E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Mitt Romney promised this past weekend that the wealthy would “still pay the same share of the tax burden they’re paying now” and that he’s “not looking for a tax cut for the very wealthiest.” And: “I'm not looking to reduce the burden paid by the wealthiest.”
He added, “I’m looking to bring tax rates down for everyone.”
That’s what he said on CBS’s Face the Nation, despite the Tax Policy Center’s analysis earlier this year that showed that those making more than $1 million a year would get a $146,000 a year cut from Romney’s plan (by lowering the top rate to 26.6%) – and that the poor would pay more than it currently does (because the base would be broadened).
(Here's the Tax Policy Center's full table laying it out.)
So what’s changed? Nothing, says Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center, who conducted the original analysis.
The key, Williams says, is Romney’s language. And Romney’s very careful here to say, “pay the same share of the tax burden.”
That means that if his plan cuts the rate for the wealthy, which it does, then he has to make that up with which “tax preferences that he’d get rid of,” Williams said. In other words, the only way the wealthiest would pay the same share is if Romney closes unspecified tax loopholes. And that is where Romney has been vague.
Though he promises to perhaps get rid of certain deductions, he has yet to specify which. When Face the Nation moderator Bob Schieffer pressed Romney, he declined to say what he would do.
“Well, we'll go through that process with Congress,” he said, adding he’d consider certain deductions and exemptions.
Asked what his ideas are now, Romney again cited Simpson-Bowles, the bipartisan commission formed by the president to find a solution that would reduce the nation’s debt and deficits. But he would only say “deductions and exemptions,” and didn’t specify which.
In fact, it would likely be very difficult for Romney to find the deductions necessary to keep the wealthy from paying the same share, because, as Williams points out, there aren’t many “deductions or exemptions” that have an outsized benefit for the rich outside of capital gains, dividends, and exclusions for municipal bond interest.
Things like state and local tax deductions and the popular mortgage-interest deduction discussed in Simpson-Bowles, Williams said, would most benefit the middle- to upper-middle class.
Romney has already said he would not raise the capital gains tax; he would keep it at the current rate of 15 percent for those making more than $200,000 a year. So that’s one lever eliminated to make up the difference.
He has said he would at least “consider taxing some ‘carried interest’ at regular income tax rates,” the New York Times wrote. But it’s not at all clear if he would actually do that, something the private-equity and hedge-fund world would strongly oppose.
“It is really hard to maintain the distribution, maintain the same share of taxes that they are paying now,” Williams said of the wealthy under Romney’s plan.
He also points out that Romney would “extend the Bush tax cuts, but kill the Obama tax cuts,” like the earned-income tax credit expansion, child-care credits, educational tax credits, making them “less generous, less refundable.” And: “The people hit by that almost exclusively are not the rich at all.”
Obama, by contrast, has promised to raise taxes on the rich. “Every budget,” Williams noted, Obama “said he’s going to raise taxes on rich.”
But there wouldn’t be enough revenue generated from the so-called Buffet Rule -- which would tax capital gains, as if it were regular wages – or eliminating oil and gas subsidies, popular with Capitol Hill Democrats, to make a big dent in the nation’s debt and deficits.
So, the choice is: A vague plan from Romney that, of what’s known so far, disproportionately benefits the wealthy and isn’t at all clear that it would raise enough revenue to offset its cost; or Obama’s, which targets the rich, but also would do little to close the nation’s deficits.
Leave a Comment:
Commom
She hated Bush Jr and thought Bush Sr. was a honest man but again as a life long Dem, she would have never voted for either anyway. Smart, I or her have nothing to prove to you. She has already proved her worth on this world by the tireless charity work, donations large and small to homeless shelters and many other community activities. Unlike the new Dems, she was not talk, but walked the walk for the Working Man. She has given over 26 million dollars in endowments for the jr and Sr high schools music programs and early childhood reading programs and Childhood Aids.
Will all that, she has walked the walk and if she saw what Obama was and was not. What have you done to help your fellow man except bash a president no longer in office. Tell Obama to pt his big boy panties on and lead and if he cant, step down and let another take over..
So she hates black people?
Just kidding, your grandma seems like a great person and you're a lucky grandson.
