Jump to Navigation
Home

Main menu

  • Home
  • News
  • Markets Map
  • Sentiments
  • Topics
  • Data
  • Comments
  • Images
  • Blog
  • About

Secondary menu

  • Latest News
  • Top Rated
  • Most Popular
  • Archive
  • Discussions
  • China's pension insurance covers 486m people
  • Top trading strategies for the coming week
  • The Brady Bunch Market
  • Amazing timelapse at Sydney light show
  • Will Obama be the prez with the best stk mkt record?
  • Pfizer Will Reward Shareholders With Zoetis Spin-Off
  • Markets may see some correction in short term: SMC
  • UK zoo worker dies after tiger mauling
  • ‘I don’t think the matter is going to go away’: Deputy...
  • Sudipta cash trail may lead to Singapore, Bangkok

    The Buffett Rule Is A Good Idea

    Mon, 04/16/2012 - 04:14 EDT - Baseline Scenario - The Blog
    • Buffett Rule
    • commentary
    • Comments

    By Simon Johnson
    Some high income Americans pay a lot of tax; others do not.  If you have right tax advice and if most of your income can be structured as some form of “capital gains”, your marginal rate – what you pay on the your last dollar of income – may be very low.  The highest marginal income tax rate currently is 35 percent, while long-term (over a year) capital gains are taxed at 15 percent at most.
    The Buffett Rule is a proposal is establish a minimum tax rate for “millionaires” – people earning more than $1 million per year – and the Senate is likely to vote on a version this week.  The exact amount of revenue that this would bring in depends on the details, but there is no question that it is small relative to the country’s need to control the federal budget.  (The Joint Committee on Taxation scored one version of this proposal as generating about $30 billion over ten years; the annual budget deficit will remain over $1 trillion in the near term even under the most optimistic projections.)
    The biggest sticking point for any reasonable strategy to control the US federal budget is that one side – the Republicans – steadfastly refuse to raise taxes, at all and on anyone.
    There are three ways forward.  Either the Republicans begin to compromise – and agree to raise taxes as part of a comprehensive deficit reduction and debt control strategy, just as Ronald Reagan did.  There is a great deal of confusion about whether Reagan raised taxes after first cutting them; see chapter 3 of White House Burning for the details of what actually happened.
    Or the Republicans who have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge will prevail – no one’s taxes will go up and, most likely, some people’s taxes will go down.  In this case, either the deficit will continue to grow (which is what Newt Gingrich is proposing) or Medicare and almost everything else the federal government does will be scrapped (which is the position represented by Paul Ryan).  My guess is that, in this scenario, we will say farewell to any meaningful form of social insurance – good luck getting healthcare when you are 85 (unless you earned over a million dollars a year for many years).
    Or the Republicans will lose big – and fiscal consolidation can proceed without them.
    A complete loss of support for the Republicans seems unlikely – they will surely hold more than 40 seats in the Senate for the foreseeable future.
    So the fiscal trajectory of the country – and whether Social Security and Medicare survive – depends very much on whether the Republicans will compromise on taxes.
    The Buffett Rule is a tiny tax, of little consequence to the people who would pay it or to the country as a whole.  The idea that $30 billion of additional revenue would tip the balance in any way is simply ludicrous.
    But this is precisely what gives the Buffett Rule its powerful symbolism.
    Much of federal government public finance is complex and hard for people to comprehend – demystifying deficits and debt is a major reason we wrote White House Burning.  Some of the reaction to our book is encouraging, particularly from people who are willing to spend some time with the details.
    But the question behind the Buffett Rule is crystal clear and does not require you to buy a book or even read the newspaper.  Should all high income Americans pay a moderate level of tax?

    • Original article
    • Login or register to post comments

    Related

    • Where People Pay Higher Social Security Taxes Than Millionaires

      Workers pay 6.2 percent of their earnings into the Social Security system and employers pay a matching amount up to $113,700 in 2013. Workers who earn more than this taxable maximum in a single year stop paying into Social Security on their earnings and also stop accruing additional benefits for that year.

    • There Are Only Three Options For The US To Cut Corporate Tax Rates

      Tax reform is one of the few things in Washington these days on which Republicans and Democrats both agree is worth doing. Especially at this time of year, when taxpayers are struggling to file their tax returns, it’s not hard to get applause for promises to make the tax system fairer and simpler. Converting this widespread bipartisan desire into legislation, however, is another matter.

    • What Tax Cuts Can and Cannot Do for the Economy

      (This entry is cross-posted on the Concord Coalition’s “Tabulation” blog here.  An elaboration of these points will appear in my next column in Tax Notes, next Monday, 7/18.)

    • Finally, Republicans Get Some Great Advice On Economics

      Last May, investor Mark Dow wrote a fantastic post on his blog titled: Reagan's Gone. You're Old. Get Over it. The gist was this: The Reagan economic playbook didn't make sense in post-crisis America, and economic commentators needed to recognize that.

    • Taxes and Spending for Beginners

      By James Kwak

    • Omaha Hokum: The Entire Buffett Rule is False

    • Do Americans Really Want (Even More Than) 100% of Deficit Reduction to Come from the Spending Side?

      NPR’s Frank James reports on two recent polls that cast doubt on the popularity of the Republicans’ position:

    • What Is Wrong With Cutting Taxes?

      By Simon Johnson The president and congressional Republicans have reached a deal that would cut taxes “for all Americans.” Their argument is that this package will stimulate the economy, create jobs and help lead to economic recovery and sustained growth.

    • The VC Tax Break

      By James Kwak

    Latest

    ‘I don’t think the matter is going to go away’: Deputy mayor calls Rob Ford’s statement on crack allegations a ‘good first step’
    ‘I don’t think the matter is going to go away’:...
    New book is a fuddle-duddle-seeking missile aimed at shattering the enduring Trudeau myth
    New book is a fuddle-duddle-seeking missile aimed...

    User login

    • Create new account
    • Request new password
    • Click on the icon to sign in with your social network login or enter your Bullfax.com login

    Our Blog

    • Tata Steel, ECB, China’s car market and European Corporate Tax in Our News for Today 05/24/2013
    • Pandora: the charm might fade away
    • Japanese Market, Indian Rupee, China’s Stocks and Oil Prices in Our Daily Round-Up for 05/23/2013

    Markets Map

    Markets Map

    Follow Us

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS
    S&P 500: 1649.60 -0.06% FTSE: 6654.34 -0.64% Nikk.: 14612.45 0.88% DAX: 8305.32 -0.56% HSI: 22618.67 -0.23% FX: EUR/GBP: 1.1694 USD/EUR: 1.2935 JPY/USD: 101.175 Commodities: Gold: 1386.60

    Bullfax.com - Market News & Analysis 2008-2011
    Contact Us | About Us | Terms & Conditions

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS .

    Secondary menu

    • Latest News
    • Top Rated
    • Most Popular
    • Archive
    • Discussions