Candidates' Tax returns

[Odelay]

One of the great things I like about the release of tax returns by candidates is that paying taxes and submitting returns is universal. The saying about "death and taxes" falls short of circumscribing all universal activities... taking a shit is one thing that comes to mind that's not on that list. But since I definitely don't want to see candidates and their bowel movements, the release of tax returns is the next best thing.

So Mitt pays 15% or lower on his income taxes. I think he was smart to prep everyone in advance by warning them that's what the rate would turn out to be. Now that he's released 'em, nobody's surprised. I don't begrudge Mitt the 15% rate - mostly capital gains. Trying to pay the legal minimum in taxes is the American Way. Although, sheltering stuff in the Caymans and Switzerland isn't all that American when you think about it. Still, I confess that I got away with legally paying 0% in cap gains tax this year on a long term asset I sold. Saved me $400-$600 because of the tax bracket I was in.

And what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I do think our tax code totally blows, but not in a way that OMK or Faldur or most other right wingers think of. I liked the two tier tax system that Bradley, Rudman and Reagan insituted in 1986. No bullshit lower rate on cap gains. They got rid of a bunch of loopholes. And there was a minimum alternative tax rate. A 28%'er could try all he wanted to get his taxes down to the 1st tier rate of 15%, but he eventually hit a floor of 21% AMT. Now that was fair. Of course, the two tier system wasn't enough to balance the budget so Bush I had to increase the top rate to 31% and then Clinton to 35% in order to get to the promised land. Still the tax code was far better from 1986-1996, compared to what it is today, after all the stupid loopholes snuck back in, they did away with the AMT, and then gutted the cap gains tax rate.

Anyway, I don't have big problems with Mitt's tax returns of 2010 and 2011. He's playing the system... legally. I'm not going to vote for him, but his tax returns as well as Obama's tax returns plays no factor in my voting decision.

Newt, on the other hand, I have big problems with. Like Newt, I had my own consulting business for years. But unlike Newt, my accountants warned me off of taking a miniscule salary and passing the rest off as profits and dividends that wouldn't incur payroll taxes. But that's exactly what Newt did. And he avoided a bunch of medicare taxes. That's bullshit. If I wasn't allowed to take advantage of it, then he shouldn't be able to either.

Them's my 2 cents on the topic.

[cockgobbler]

Didn't Newt release his and he is at 31%?

I think Obama is at 26%.

[onmyknees]

One of the great things I like about the release of tax returns by candidates is that paying taxes and submitting returns is universal. The saying about "death and taxes" falls short of circumscribing all universal activities... taking a shit is one thing that comes to mind that's not on that list. But since I definitely don't want to see candidates and their bowel movements, the release of tax returns is the next best thing.

So Mitt pays 15% or lower on his income taxes. I think he was smart to prep everyone in advance by warning them that's what the rate would turn out to be. Now that he's released 'em, nobody's surprised. I don't begrudge Mitt the 15% rate - mostly capital gains. Trying to pay the legal minimum in taxes is the American Way. Although, sheltering stuff in the Caymans and Switzerland isn't all that American when you think about it. Still, I confess that I got away with legally paying 0% in cap gains tax this year on a long term asset I sold. Saved me $400-$600 because of the tax bracket I was in.

And what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I do think our tax code totally blows, but not in a way that OMK or Faldur or most other right wingers think of. I liked the two tier tax system that Bradley, Rudman and Reagan insituted in 1986. No bullshit lower rate on cap gains. They got rid of a bunch of loopholes. And there was a minimum alternative tax rate. A 28%'er could try all he wanted to get his taxes down to the 1st tier rate of 15%, but he eventually hit a floor of 21% AMT. Now that was fair. Of course, the two tier system wasn't enough to balance the budget so Bush I had to increase the top rate to 31% and then Clinton to 35% in order to get to the promised land. Still the tax code was far better from 1986-1996, compared to what it is today, after all the stupid loopholes snuck back in, they did away with the AMT, and then gutted the cap gains tax rate.

Anyway, I don't have big problems with Mitt's tax returns of 2010 and 2011. He's playing the system... legally. I'm not going to vote for him, but his tax returns as well as Obama's tax returns plays no factor in my voting decision.