Did she give any reason for disliking Obama?
Just curious....
Now why if you were not hiding bigot feeling would you even say that?
And yes she gave many reasons why you don't elect a person with no experience to be president of the USA.
Dude, just kidding.
So,all she said was no experience?
What experience does Romney have?
His record as governor is terrible.
Hope,
are you shocked that'd eventually come out of a Lib?
Oh, but he's "JUST kidding." it's OK for Libs to do that...
LOl...So typical of a lib.
Common-
What more do you need then someone with no experience to run a country? Is that not enough? Obama has proved the office cant have on the job training. Obama is good and a few things, campaigning, blaming others and taking vacations and playing golf. I give him credit for using drones, I give him credit for trying to fix the health care issue, and I give him credit for for being a true believer in socialist ideas. i also give him credit for haveing two really cute little ones and Im sure he is a great father, he just is not a good president. Keep in mind just because he became president dosnt automatically give him wisdom he may not have had prior. He wanted the job, he ran for the job and now he wants to keep the job, so with that he needs to quit whinning and Sh*t or get off the pot
I reside in CA., look at CA. as the perfect example of the Dem party and the results of those ideas. If this state did not have sun, sand, water, mountains and some of the most beautiful national parks in the US, people would leave in droves. You cant even go to parts of LA and not think you are in a third word country.
Nice trading thoughts with you common but time to go to bed. Till we exchange again...
Jery
So what was your point with the tax rate when corporations don't pay it?.....
I'm betting you were complaining that corporations have a high top tax rate........
Without a clue that it's completely irrelevant.....
So what was your point?.....
I'm guessing you can't answer and that I just caught you being a complete and total ignorant moron?.....
I'll take your non answer as confirmation .
Hahahahahahahahaha
Common,
U get caught LYING, and I point that out with fact that US Corp rate is highest.
Regarding my "point" why not educate yourself and read the post I was responding to...it clearly shows my POINT.
So, find the moron in your mirror...
next time you want to enter a conversation, Try not to LIE...IF you DO LIE, and get caught, at least be MAN enough to OWN it.
Seriously, you prove in post #77.3 that you are nothing more than a Liberal BIGOT that can't argue and have a rational discussion without bringing up race or something like that.
It quite honestly proves MY and Hope's points about you.
Enjoy your life as a BIGOT, little one.
Funny how that works, not at all suprised it's a LIB that brings up race...that is the tactic...just prepping for November, huh?
Go back to your tonka toys and Xbox Common,
And GOD HELP us, if people like you VOTE.
OH, sorry for referencing GOD...
Sheesh, but at least I apologized before getting called out,
OWN your LIES boy...
Bottom line, would I have voted for Obama, heck no. Once he was elected did I wish him success to do well for all Americans, heck yes. But wishing and confusing what he has done and think that is success is plain delusional.
He has failed, he policies have failed and no amount of Look Here, Dont Look there will chance that fact. You can be anti GOP for many reasons, but he, Obama has the big boy panties on and he needs to either stop being a cry baby or step down and let another person give it a try. If you where the manager of a pro baseball team and pitcher was giving up homerun balls each pitch, would you keep him in or pull him for the relief pitcher.
hope, Buck wants ONLY 5 Obama failures.
he didn't ask me...he's mad that he can't research links to validate...
I can assist, but I know you have capacity to give more than 5...but if you do, he'll say your source is bad, or it's FAUX...Typical Lib ploy...
So, again, I truly suggest sticking to Liberal comprehendable language..
OBAMA BAD...OOOOOOG....UGGGGHHH....OOOOGG
It's much better for their capacity
i'm still waiting for you to respond about why progressive tax rates are a "lib" thing, when we've had progressive rates under both dems and the GOP. Apparently most people think progressive tax rates are fair. :)
I guess i'll have to put that in language you'll understand.."tax rates progressive..ugh...under gop too". :)
well, its time for bed, and I doubt i'll get an intelligent response from jerry about why a progressive tax rate, which we've had under both parties, is somehow now magically a "socialist lib" thing. lol.
the top tax rate, for example, under that "socialist" eisenhower was 91%! lol. I guess nixon was less of a socialist, since the top rate was over 70%. :) socialists everywhere!
enjoy!
vermont, I answered it in earlier post.
