A Call for Fairness in the Tax Code
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-01-30/call-fairness-tax-code
Last week in his State of the Union address President Obama called for tax reform to ensure fair play. He proposed what he called a Buffett Rule: a minimum federal income tax of 30% for people making over $1 million. Republicans say he’s pushing class warfare and stifling economic growth in a period of weak growth. GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is facing criticism for both how he made his enormous fortune and for his seemingly low tax rate, but, as many analysts point out, most households pay at an even lower rate. Please join us to discuss the tax rates and he economy.
Guests
Alice Rivlin
senior fellow, Brookings Institution, vice chair, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System (1996-99); director, White House Office of Management and Budget (1994-96); and founding director, Congressional Budget Office (1975-83).
Stephen Moore
member of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board.
Jared Bernstein
senior fellow, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities; former chief economist and economic policy adviser for Vice President Biden.
David Leonhardt
Washington bureau chief, The New York Times.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
We can only get there through revenue increases and we cant get there through spending cuts?
That's like telling someone who cant pay their bills they just need to earn more and not to bother trying to reduce their bills. Or just follow the governments model and get another loan or credit card and ignore the bills.
The speaker removed any credibility they had with this statement.
Wasserman...do both
An earlier e-mail expressed dismay because the e-mailer reasoned that on $50,000 of income, renting and taking the standard deduction they paid 23% in federal income tax. Using an onliine calculator, the worst possible case for this filer is 12.5%.
How will Romney reduce the top marginal rate to 25%, the corporate rate to 25%, eliminated cap. gains, dividend and estate tax and target revenue at 20% of GDP?
The issue of taxes seems fact-free on all sides.
thefairtaxman:
Agreed on your first point.
How progressive is our tax system, anyway? This seems to be a pretty thorough study of federal income tax and the other taxes, showing the burden is about as great, in some cases greater, on the poorest. Even ignoring offshore havens creative accounting, etc.
http://www.itepnet.org/whopays3.pdf
But this doesn't even touch on the real extents of wealth or lack thereof.
Agreed on your last point - feathering a nest is one thing...
Agree, agree, agree! :) Flat Tax Now!
Wow, I can't believe Diane has a guy like Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board on. What a total disservice to her listeners. The Wall Street Journal editorial is so far right that it has pretty much detached itself from reality. IMHO it is nothing more than liars for the rich.
What people seem to forget is that we are taxed twice at the federal level. First, the FICA tax (Social Security & Medicare) and then regular income tax. As a self-employed individual, I have to shell out over 15% of my income before I even start paying income tax. Since I make under $75,000 a year, the overall tax picture for me is really burdensome.
Why not eliminate all corporate income tax and pass through all corporate earnings just like small business taxes S corporations do. Eliminate retained earnings so growing companies need to raise investment income annually.
Cut Government Spending First! The dufus said "we cannot get there by cuts alone" what cuts? where? There will not be cuts with this president period, there will only be increased spending
450 people own more that is owned by 50% of population. 74 people own as much as 18 million of lowest income people.
Supply side economics never worked. The top 1% create very few jobs withe their disposable income.
The GINI coefficient is the same as in China.
The supply side economics can be recapitulated by "Let them eat cake"
The class warfare is related to GINI coefficient than imbecilic talk about it about it.
It is interesting that Germany has higher taxes and is more successful on many levels than Germany.
In us states with highest taxes are also more successful than those without state taxes.
When the 1% make the bulk of their money off of money making money or when they make huge profits off of the back of paying pathetic wages etc...yes they should pay larger percentage.
When 6 Wal Mart family members make more than what 130 million workers in the US make in the same year...then yes they should pay a larger percentage of taxes. They are making massive amounts of money off the backs of workers who make pathetic wages and can barely get by
My retired parents earn about 20K/year from investments. It supplements their SS, and pensions. I don't think they should be taxed more on their investment income.
My question is:
What about a Progressive tax on dividends and capitol gains.
David how much do you re-invest in your business? Do you employ others? How much do you pay them? Do you provide insurance?
If 10% of the people make 90% of the money, why don't they pay 90% of the taxes?
Its about being FAIR !!
we are a country that shares everything
Freedom, infrastructure, security
we all should contribute EQUALY
It would be too radical to pull off
But
eliminate all the subsidies, all the write offs...all the loop holes; even eliminate joint filing by married couples
(They are all exploitation by some at the detriment of others; example:
Why should my tenant subsidize my mortgage interest payments?)
tax every man, woman, working child and corporation (a legal person) exactly the same rate, STOP the CLASS WAR FARE
(?WAR FAIR)
If the lowest econ. strata see that we are all being dealt fairly you will inherantly build a more responsible society
Be done with this madness
and have your CPA's working on real valued work instead of trying to cheat the goverment with every "legal" means
Steven Moore stated a very small percentage of people pay the highest percentage of federal taxes collected. Question - what is their percentage of all taxable income, and how does that percentage compare to the percentage of taxes that they pay compared to what the rest of taxpayers pay?
