E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom msnbc.com's Tom Curry: House Democrats unhappy with the tax cut deal negotiated by President Obama managed to tie up the lower chamber with a procedural roadblock for most of the day Thursday but were unable to stop final passage of the bill that will be signed into law Friday afternoon. So what was all the fuss about?
In a last gasp of rhetoric over tax policy, Democratic opponents of the deal were battling over just about one percent of federal revenue in 2011. That's the money that would have been raised from allowing the estate tax to revert to its pre-2001 level.
The 2001 tax law repealed the estate tax for 2010. If Congress hadn't have acted by the end of the year, the tax would have been reinstated with an exemption of $1 million and a maximum marginal rate of 55 percent.
The money raised by the estate tax (and the related gift tax) is small, compared to total federal revenue and compared to the size of the deficit.
According the Congressional Budget Office, since 1945 estate and gift tax receipts have been "near or below 2 percent of federal revenues. In recent years, they have been less than 1.5 percent of federal tax revenues."
But the tax has a large symbolic value for both political parties.
The accord that Republican leaders reached last week with President Obama, and that will soon be law, exempts estates above $5 million for individuals ($10 million for married couples) and sets a top rate of 35 percent. Those provisions will last for two years, ending on Dec. 31, 2102.
According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the estate tax provisions in the Obama-GOP accord would mean a loss of about $32 billion in revenue over the next two years, compared to what would have been raised if the pre-2001 estate tax came were reinstated.
How large is $32 billion? Less than four days worth of federal spending.
Many House Democrats were pushing Thursday for a higher alternative: a 45 percent top tax rate on estates valued over $3.5 million ($7 million for a married couples).
But Democrats Thursday focused not on the relatively small revenues at stake, but on what they saw as an undeserved windfall for the rich.
"Some $25 billion will be lavished on 6,600 of the wealthiest estates in this country," complained Rep. George Miller, D- Calif., during Thursday's debate in the House. "These are estates that have used all of the tax laws to minimize the size of that estate to their advantage before they pay the estate tax."
"I'll paraphrase Winston Churchill who said: 'it has been some time since so many were asked to do so much for so few' -- and with no legitimate reason, I might add," said Rep. Stephen Lynch, D- Mass. "There's a big difference between compromise and surrender. What this bill represents is a complete surrender of Democratic principles and standing up for working people."
But Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas spoke for many Republicans when he denounced the estate tax Wednesday arguing, "Morally, it is not right what we do in taking people's property, in prying their wallet from the dead carcass of someone because we can, because we have that power."
The arguments over fairness have changed little in the years since Congress created the estate tax in 1916 to help raise money for expanding the U.S. military.
With war in Europe threatening to embroil the United States, President Woodrow Wilson pushed Congress to enact a massive military preparedness program and a tax bill to pay for it. That bill created the estate tax, as well as raising income taxes.
As tax historian Joseph Thorndike shows in his look at the creation of the estate tax, Democrats in 1916 saw it as the fair way of getting wealthy people to help pay for the military buildup. "Many of the enormous fortunes of this country far exceed any service the recipients of these swollen fortunes have ever rendered society," said Rep. Clement Dickinson, D- Mo.
At first the estate tax was small: in 1918 it generated only 1.3 percent of federal revenue. By 1940 the tax had been increased and was raising about five percent of federal revenue.
It's highly unlikely that Congress and the president will return to that level. Long before last week's accord with the GOP, Obama had called for significantly cutting the estate tax from its pre-2001 level. According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Obama's 2009 proposal would have cut the number of taxable estates from 44,000 to about 6,000 in 2011, reducing estate tax revenue by $16 billion.
Leave a Comment:
I have to say that this Obama fellow is turing out to be alright. Thank you Mr. Obama for adopting wholesale those "failed bush" tax policies.
So do'ya think Obama will invite GWB to the signing ceremony this afternoon? Maybe give ol'George one of those pens he uses to sign the newly re-named "Obama Tax Cuts" into law.
Got to figure Barack's hand will be a little shaky when he signs that bill.
So....which is he, good, or bad?
Methinks the 'want-it-both-ways' crowd is going to go insane pretty soon. (uh, wait.....)
Good when he does the right thing. I'll leave it to you all to interpret what the "right" thing is, or whether the r should be upper of lower case.
For me it just seems like there sure is a lot of Bush in him. He's sticking with Bush's: prison for terrorists, wars, tax policies. The list goes on, but I have an office party to get to (and more importantly, gettting the booze and cutting the bonus checks), so I'll leave it there.
I don't know anything abnout the "want-it-both-ways" crowd, but if I was an Obama supporter, or believed the campaign promises, I might be a little miffed. As for me, he adopted Bush's rates, repudiated Clinton's rates, and now gets to deal with a different house.
