Proposed CA wealth tax is surprisingly rational and addresses the problem of unrealized gains. We’ve got to tax portfolio loans for the UHNW too. Such a loophole.

I do not agree with a "wealth tax" on everything. But I do agree, if you are borrowing against capital, you need to pay taxes on that capital.

However, the solution is not just to tax anyone who is worth $5M (insert whatever number) on their net worth. We are UHNW, we don't hide anything. We paid taxes on everything when we earned it (either as regular income or Capital gains). I dont' borrow against my "wealth". So I do not need to and shouldn't have to pay taxes yearly on my "net worth", if it is simply invested wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

Yep. Proposed CA wealth tax is surprisingly rational and addresses the problem of unrealized gains. We’ve got to tax portfolio loans for the UHNW too. Such a loophole.

I do not agree with a "wealth tax" on everything. But I do agree, if you are borrowing against capital, you need to pay taxes on that capital.

However, the solution is not just to tax anyone who is worth $5M (insert whatever number) on their net worth. We are UHNW, we don't hide anything. We paid taxes on everything when we earned it (either as regular income or Capital gains). I dont' borrow against my "wealth". So I do not need to and shouldn't have to pay taxes yearly on my "net worth", if it is simply invested wealth.

Lucky for you the CA wealth tax is $1B and above and it’s focused on people like the Google co-founders who take loans against their ownership stake instead of having to sell shares and pay taxes for liquidity. It’s also a one time tax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

Yep. Proposed CA wealth tax is surprisingly rational and addresses the problem of unrealized gains. We’ve got to tax portfolio loans for the UHNW too. Such a loophole.

I do not agree with a "wealth tax" on everything. But I do agree, if you are borrowing against capital, you need to pay taxes on that capital.

However, the solution is not just to tax anyone who is worth $5M (insert whatever number) on their net worth. We are UHNW, we don't hide anything. We paid taxes on everything when we earned it (either as regular income or Capital gains). I dont' borrow against my "wealth". So I do not need to and shouldn't have to pay taxes yearly on my "net worth", if it is simply invested wealth.

There should be a wealth tax on billionaires because our democracy has already started to feel democracy falter. Trump has made some sweet deals for the billionaires in exchange for their contributions, for what not sure anyone knows. They are already over involved in law making. Trump managed to find $4 billion dollars in income this year.

[Anonymous]

Your CPA is correct

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:401k
mega back door Roth will avoid taxes over time
HSA
I bonds
Tax efficient investment allocation
529
Flexible spending accounts

OP shouldn’t do this now, in a high tax bracket. The time to do it is is between retirement and RMDs.

Nope nope nope. I’ve been doing this as an 800k/yr income family. we are investing 60k/yr in our megs back door. we have accumulated 900k (half of which pay dividends) in those accounts and are 45yrs old. tax free compounding is a beautiful thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you need a side business: rental income, landscaping, tutoring, house cleaning, remodeling, etc.

Let’s say they have a side gig doing tutoring and earn a few extra bucks that way. How can that benefit someone earning 500k+ ?

Or you mean it needs to be an actual business where they hire others?

I think they mean a side business that loses money for the tax write off

No that's not what is meant. It would be silly to own a business just to lose money considering the time exerted and liability.
However, what does happen is this from first hand experience. I could make tons more money than i do now. I simply don't have the desire to pay $40,000 in more taxes for every $100,000 earned. It's taken away my desire to spend more time earning that money when such a huge chunk goes to pay others that don't pay tax. Our capitalist economy is already suffering and many of you fools want to tax us more out of nothing but sheer greediness. GOYA's It's not fair that someone sacrifices their time to make twice the income, but after paying tax is closer to the goof that only works 40 hr weeks.

If you are starting a business just to lose money to write off against your W2 income, then it’s not much time exerted (and not sure about the liability).

Start a business as an Amazon reseller and write off your home internet and cell phone and a portion of your utilities…heck, have it resell everyday items and you buy all your normal home products as inventory.

Find some “trade shows” in vacation destinations (where you can usually walk the floor for free) and attend for one day, yet you write off a bunch of your travel expenses. Have your CPA prepare taxes for your family and the business, and write off the entire cost.

The list goes on.

Only problem is you can only lose money for 3 of 5 years, or IRS considers it a hobby and you can no longer take losses. Though you could probably eke out a small profit every 3rd year.

Lose money for 3 years and close the business. Start a new one, rinse and repeat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:401k
mega back door Roth will avoid taxes over time
HSA
I bonds
Tax efficient investment allocation
529
Flexible spending accounts

OP shouldn’t do this now, in a high tax bracket. The time to do it is is between retirement and RMDs.

Nope nope nope. I’ve been doing this as an 800k/yr income family. we are investing 60k/yr in our megs back door. we have accumulated 900k (half of which pay dividends) in those accounts and are 45yrs old. tax free compounding is a beautiful thing.

Younger but also $800K and we do $60K annually via mega backdoor Roth too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, you need a side business: rental income, landscaping, tutoring, house cleaning, remodeling, etc.

Let’s say they have a side gig doing tutoring and earn a few extra bucks that way. How can that benefit someone earning 500k+ ?

Or you mean it needs to be an actual business where they hire others?