Moore's statement about Warren Buffett's and his secretary's tax rates surprised me.
I've owned stocks that paid dividends, and I never had them send me a check for $8 and then demand that I pay $2.40 to cover payroll taxes for the corporation. Moore says that Buffett pays payroll taxes out of his investment income. I've never heard of that happening. Do they also give him his income and then charge him for the rent on the corporate real estate? Do they charge him separately for the utilities?
The more important question is, does Moore believe what he says? Or does he think we will?
I love it when the conservative head starts talking about what Americans want....that sounds like a Karl Rove talking point memo....stool for the right
If we borrow money and then lower taxes on the rich then what we are really doing is giving borrowed money to the rich
Believe me, these 'comfortable people,' knowing every detail of their deductables, are the same ones who sneer at the poor at the bus stops and want off their streets out of sight out of mind, us back alley poor. They provide no bathrooms for bus riders and 'their sniveling children' the great unwashed, but they make sure they have access for 'powder rooms' where ever they might travel, their train depots will have 'facilities' but they very much want there to be 'separate accommodations' for themselves. Believe me, the poor policemen and police women have addled brains attending to the 'needs' of the posh venues, never bother them on the street and cars as they know it is a waste of time as they have 'their people - lawyers.' and can write that off too. So the rest of us get ticketed to death, and have to cross multi lane traffic to take children to the restroom at a gas station. Do not they pee and powder their noses, too?
the tax cuts just give them more money to put in their pockets...to invest yes but the investments just get them richer and they take their money to foreign countries and the US economy looses..
Stop worrying about rich and poor. Why don't we treat all income the same way, and tax it all equally? Wages, interest income, and investment income.
I have heard the argument that the lower rate for capital gains encourages investment, but I don't believe that with equal tax rates people will just stuff the money in their mattresses and not invest it. If they put it in the bank, what does the bank do with it? (invest it!)
Wage income also plays an import role in the economy and has quicker recycle and turnover rates. There is no reason that investment income should get a preferential tax rate. Giving a lower tax rate to investment income, while keeping spending rates the same just means that wage earners pay a larger share of the burden.
1) Please be consistent with use of words: "tax rate" an entity pays is not the same thing as the "amount of taxes" an entity pays
2) If there is a "drop dead" line date for spending reform, then there should be a similar dead line date for 'revenue' (aka taxes) reform - if no spending reformation happens by a certain date then a system wide cut in spending is enacted ERGO if tax reform does not happen by a certain date then the Bush Tax Cuts are 'negated'
The idea that capital gains is subjected to double taxation because of corporate taxes as Mr. Moore has suggested is a bit of a canard. First, many, in fact most, corporations do not pay the full 35 percent because of deductions. Most importantly. much capital gains is realized on sale of stock rather than dividends. The stock has never been taxed until sale, hence the real tax rate is only 15 percent because the stock is only taxed once.
What we need is a SOPA/PIPA style protest:
Until Wash DC fixes the tax code top to bottom, congress/president will not be allowed to submit any new legislation. That we are basing new government programs and the payment for them on a broken tax code means that we do not have any idea how existing or new programs can be paid for without placing unfair burden on someone. Accounting gimmicks are used by government all the time to justify revenues against program expense and we have no real idea whether these things can be paid for.
The creation of corporations began with strict charters for the corporation to advance the public good. The idea that taxing the wealthiest Americans will harm corporate well-being points to the fact that corporations are no longer serving the majority of the public.
Call me cold hearted but I have trouble feeling any sympathy for the rich. From my perspective all this class warfare talk is ludicrous. The rich have been conducting class warfare ever since money was invented.
I would like to understand who is able to deduct charitable contributions. My tax accountant says I cannot deduct them (or very minimally), but I know that people donate large amounts of money that would otherwise go to the IRS. I understand that some people do a great public good with these donations; but it is also good for their business and they are celebrated for it as if the money was theirs to give away. Why do they get to choose what to do with their taxes and I cannot? On the other hand, with the "representatives" we have now, it may not be a good idea to give the money to the government, but I would just like to understand that.
Out of 3 dollars of increase of GNP, 2 went to top 1%.
I seem to remember Mr. Buffett also said in an annual Report to Berkshire Hathaway that if just 18 Corporations paid taxes as his firm did, they could eliminate ALL personal income taxes. why not hide income taxes a touch more?