Newt, on the other hand, I have big problems with. Like Newt, I had my own consulting business for years. But unlike Newt, my accountants warned me off of taking a miniscule salary and passing the rest off as profits and dividends that wouldn't incur payroll taxes. But that's exactly what Newt did. And he avoided a bunch of medicare taxes. That's bullshit. If I wasn't allowed to take advantage of it, then he shouldn't be able to either.

Them's my 2 cents on the topic.


Not a bad post form a left winger (I think we may have had a McCain-Fiengold type moment there) You'll get no argument from me about tax simplification, and you'll hear lots of class warfare hype tonight, complete with a dozen Warren Buffet references. As you say...it's all bullshit ( that's my word)
So the question then becomes....if Obama wants tax relief/simplification why did he run ( not walk) away from his own deficit commissions recommendations that had pretty fair wide spread support. Allow me to answer if I might....

It's because it's far more valuable as a political weapon ...I think that's fairly obvious...don't you? So you can kiss any reasonable tax reform goodbye. Politics as usual.

[trish]

Good post Odelay. I agree that structuring one’s finances so as to minimize the amount paid in taxes is just smart and not a good reason to vote against candidate for public office, as long as it’s all done legally and above board. Even when the law is unfair and creates huge disparities, it’s not a reason to vote against the advantaged. The reason to vote against Romney, Gingrich and the rest of the GOP lineup is they all believe the current system doesn’t unfairly advantage themselves. Recently Gingrich argued there should be no taxes on capital gains. Their view is that tax relief will stimulate the “innovators” (what a screwy misuse of a word__one would think that in every corporation the guys in research and development are hailed as heroes). Okay, let’s make it a law that physicists, chemists, electronics experts etc. don’t have to pay taxes on their salaries. Got my vote___I’m all for it :) . Not raising taxes on capital gains___not so much.

[Odelay]

One thing I forgot to mention, I was a little impressed by the Romneys' charitable giving... 15%, that's alot, albeit most of it to the Mormon Church. I feel that churches aren't exactly the best funnel for charitable giving. But still, the man gave. These kind of things will work themselves out... Newt's slipperiness, and some of the basic dignity that Mitt has - like marrying once and sticking it out. This whole primary has been pretty interesting.

[Ben]

How Mitt Romney escaped the tax man (http://www.salon.com/2012/01/24/how_mitt_romney_escaped_the_tax_man/singleton):

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/24/how_mitt_romney_escaped_the_tax_man/singleton/

[Ben]

Newt Gingrich --Tax Cheat?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/01/23/newt-gingrich-tax-cheat/

[onmyknees]

One thing I forgot to mention, I was a little impressed by the Romneys' charitable giving... 15%, that's alot, albeit most of it to the Mormon Church. I feel that churches aren't exactly the best funnel for charitable giving. But still, the man gave. These kind of things will work themselves out... Newt's slipperiness, and some of the basic dignity that Mitt has - like marrying once and sticking it out. This whole primary has been pretty interesting.



Ok...so while you're being reasonable ( I'd better get this in quick !) Answer me this, since I'm incapable of understanding the progressive position.

Why does Obama continue to use Buffet's secretary as an example of what he calls "inherent unfairness" ...Romney's 15% versus her 25-30% ? We know that Romney and Buffet and everyone else so affected has already paid the corporate tax rate on these dollars.

You, me and everyone on this board...liberal and conservative understand the reason capitol gains is taxed at a lower rate....It enjoys widespread support from the moderate democrats, ( there are no conservative democrats left) the moderate and right wing republicans so why does he continue to demagogue the issue? Even Buffet has asked him to stop it . And again...if tax fairness and simplification is the issue as he says it is....what about his own debt commission?

[Odelay]

I don't support it. Back in 1986 it was taxed at the same rate as regular income, which I thought was a good thing. Then they lowered it during some year for purposes of stimulus... probably during the Bush I recession, but I'm not sure. Predictably, rich people liked it, but government types loved it because they saw a spike in revenues as they actually collected more total tax revenues as more investors sold their assets. But it was all illusion. Eventually the investment churn went back to an equilibrium, and after that the government types were in fear of raising it again for fear revenues would decrease. The closest analogy is some of the silly baseball superstitions that players have thinking they will avoid some bad performance if they only repeat some stupid routine. So now we're stuck with low cap gains tax due to an irrational fear that total tax revenues will plummet.