Take a look...
Hope, I'm actually enjoying your posts. Please, list five things Obama has failed at. And please, don't just give us opinion, give us something factual that you can back up with, well, facts.
Thanks. I'm curious.
Jerry, I'm not mad at you. I just think you're around 16 years old, with not much to add to the conversation.
Good luck.
Oh, and I think Hope is probably very capable of speaking for himself.
Buck Garcia 5-
1. He has failed to unite as he promised. Seems we are more divided then ever.
2. He has failed to reduce the budget his first term as he promised
3. He has failed to go "line by Line" to reduce goverment waste and eliminate redundent fed jobs as promised.
4. He failed to keep his promise no Lobbyist would work in his admin
5. He failed to keep his promise that passing the pork bill would have shovel ready jobs
Bonus-He has failed to keep his promise if Numbers 1 and 2 in his first term where not reached he would not run again. Now the excuse was I didnt know it was this bad..So then the next locgical extention is he was not ready to take hold of a job he wanted or he was not able to handle the job after he got it. There is not grey area on this.
I could go on, but time for bed.
Thanks for the response, Hope.
1. He has failed to unite as he promised. Seems we are more divided then ever.
That's opinion, Hope, just opinion. I for one think the Right Wing has divided this country more than any entity since the Civil War. But again, that's just my opinion, not a fact. And neither is your example.
2. He has failed to reduce the budget his first term as he promised.
True, but when he said he'd reduce the budget we had not yet experienced the Great Crash of 2008. So, though true, how can you possibly hold him to that one?
3. He has failed to go "line by Line" to reduce goverment waste and eliminate redundent fed jobs as promised.
You'll have to show me where and when he actually said that. A link would do, as would a Youtube link.
4. He failed to keep his promise no Lobbyist would work in his admin
Again, you'd have to show where and when he actually said that. Though I do remember him railing against lobbyist during his campaign.
5. He failed to keep his promise that passing the pork bill would have shovel ready jobs
You'll have to explain number 5 to me in a bit more detail. I don't follow it. It's probably me.
Good night, Hope. I too am hitting the sack.
Thanks for the give and take.
Buck-
You can easily find Youtube links on those plus many others like "Putting on a pair of comfortable shoes and walk the pick line etc. I dont think he went to Wisconsin did he?
And its not opinion that he has failed to unite the American people, because if so then there would not be bloggs like this now would there?
You have to wonder what the great business and industrial leaders of the prior century would say about their replacements today and their crony repub politicians? What would Henry Ford, J. Paul Getty, Carnegie, Kaiser, Hughes, Edison, Bell and others say about the greed of these "leaders" that are supposed to provide good paying jobs with benefits like the great ones used to (although some forced by Unions, through negotiations)? They had a Social Contract with Americans and strengthened it when they won World War II which kept all those rich guys free to get richer and continue their industrial develeopment to make the strongest country. I imagine they wanted to work in the USA and not a Colony of Germany, Japan, Italy - The Axis. You really wonder if these great leaders that really built this country that makes the rich richer now and for some reason greedier would think much of their attitudes. I think they would expect the President to have them write and sign an oath with their own blood as ink to all Americans that they would do their best to keep jobs in America and make the middle class as strong as ever with good waqes and benefits. I am sure their souls would not be resting good and they would not expect to be resting in peace if they screwed us Americans like some/many/or is it most of the rich have in the past 12 years, especially Wall Street with the Housing Mortgage/Foreclosure and Bailout Scams!!!
You would do well to read more history.
Your premise while well intentioned is just, well wrong.
Greed knows no political party, no industry, nor for that matter no country.
