someproteinguy wrote:
The difference seems to me to be whether or not you look at averages, or try to close the loopholes people are taking advantage of.
I think the larger point is that to whatever degree we do decide to close loopholes or make other changes to our tax system, such changes should not be made based on completely false assumptions about who pays how much in tax.
Quote:
OP linky wrote:
With tax rates that high, why do so many people pay at lower rates? Because the tax code is riddled with more than $1 trillion in deductions, exemptions and credits, and they benefit people at every income level, according to data from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress' official scorekeeper on revenue issues.
So do we close loopholes that people like Mr. Buffet and everyone with a child takes advantage of?
Buffet does not take advantage of any loopholes. That's one big flaw in the whole thing. Buffet is an outlier. He has specifically structured his earnings so that it all comes in the form of long term capital gains. That's why he pays so little in tax relatively speaking. There's no loophole involved. To raise his tax rate, you'd have to raise the long term capital gains tax rate. And if you want to do that, you need to make a completely different argument to support it.
Quote:
Will that even have an effect on the economy? And if you do, does that count as 'raising taxes' on those individuals according to Mr. Norquist and the Americans for Tax Reform?
If you want to make Buffet pay more taxes, you have to raise the capital gains tax rate. That would absolutely count as "raising taxes". And it would hurt a hell of a lot more people than just Mr. Buffet. Everyone with a 401k will be affected. That's a lot of people who aren't super rich.
The problem is that you are conflating what is really two completely different issues. The one raised about Buffet, which has to do purely with capital gains tax rates, and the broader concept of tax loopholes, deductions, credits, etc. We can look at the real loopholes, but we should really be honest from the start about what we're really talking about, and who it will affect, and why we're doing it.
Obama's approach was not honest.