The Buffet Rule

[billynomates]

President Obama to seek a new tax rate for wealthy
President Barack Obama is expected to seek a new base tax rate for the wealthy to ensure that millionaires pay at least at the same percentage as middle income taxpayers.

A White House official said the proposal would be included in the president's proposal for long term deficit reduction that he will announce Monday. The official spoke anonymously because the plan has not been officially announced.

Obama is going to call it the "Buffett Rule" for Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor who has complained that rich people like him pay a smaller share of their income in federal taxes than middle-class taxpayers

Telegraph

Does this mean you admit you owe it, just don't pay it?

[NoAngel2u]

Nope, it actually means nothing, because their attorney (including Mr Buffet's) will find a way around it, by design. lol

[curtinsea]

A couple of issues I have with it . . . .

for one, it's punitive in nature and design, in that they aren't looking to raise $X they are doing it because they think the rich owe (despite the fact that the top 2% earners pay more than half of all the taxes collected). So for that reason alone, I think it is bad. If they said "we can raise this much money" to start with, I might get on board, but they aren't, they are "we gotta make them pay more" and that is about as un-American as it gets in my book.

Second, as Beth pointed out, it does nothing to revise the code to prevent "the rich" from getting around the high rate, as THEY ALREADY DO. None of these "rich" guys pay the top nominal rate, so this is a joke.

Unless and until they can get a grasp on a flat tax with no deductions, then they are still using the tax code to manipulate the populous, and reward their benefactors.

[billynomates]

Billionaire Buffet wants Obama to tax mere millionaires and ordinary folk rather than pay for his bad bets on state and municipal bonds which are going bust as the New Depression deepens, and state spending outstrips revenue from tax.

So this "Buffet Rule", does that include putting the vast majority of your wealth into a non-taxable trust, to be used at your discretion, as Buffet and Gates have done?

Or is that option excluded for anyone who is not an Obama crony?

The big money likes its political pets.
The pets earn five figure and six figure sums whilst handing over trillions of taxpayer money to their banksters, and billionaires like Buffet, Soros, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group that herds its tax slaves.

So wont this make them divert it into investments?
So wont that benefit Buffett?

A few comments from the Daily Telegraph comments page on 'Buffet's Rule' All comments can be read there (or free to join and comment yourself)

[curtinsea]

FLAT TAX - NO DEDUCTION

simple, effective, easy, fair

^^ that is why politicians are against it. Seriously, if Obama wants them to pay the same rate as their secretaries, well there is the answer in two simple words. I'll repeat it for those slow on the uptake

FLAT TAX

[wubders]

FLAT TAX - NO DEDUCTION

simple, effective, easy, fair

^^ that is why politicians are against it. Seriously, if Obama wants them to pay the same rate as their secretaries, well there is the answer in two simple words. I'll repeat it for those slow on the uptake

FLAT TAX

So flat with even rates across all forms and levels of income, with no standard deductions or exemptions?

I understand the argument against raising taxes on investment income(the rich) since much of it was already taxed as income before , but they are the ones who have plenty of money to spare, unlike many lower income peeps?

[curtinsea]

So flat with even rates across all forms and levels of income, with no standard deductions or exemptions?

yes, with a low minimum income, so incomes below poverty are exempted

I understand the argument against raising taxes on investment income(the rich) since much of it was already taxed as income before , but they are the ones who have plenty of money to spare, unlike many lower income peeps?

Money to spare? lol Investment income is not just beneficial to the investor, it is beneficial, crucial even, to what the investor is investing in. In almost all cases, those investments are supporting jobs, especially those where the risk is the highest. So if you are taxing a large percentage of the earnings on those high-risk investments, you are discouraging the investor from taking that risk, since a lower risk, lower return investment will be safer, pay less in tax, and often yield an equal or even better return for the investor. This doesn't hurt the investor, but it does hurt the economy that needs the investor.

Under the current system, it's not that the "rich" can't afford to pay more, it is what they will do to avoid paying more. And what they do is protect what they have, stop spending, save at low returns, and stay rich, while the rest of us suffer from a stagnant economy.

If we went to a flat tax with no deduction, at a reasonable rate of about 15%, the rich would pay more than they do now.

It's time to stop using the tax code for social engineering and use it to collect revenue in a fair and equal manner.

[DDT]

It's time to stop using the tax code for social engineering and use it to collect revenue in a fair and equal manner.

Now that makes way too much sense to be used.
I'd be in favor of everything over a million be taxed at 20% and below at 15%. But what would be the cutoff for not being taxed?

[Nynus]

But what would be the cutoff for not being taxed?

I'd say zero. If you earn money you get taxed.

The Federal Income tax should be a sliding scale (not tiered) across the board on what you earn, start at 5% and cap at 20%. Same with the Federal Corporate Tax.

The State should also collect based on a flat tax across the board. If a state wants to collect primarily from Corporations or Personal Income is up to them.

County and Cities should collect from sales tax and/or property taxes.

[DDT]

if everyone is getting taxed at a flat rate by the government and then you start adding in state, county and city taxes on top of that.....you'll still be paying a high tax rate. I think the government would actually be taking in way more than they do now with the flat tax...the biggest problem would be trying to keep them from sticking thier fingers into the surplus and doing something stupid with it instead of paying the national dept. but people would have more money, and tend to spend more to help the economy.