I make more money than i ever imagined i would. 35 years in my industry. away from home much of this time. ive put in my fair share of hardship to feel as if i deserve to keep my. money.. I am 600 miles from home now , doing what i must do to feed my family.... Now. I cant get my tax people to find these so called loop holes.. so i pay around 60-70 grand .. i know most people dont make that much. Again i know i am fortunant. . And i dont mind helping someone who is trying to help themselves.. I just ask our government to spend my money wisely.make sure no one gets any who is not trying to help themselves. no bridges to no where., not 10 guys standing around a pot hole, no money for bailout of a dying solar panel company,,. .A tax cut is a stimulus for everyone. Not just. GM, Solyndra
Isn't it just like Catchers Mitt to not have the courage to wag a signal to the pitcher. I mean, he is the Holden Caulfield of Catcher in the Rye, complete with his glove, used for you know what. Cmon Mitt, whats the plan Stan? Or is it that you really don't have a clue, a viable idea that would rock the ages. None of your Reps have a clue nor a plan and if you do, you are far to cowardly to present it and place it on the table for debate, discussion and criticism.
The GOpers are one dimensional, cut more from the Middle Class, which carried the load for this country in good and bad times, now being dissed and diminished. Yes, I firmly believe they want the homeowners mortgage interest eliminated. That's one of their unstated plans. Once again, Mitt and his backers are to cowardly to speak out and place teir agenda on the table. Weare not quite ready yet, but upon taking office, we will surpise youy, yes we will
Obama/Biden 2012
All I can say is that most people don't remember what happened last week. They will never remember 5 months from now.
"AX THE TAX CODE": with its $1.1TRILLION in "breaks, Cuts & Caps"; Plus 45% paying NOTHING?? There is your "DEFICIT"
An unprincipled man like Romney that would buy a "luxury dancing horsey" and use that property to declare a 70K deduction on his taxes-------by his very actions would seek to protect the super wealthy from American tax liability because it is the most wealthy that fund Mo Romney's campaign.
LTC Rattus, USA, ret.
OBAMA-BIDEN 2012
Romney stated:
. . . the wealthy would “still pay the same share of the tax burden they’re paying now”
As they're now paying taxes under a Bush tax cut which ends this year, looks like he's planning on renewing it if he's elected should it not be renewed this year.
I thought it was a rather arrogant statement the Republicans made after the 2008 elections that they were going to spend the next four years getting Obama out of office, which they have blatantly done in Congress at our, the people's, expense.
In regards to the economy, anyone who has worked to get themselves out of debt knows it can take a long, diligent time to do so, but it can be done, with the family working together, cooperating. Without that cooperation, the chances are slim if any of it happening.
The Republicans refused to cooperate. You want to gripe about the economy, call them.
Our economy is better than it was in 2008, unemployment is lower in most of the states, housing is picking up some states and our country would be in even better shape if the Republicans hadn't been h*** bent on ousting Obama instead of resolving our economy problem.
I've been unemployed more than employed the last five years, read all the news online about our country and others.
Like many of you out there, I still have hopes of being employed soon, yep, interviews are few and far between, but I realize that there are still many, many other issues that are needing to be resolved, not just mine.
In November, whether I am employed or not, I shall vote again for Mr. Obama and every Democrat that's running, as he has done so much for this country and improved relations between the U.S. and other countries that had not been cordial, and that's a good for all involved.
As for the Republicans, if they get in be ready for them to continue to take care of their rich friends and corporations, getting richer with no thought us 99%, the people the constitution is for, or was.
1. The poor don't pay federal income taxes
2. The national debt increased more under Obama than any other President in the same amount of time.
3. Russia and China have done everything they can to stonewall the U.S. for the last three years. It is believed that a new 'cold war' is under way with Russia.
4. Wall St. is in NYC which is a haven for democrats. Using the figures that D's to R's in NY are 2:1 means that most of the financial industry is run by Democrats.
I hope your situation (and mine) improve soon.
Romney is surely going to do away with the mortgage interest deduction. He should just be honest with the American people and say so. But being honest and forthright with the American people is not Romney.
You mean the interest rate deduction on second homes of high income earners. Don't lie or try to deceive people.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/17/us-usa-campaign-romney-comments-idUSBRE83F1BU20120417
He pays 15% thats nothing! It also doesn't account for the millions he hides.Romney will pay 5 million more if Bush tax cuts expire.
If your from one of these states: VA. NE. WV. MT. MO. FL. or ARKANSAS YOUR DEMOCRATIC SENATORS WILL BE VOTING TO EXTEND THE BUSH TAX CUTS.