YeaH.
You see Libs? That's how bi-partisanship works. The Republicans come up with the right answer, and the Democrats vote for it.
So, do you like it?
Spanky's like one of those Transvestites:
Just can't figure out if they wanna Pole dance or go Fox Hunting.
Death by a thousand cuts:
This was a small win for democrats, but the bigger picture shows a modest win for republicans. The ultimate goal for conservatives is to eliminate the estate tax and this win for them is just one more cut in their war on government. They also had a victory with the payrol tax with a cut for at least one year. The ultra conservaties want to kill goverment with a death by a thousand cuts.
I love pole dancing and the brave women trying to better themselves through education. They are all just working their way through school, right?
Talk about Obama getting schooled. Yesterday was certainly a "Teachable Moment" for the Community Organizer. After Obama and his party held Americans hostage for so long by not telling them what their tax rates would be, Obama finally realized he had to cut a deal with the Republicans and agree with them that the Bush Tax Rates were the Correct Tax Rates. An added benefit was Obama appointing Billy Clinton to be his official spokes-model for supporting those very same tax rates.
Now that the Democrats are finally onboard on taxes, there was also a bonus round for all Americans yesterday when Harry Reid whined about having to pull his pork-filled 2000 page omnibus bill (What's with the Liberals and their 2000 page bills?) after many Democrats up for election in 2012 decided maybe that Americans are serious when they say they want real Change in Washington, and elected not to vote for the attempt of the last great heist and rip-off of the American taxpayer by the Democrats. Harry too got schooled.
When's the last good day the Liberals have had? It's been a while. And it will be a while before they have their next one.
Come on JoAnn this is frigging MSNBC for goodness sake. Don't be so blunt. Where else thse folk going to go? Huff Post, Firedoglake have already turned. Kos and Salon are on there way.
Plus MSNBC got bought out so it really only is a matter of time time the plug gets pulled in favor of a format and shows that can turn a profit. Recycling Air America rejects is about as good of a "plan" as Hope and Change.
Yeah S, the Libs are down to ThinkProgress as their bible. It's funny how when the the light of day is shined on these lying Liberals, just like has been done in this lame duck session, that they just fold up like a cheap suit.
Definition for “blunt”: Not Sharp
Fits JS1 perfectly
Thanks Spanky
So I guess you have a preference to be beaten down with a blunt, as opposed to a sharp object Dennis? Either way, getting a beat down is not a fun thing.
By hey if I can help you in any way feel better about yourself, even if it does in your mind come at the expense of someone else, who in no way directed the comment toward you, then by all means, you are welcome.
Spanky,
Still hurting from the beat down you got yesterday? You seem to be a little sore.
BTW JS1 is fully capable of defending herself or are you her big brother?
I'm sorry are you talking to me? What beat down are you talking about? Also, is someone keeping score? If so why? Are there prizes given for the biggest beater? And more importantly who decides the winners and losers? You?
I was not "defending" anyone. You refered to me, I chose to respond. It's fun, right?
Fun to take the occasional work breaks.
If it was a "teachable moment", what did we learn?
I learned that we are a plutocracy. The top 2% are more important than anything else. START, DADT, healthcare for those with illnesses related to their work on 9/11...sorry, you're going to have to wait. The rich folks need to buy a new Mercedes first.
I guess I shouldn't complain, though. We might get lucky and one or two of the fortunate ones to receive the super duper Tax Shift might be magnanimous enough to throw a job or two our way.
Yeah, we've all been schooled about who really represents the american people; backwards republicans won't be able to pull the same stunt in 2012 and the tax deal for the super rich will be repudiated once and for all. Obama will know how to get even now that the true face of the obstructionists and their agenda is in the open. Let's the game begin...
So the last two years were just play time for Obama? Now he's going to really start to try.
Oh my.
"Plus MSNBC got bought out so it really only is a matter of time time the plug gets pulled in favor of a format and shows that can turn a profit. Recycling Air America rejects is about as good of a "plan" as Hope and Change."
So, then, LIBERAL media is....what, a slogan, and not a real thing? Sounds like it. You have convinced me.
We learned that all the populist rhetoric Obama and the Democrats chanted about the Bush Tax Cuts for the last ten years were all lies. We learned that the Democrats now agree that lower taxes, lower taxes for everyone, will benefit the economy. We learned that not telling individuals and corporations what their tax rates will be is not good for the job market. We learned that both Obama and Bill Clinton agree with what Bush did in setting the current tax rates. We learned (again) that elections matter. We learned the Tea Party has had a significant and positive impact on the direction of the country. And we learned that Obama can be taught something, a very hard lesson in this case.
