 where, for example, if we earned $100,000 gross, but it took us $80,000 to generate the $100,000, it wouldn't make sense to tax the $100,000 gross income, but only the $20,000 net income. Because if you tax the $100,000 gross income, you're really going to be giving a huge benefit to those types of businesses that don't have expenses that they need to invest in order to generate the revenue, right? So it only makes sense to tax the net income. When we talk about the W-2 wages, it's kind of harder to see that because if you're an employee, the assumption is that your employer is providing the expenses and therefore we're including the W-2 income on the top line, and possibly they might be arguing that the standard deduction will be large enough to pick up any other kind of deductions in that kind of scenario. The itemized deductions, you'll see the IRS using the tax codes sometimes to do things outside of that natural thing. I mean, in other words, if taxes was only intended to generate revenue for the federal government, because we're talking about federal taxes, so they can do what they need to do, which is to defend us with the military and instead of our business, if that was what they were trying to do, then you would think they would just allow deductions that were necessary to generate revenue. However, the government likes to try to nudge us and manipulate us with other types of things. And so you can argue whether that's good or not, but it does add complications to the code. And you can see the itemized deductions, you have a lot of that going on. So you get to deduct medical expenses and whatnot. What does that do? It subsidizes the medical industry and whatnot. Now, the argument that they would give is that they're giving it, but you get to deduct mortgage interest. Mortgage interest on your personal home is a personal expense. So you would think that you wouldn't need to deduct it as a personal expense, but the government's argument was, well, they're trying to get everybody to be able to own a home because it's the American dream or whatnot, probably more likely that the lobbyists for the home builders got that in there because it propped up, again, supplemented the housing market and so on. And then if you have charitable deductions, again, they're trying to incentivize people to give to charity, which again, you could say, well, that's a noble cause or whatever and whatnot. But I would still, to me, I would still think the idea of giving to charity shouldn't be to give a tax deduction for the gift to the charity. But you can see what's happening here. We have all these kinds of deductions happening that really have nothing to do with just taxing people based on their net income in order to do what the government's supposed to do, which is just make sure that we're not getting attacked by Britain, the King of England coming over here and trying to take my land or something, right? Or whatever. So that's going to be so that's the general idea. Now, that means it also gets confusing when some of those schedule a deductions conflict with where they could legitimately be written off as a business expense. So for example, with a schedule C, you might actually work from your home, in which case it's not just the personal expense, the mortgage interest on the home, your paying as basically an office in that case, because you're working in part, at least in part of the home. That means you should be able to deduct some of that as a business expense, not on schedule a, but on schedule C. But if you deduct it on schedule C, you can't deduct it again on schedule a, because you would be I would call that double dipping, right? You'd be deducting two places the same amount. So then you run into these problems of okay, I was able to deduct it more naturally as a business expense somewhere else, like a schedule C. And therefore I can't deduct it also on the schedule a, and we'll talk about some of those scenarios later. So what's new with the form, you got the standard mileage rate, that's going to be something updated all the time, because we have the massive government induced inflation that we're dealing with these times that they try to hide with shrink inflation. It's the it's the company's fault because they put less chips in the back. No, you caused it. It's the same thing. What are you, either they raise the price or they put less chips in the back? What do you want them? I mean, anyway,