As for the double taxation argument, that carries little weight with me either. First, it only applies to corporate stocks. If the double taxation arguers were honest, they would grant that other assets don't face double taxation and allow that the cap gains be taxed at a higher rate for non-stocks. But even with stocks, I find the argument faulty. Corporate values go up and down and really aren't all that related to the corporate taxes they pay. Furthermore the corporate tax is such a joke. The huge companies pay practically nil because they get all sorts of subsidies and play the system to minimize corporate tax rates. Meanwhile, medium and small companies are left holding the bag as they don't have the same political power.

Grant me a true corporate tax rate of say 35 or 40% with no subsidies or breaks for any of 'em, and I'll give you your low cap gain tax rate on stocks. But if we did that Exxon and many other companies would shit themselves enough to fill the Grand Canyon.

The bottom line for me is... the current system is crap all the way through. Anyone trying to point out that such and such tax is justified being low simply doesn't see the rot that pervades the entire system. I have no problem with demagouging the Buffet's secretary thing. It shows how stupid and unfair the system is.

[Ben]

Romney’s 13.9% Tax Rate Shows Power of Investment Tax Preference:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-24/romney-paid-13-9-percent-tax-rate-on-21-6-million-2010-income.html

[Faldur]

Grant me a true corporate tax rate of say 35 or 40% with no subsidies or breaks for any of 'em, and I'll give you your low cap gain tax rate on stocks.

We already have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. How many business are you going to run out of the country before you realize its your taxation and regulation thats killing them. Do you have any idea how many jobs would be created if Apple manufactured all of its components in the US? GM, Chevy, and Ford?

How about we stop spending so much? 1/3 of the total debt the US has incurred in its history happened in the last 3 years. Our annual debt now exceeds our GDP. For the first time in the history of the country we have not had a budget for 3 years.

If that doesn't alarm you, check your pulse.

[Stavros]

We already have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. How many business are you going to run out of the country before you realize its your taxation and regulation thats killing them. Do you have any idea how many jobs would be created if Apple manufactured all of its components in the US? GM, Chevy, and Ford?


Faldur I think you will find that in most states there is an official corporate tax rate which is then subject to deductions for domestic and multinatinal corporations. Japan has the highest rate @ 40%, even with deductions domestic corporations pay 37% and multinationals 38% compared to the 35% rate in the USA where, with deductions, domestic corporations pay 23% and multinationals 28%. I dont think there is a problem in finding an equitable balance between the corporation tax that is fair and the volume of capital that those firms can use to invest, and there is no reason why there cannot be a sliding scale so that small enterprises are not -like 'small people'- in effect paying more in taxes than the 'big guys'; you would think that with however many Nobel Prize winning economists the USA has, a formula could be devised that even your Congress could approve...

[onmyknees]

I don't support it. Back in 1986 it was taxed at the same rate as regular income, which I thought was a good thing. Then they lowered it during some year for purposes of stimulus... probably during the Bush I recession, but I'm not sure. Predictably, rich people liked it, but government types loved it because they saw a spike in revenues as they actually collected more total tax revenues as more investors sold their assets. But it was all illusion. Eventually the investment churn went back to an equilibrium, and after that the government types were in fear of raising it again for fear revenues would decrease. The closest analogy is some of the silly baseball superstitions that players have thinking they will avoid some bad performance if they only repeat some stupid routine. So now we're stuck with low cap gains tax due to an irrational fear that total tax revenues will plummet.

As for the double taxation argument, that carries little weight with me either. First, it only applies to corporate stocks. If the double taxation arguers were honest, they would grant that other assets don't face double taxation and allow that the cap gains be taxed at a higher rate for non-stocks. But even with stocks, I find the argument faulty. Corporate values go up and down and really aren't all that related to the corporate taxes they pay. Furthermore the corporate tax is such a joke. The huge companies pay practically nil because they get all sorts of subsidies and play the system to minimize corporate tax rates. Meanwhile, medium and small companies are left holding the bag as they don't have the same political power.

Grant me a true corporate tax rate of say 35 or 40% with no subsidies or breaks for any of 'em, and I'll give you your low cap gain tax rate on stocks. But if we did that Exxon and many other companies would shit themselves enough to fill the Grand Canyon.