Yesterday morning in the office kitchen the #1 question was what would Scott Brown do on DADT.
Think Progress:
Yesterday, Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown (R) said he’ll support a “stand-alone repeal bill”of DADT. His support helps secure the 60 Senate votes needed to block a GOP filibuster and pass a bill.
_________
My oh my. No words to describe how I feel reading this.
Brown is a fool, after all, he was elected by Mass!
Pat: what will that do to Brown's original supporters, the "teabaggers"? Think they will give him trouble over it?
He's better off letting go of the teabaggers. This news on the DADT went over very well with the D's. He HAS to vote aye on this. The firefighters here in Boston are BS at him on the 9/11 responder bill. Big article on the right wing newspaper this past week that said he agrees with this bill in principle, but how to pay for it is the question. Not lost is that he was for the tax cut extensions for the rich.
If we can get a strong D to run against him, he'll lose. We want a female Senator up here if possible. GOTV will be crucial, as it was v. successful in getting our D governor re-elected and Barney Frank. We were able to keep Delahunt's seat D. So if the D's come out on election day in 2012, he's toast I believe.
Thanks for the response Pat. I have found Brown to be interesting. He is between a rock and a hard place, and it is fun to guess which way he will jump next.
newday, read your memo: redistributionists will refrain from using any derogatory homosexual references when discussing Patriots until after DADT has been decided.
signed
D. Axelrod
Minister of Propaganda
"Pat: what will that do to Brown's original supporters, the "teabaggers"? Think they will give him trouble over it?:
Heh...Heh...Heh..... you said "teabagger".
But Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas spoke for many Republicans when he denounced the estate tax Wednesday arguing, "Morally, it is not right what we do in taking people's property, in prying their wallet from the dead carcass of someone because we can, because we have that power."
Amen, Louie. We should be building pyramids, not bringing wealth back into the commoner's hands. Dead people gotta live too.
What does it mean to "bring wealth back into the commoner's hands?"
So you're all for taxing while someone is alive, and after they've passed, taxing them again?
Given half the chance, the Democrats would steal the brass fittings off the casket as its being lowered into the ground.
Spanky
I think he means being born to wealthy family should not entitle one to be wealthy. The small business arguement doesn't hold wieght, this bill allows for $5 million exemption. Not many "small business owners" have $5 million dollars of taxable net worth to pass along. Also take into account trust and asset transfers in ones final days most low end millionares will have there wealth well protected from this tax. Its the ubber rich that will pay the lion share. Its the Paris Hiltons of the world that will pay this tax. The children of the Gates, Buffetts, Dell, Ellison etc. and they should. I would gladly take 65% of any of those estates for just being born, wouldn't you?
Yeah, because we need to look out for the Lucky DNA Club!
Sean, I think we can all surmise you do not live in a part of the country where real estate values are high, and have a less than full understanding of the inter-relationship between the estate tax provisions and exemptions and the general provions of the IRC.
I also suspect that you would not be so glad if it were your money. It is always easy to call out for taxing the other guy. SHould not the earners of the wealth get to choose where it goes and what it's used for? Have not these folks already paid taxes on the amounts earned. Do you volunteer your estate to be taxed after your death? Why not be "fair" and tax all estates?
I speak with full understanding of the provision and with anticipation of paying the tax on my parents estate when they pass on. I also understand from speaking with friends that attended the same overpriced private school they anticipate the tax as well. For the most part the people that scream the loudest about this tax will never pay it.
"Given half the chance, the Democrats would steal the brass fittings off the casket as its being lowered into the ground."
......And buy yachts with them or hide them in off-shore accounts. Wait, WHO we talking about again...?
John Kerry apparently.
So let me get this straight.....
For the last however long all weve heard from the left is how much the "evil" bush tax cuts were going to "cost the government" (again....it wasnt going to "cost" anything..... you cant count dollars that dont already have).
But today F. Chuck Todd and his comrades are now claiming "its only 1 percent of the federal revenues......" really?
MSNBC..... If your going to be the media wing of the socialist party then be that all the time.... quit being Obama's lap dogs....
The word "Socialism", which very few seem to know the definition of, will not seem so vulgar a term after the Republicans take what's left from the poor and middle class, social security and medi-care are squarely in their cross-hairs now, I mean all that money being wasted in these two programs could be used much better to further en-rich the rich or blow up some country, much more noble causes than letting the masses retire in dignity with the lights turned on and something to eat, yes un-regulated Capitalism is truly a God send, if you are in the top 2% anyway, and in this Banana Republic that's all that is important.
This is why government should stop trying to pick winners. Be pro-Market not pro-Business.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19878-carbon-trading-tempts-firms-to-make-greenhouse-gas.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703395204576024650186378260.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5
So we create an artificial market and businesses will adjust to exploit that market.