I think they mean a side business that loses money for the tax write off

No that's not what is meant. It would be silly to own a business just to lose money considering the time exerted and liability.
However, what does happen is this from first hand experience. I could make tons more money than i do now. I simply don't have the desire to pay $40,000 in more taxes for every $100,000 earned. It's taken away my desire to spend more time earning that money when such a huge chunk goes to pay others that don't pay tax. Our capitalist economy is already suffering and many of you fools want to tax us more out of nothing but sheer greediness. GOYA's It's not fair that someone sacrifices their time to make twice the income, but after paying tax is closer to the goof that only works 40 hr weeks.

If you are starting a business just to lose money to write off against your W2 income, then it’s not much time exerted (and not sure about the liability).

Start a business as an Amazon reseller and write off your home internet and cell phone and a portion of your utilities…heck, have it resell everyday items and you buy all your normal home products as inventory.

Find some “trade shows” in vacation destinations (where you can usually walk the floor for free) and attend for one day, yet you write off a bunch of your travel expenses. Have your CPA prepare taxes for your family and the business, and write off the entire cost.

The list goes on.

Only problem is you can only lose money for 3 of 5 years, or IRS considers it a hobby and you can no longer take losses. Though you could probably eke out a small profit every 3rd year.

Lose money for 3 years and close the business. Start a new one, rinse and repeat.

I had a small business while DH's income grew substantially. At a certain point, the savings aren't worth the effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

Yep. Proposed CA wealth tax is surprisingly rational and addresses the problem of unrealized gains. We’ve got to tax portfolio loans for the UHNW too. Such a loophole.

I do not agree with a "wealth tax" on everything. But I do agree, if you are borrowing against capital, you need to pay taxes on that capital.

However, the solution is not just to tax anyone who is worth $5M (insert whatever number) on their net worth. We are UHNW, we don't hide anything. We paid taxes on everything when we earned it (either as regular income or Capital gains). I dont' borrow against my "wealth". So I do not need to and shouldn't have to pay taxes yearly on my "net worth", if it is simply invested wealth.

There should be a wealth tax on billionaires because our democracy has already started to feel democracy falter. Trump has made some sweet deals for the billionaires in exchange for their contributions, for what not sure anyone knows. They are already over involved in law making. Trump managed to find $4 billion dollars in income this year.

You mean billionaires like George Soros?
You mean like that you hypocrite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

Yep. Proposed CA wealth tax is surprisingly rational and addresses the problem of unrealized gains. We’ve got to tax portfolio loans for the UHNW too. Such a loophole.

I do not agree with a "wealth tax" on everything. But I do agree, if you are borrowing against capital, you need to pay taxes on that capital.

However, the solution is not just to tax anyone who is worth $5M (insert whatever number) on their net worth. We are UHNW, we don't hide anything. We paid taxes on everything when we earned it (either as regular income or Capital gains). I dont' borrow against my "wealth". So I do not need to and shouldn't have to pay taxes yearly on my "net worth", if it is simply invested wealth.

Lucky for you the CA wealth tax is $1B and above and it’s focused on people like the Google co-founders who take loans against their ownership stake instead of having to sell shares and pay taxes for liquidity. It’s also a one time tax.

And lucky for me, I don't live in CA. Way too many taxes and poorly run govt. WOn't live somewhere that we'd pay 60% in taxes yearly, 10%+ sales tax and ridiculous cost of living. We still have a VHCOL, but no state income tax (for now) so we don't get taxed until we die

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So let me get this straight. You asked a CPA. You didn't like the correct answer s/he gave you. And so you thought you'd crowd source this?

Maybe count your blessings to be doing so well that you can contribute that level of taxation and be glad you don't live in other places of the world where taxes are higher (because the USA is basically the world's tax haven).

The short answers is the same your CPA gave you. You're salaried employees. Short of increasing exclusions like 401K contributions, there really are no magic tricks here. And thank God for that. Pay your fair share, damnit.

Ditch the attitude!!

It's frustrating to pay so much of your income in taxes. Those making over $178K pay 75-80% of all income taxes at the federal level. So while many of us are happy to do our part, it's frustrating to see so much of our hard earned income go to taxes ALL the time. We see no real breaks, and are not billionaires

That’s a load of horseshit.

72% in 2022! Pretty close to 75-80%

https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/latest-federal-income-tax-data-2025/

+1000

The 75-80% came from an article after 2022. The people you want paying more are those in the Ultra Ultra UHNW...think worth over $100M+, whose "income" comes from borrowing against their options/stock.

Not the people who have W2/1099INT/DIV income. We pay (and have been) for decades. Everything over about 751K for a married filing jointly couple is taxed at 37%, and so on down the chart.

Yep. Proposed CA wealth tax is surprisingly rational and addresses the problem of unrealized gains. We’ve got to tax portfolio loans for the UHNW too. Such a loophole.

I do not agree with a "wealth tax" on everything. But I do agree, if you are borrowing against capital, you need to pay taxes on that capital.

However, the solution is not just to tax anyone who is worth $5M (insert whatever number) on their net worth. We are UHNW, we don't hide anything. We paid taxes on everything when we earned it (either as regular income or Capital gains). I dont' borrow against my "wealth". So I do not need to and shouldn't have to pay taxes yearly on my "net worth", if it is simply invested wealth.

There should be a wealth tax on billionaires because our democracy has already started to feel democracy falter. Trump has made some sweet deals for the billionaires in exchange for their contributions, for what not sure anyone knows. They are already over involved in law making. Trump managed to find $4 billion dollars in income this year.

You mean billionaires like George Soros?
You mean like that you hypocrite?

Boy you MAGAs are something else. Trump is president and is corruption. And it’s all billionaires.