The bottom line for me is... the current system is crap all the way through. Anyone trying to point out that such and such tax is justified being low simply doesn't see the rot that pervades the entire system. I have no problem with demagouging the Buffet's secretary thing. It shows how stupid and unfair the system is.



You're very simplistic....with all due respect...A corporate rate of 40% would guarantee China, India and Sri Lanka unprecedented growth at the expense of the US economy. Better leave managing the economy to people who understand the complexities...such as subsidies...
If you've noticed gas prices spike recently, it's because the Ethanol subsidies have been extinguished. You may think that's a good thing....to get the government out of the business they should have never been involved in the first place ...mandating 10% ethanol to every gallon of gas, and that now gas is closer to being market driven, but it has adverse affects on the poor and working class. It's gone up nearly 10 cents a gallon overnight because of ethanol.
Additionally....on the cap gains. Let's say I land a big contract with Apple supplying widgets. I make lots of money over the life of the 2 year contract, and the money not put back into the business, or in paid income, or corporate taxes depending how the corporation is set up...I invest in mortgage backed securities, which reap large returns. Would you exclude me from the cap gains tax, or tax them at a lower rate if I took my salary from my investments, since in this case, as with most others...it's already been taxed at the income, or corporate rates?

I know you have a fetish for double taxation. I recall the death tax discussion.

[Odelay]

We already have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. How many business are you going to run out of the country before you realize its your taxation and regulation thats killing them. Do you have any idea how many jobs would be created if Apple manufactured all of its components in the US? GM, Chevy, and Ford?

How about we stop spending so much? 1/3 of the total debt the US has incurred in its history happened in the last 3 years. Our annual debt now exceeds our GDP. For the first time in the history of the country we have not had a budget for 3 years.

If that doesn't alarm you, check your pulse.

Japan's debt is 2.5 times their GDP and while they have some economic challenges, they're still holding their own in the world. You've glommed onto a statistic that is meaningless relative to forming economic policy. I'd like to see the USA hold the line on debt, too, but it isn't something I'm screaming mad about like many on the right.

[Faldur]

Japan's debt is 2.5 times their GDP and while they have some economic challenges, they're still holding their own in the world. You've glommed onto a statistic that is meaningless relative to forming economic policy. I'd like to see the USA hold the line on debt, too, but it isn't something I'm screaming mad about like many on the right.

Well stated, I wish I had your confidence in our government. So $5 trillion over the last 3 years added to the debt. When will it alarm you? Another $5 trillion over the next 4 years. Then what? At what point do you feel as a country we try and solve our debt problem?

Sooner or later inflation is going to kick in. If you think the last couple years have been rough. You ain't seen nothing, but again, my opinion. I hope your right.

We had an independent Debt Commission some of the smartest minds around we were told. Appointed by a democratic president. They studied the issue and came to some very telling conclusions. We needed to take immediate action in cost cutting to get our debt crisis under control. After paying millions for there research, we politely thanked them and tossed the report in the garbage.

[trish]

Sooner or later inflation is going to kick in.You guys keep saying that. Why hasn't it happened? When are you going to admit supply side theory is just a theory...a wrong one at that?

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/inflation-conspiracy-theories/

Interest rates are lower than they're ever going to be. Our infrastructure is also old and falling apart. Employment is slowly rising but still low. Now is the time to spend on infrastructure. It will never be cheaper, it needs to be done and it will put people to work. With people back at work & spending money, the market will bounce back with renewed confidence. Then we can work on the widening wealth gap, the debt and that deficit that's got you defecating all the time in your depends. :)

[hippifried]

"Going to kick in"???? What, nobody goes to the grocery store? "Why hasn't it?"???

Inflation has been a constant for the last 40 years. August 15, 1971 to be exact. That was the day that the ability to set valuation of our currency was wrenched from the control of Congress & ceded to anonymous traders in the global currency exchange. A dollar today has the purchasing power of around 7 or 8 cents in pre-shock dollars. Maybe less. This inflation is artificial & has nothing to do with the standard memes about "supply & demand". Money's not a commodity. It's not even tangible. Aside from the pittance kept by banks to cash checks & make change, money's just numbers in a ledger. The currency speculators who are driving this inflationary spiral don't even trade actual currencies. They're just betting on dericative futures. Milton Friedman's explanation of inflatin is a lie.