You talk about how "little" the amount of money that estate and gift taxes bring in - well, we have to start somewhere. When I look at my paycheck, I wish that the IRS would take that approach with my income tax liability, seeing how "little" I make.
I tell you what, let's go with a flat tax on everyone, individuals and corporations - tax on REVENUE, not net income for the corporations. No deductions or loopholes of any kind. Now, how much fairer can that be?
" The money raised by the estate tax (and the related gift tax) is small, compared to total federal revenue and compared to the size of the deficit" perhaps, but it is an excellent way to satisfy the redistributionist (liberal mantra): from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.
it would have been a good way to terminate family owned farms, wait a min, who else thought that was a good idea?
now watch your step as you get into the railcar.
morons
At least when the middle class receives a tax break they spend it. The wealthy offshore it in Cayman Islands bank accounts.
Republicanism flourishes on the blood, wages, forfiet prosperity and pain of the working class. I would not mind so much that the wealthy get ahead if it were not for the fact that they have to lower my wages, pension, empowerment to do it. Republicanism is not a victimless crime, and it is a disease we can cure in our lifetimes.
I sincerely hope JoannaSmith gets what she wants: No jobs, no regulations, low wages, no taxes, no health care, welfare for the well-off, and no dividend checks to amass. I hope JoannaSmith finds herself a serf serving a republican master.
You ignorant people just won't get it: You are not a republican. You are what a republican craps out! Once a repub has consumed you whole, stripped you of wealth and empowerment and turned you into a dried-out husk then you will become mere repub waste matter. Filthy tax-and-spend repiglicans !!
LOL, and you are from Detroit!
enough said.
JAS 1 should be careful what she ask for. If her so called friends get what they want there will be no USA government. Only a loosely aligned confederation of states.
Where's Navy Vet, Beverly and Fisty Red Bush?
Man, I knew we were missing something today.
Without all the hate spewing, bigoted comments and outright lies, it has been pretty pleasant on here today.
Will it last?
It's always more pleasant when you can toss around BS, and not be challenged to back it up.
BTW- it will NOT last, see? What are you, Psychic or something?
Greg in Detroit
At least when the middle class receives a tax break they spend it. The wealthy offshore it in Cayman Islands bank accounts.
I agree with your sentiment. The people on here that support the repubs are fools, unless they truly very rich. I have been saying since Reagan started all this trickle down BS that most of the country has been getting screwed. It's the old I got mine you get yours and if you don't get yours TFB.
So because I'm wealthy I should pay a higher percentage. I worked hard my entire life and should have to pay a lot more than 98% of the population, even though 45% of the population don't even pay taxes.
Yes the rich should pay more because you have it to spend and it is people like you that are causing the prices to go higher and higher so that you might pay out a higher and higher bonus. How hard do you think the wall street brokers worked to suck you out of your retirement and run this country to the ground. The hardest thing they had to do was get the republicans to back off regulation and let them gamble with the countries wealth. We all know that wasn't very hard at all. I don't know who you think you are protecting but the top 2% of the wealth in this country has nothing to do with working hard all you life. That dream in your head that if you work hard you can become rich is way beyond reach for 80% of this country, because the harder they work the more the rich take as theirs. You are truly a fool.
So a loss of revenue of 32 billion over two years is a drop in the bucket. THAT WILL HAVE TO BE MADE UP BY ORDINARY FOLKS, you lame brains. It may just be a few days of the government's operation, but when we already have a big deficit, IT WILL HAVE TO BE MADE UP - OR ANOTHER 32 BILLION IS JUST LOPPED ONTO THE DEFICIT. So, here's to you, the Tiffanys and Prescotts of the world. You get to inherit millions more so that some of the pudding heads on this blog get to pay more. How many of you $10 to $15 an hour Tea Bagger chowderheads bleed for Paris Hilton? Bless your little pudding heads. You couldn't smell the cheese if it was smeared all over your face. And the rich just laugh and laugh at how dumb you are. But they appreciate eating your lunch -- AGAIN.
I think Obama did what he had to. If the democratic party didn't want the taxes to continue on the higher earners, they should have and could have passed a bill a long time ago. This to me was the democrats holding off on a controversal bill so they could show the republicans for what they are drones for the wealthy, wall street, lack of regulation, no responsibility for the poor, elders, middle class americans. Now the fun part is going to watch the republicans dance around cutting spending just like they did on earmarks. Their solution ask for earmarks but if anyone notices than block the bill and blame it on the democrats or lets just name it something else then we don't have to call it earmarks anymore and we can continue along our spending spree to our friends.