If you OBJECT to this please call or email your senator & pass the word to others.
hey bob eat shi&& and die. You stupid fool, Obama is a real piece of work but so is romney and all of them. Take your Jr. College degree and learn to read someday ok. They all need to be put up against a wall and be shot. " the tree of liberty needs to be refreshed by the blood of tyrants and patriots" TJ
You want to get an idea of what Romney has in mind. First look at the Ryan plan, he tied himself to that.
Then look at Michigan where we elected another venture capitalist whose promise was to "remake Michigan"
but wouldn't say how(remind you of Romney now?). Well what we got first out of the gate was a massive tax shift from Business taxes to taxes on seniors pensions. So you decide for yourself what you think you might get from a guy that gives you a line like....I'm gonna change things, I'll tell ya after the election how.
The election is 5 months away. You wouldn't remember anything Romney says today by then.
Heck, whatever he does try to say today (which isn't much and usually confusing), doesn't mean that he believes it, or will act on it.
"Health mandates are GOOD! Errr....except when the other party tries to make them happen". (MR)
"I'm against abortion. No wait, I'm for it now." (MR)
As an Independent I have to conclude that Republican voters would vote for Charles Manson if he had a R behind his name,,,,,,,After a year of comical primary we now know absolutely NOTHING about what Mitt Romney plans to do as President (other than NOT what Obama has done) He has given me absolutely no reason to even consider voting for him and checking into his past record makes me think Republicans are simply trying to hand the election to Obama, His record in Mass is horrible across the board, taxes raised, UE raised, debt raised, bottom of the barrel in job creation.
Why would ANYONE vote for Romney?
Read this Bo:
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2012/06/04/why-romneys-record-as-governor-barely-matters
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governorship_of_Mitt_Romney
Republicans lie about who will benefit from their tax cuts. Romney is the same as Bush in htis respect.
Bush said"By far, the majority of my tax cuts will go to those at the lower end of the spectrum". In fact only 15% of the tax cuts went to the bottom 50% of taxpayers.
The tax cuts for the rich are the largest contributer to the increase in national debt.
England has shown that austerity does not work to pull them out of the recession, they cut programs to the bone, and they have double dipped.
It's time to be adults and increase taxes.
The top income rate was lowered by about 5% while the lowest tax rate was lowered much more.
I just came over today to see how you all are doing in socialism land. So, How are all the socialist lemmings today?
Two words to simplify the current tax code: Fair Tax.
Before commenting on this, at least look at their website and read up on How the Fair Tax Works at...
http://www.fairtax.org
Romney hasn't said what deductions and loopholes he'd change because he's waiting for his buddies and Grover to tell him what they are. The man doesn't have an original thought until someone tells him what it is supposed to be.
He just wont say WHAT his plans are....for pretty much anything. Other than "I'd do it differently than the President"....he never really says anything. Hopefully we'll get to meet the real Mitt Romney....BEFORE Novemeber. But then, he's flopped so many times, who knows who the real Romney is?
PMS-NBC has lied and distorted so many reports - I doubt this is the full story... If MS-NBC would setup an innocent person (Zimmerman) and then purposely and falsely report a Romney event (for their own purposes) how can we trust any of this??? Even Andrea Mitchell continued the lies!!!
I think PMS-NBC is fabricating news....
Romney's policy proposals aren't opinion, they are factual. Some things are opinion but this isn't.
Forget all the demagougery on who pays what and how much and what is fair tripe.
The root of the matter is simple. It isn't that we tax too little (let's not forget nearly 45% of 1040 filers pay ZERO income tax now - what happened to shared sacrifice?) it is that we spend too much.
And the favorite liberal argument that in the 40s and 50s tax rates on the wealthiest mostly small business owners were 78% and our economy still boomed, so it would be OK to raise taxes greatly with no ill economic effects, is idiotic.
What the morons who believe that are forgetting is the why of how that happened. It happened because after WWII all the industrialized economies of the world were in a shambles - except for our country. We became the mfr. to the world.
Times have changed. We no longer have the luxury of no competition. And making corp. and small business owner individual tax rates higher when they are already the highest in the industrialized world economies is not going to make our products more competitive. It will remove all incentive and crush growth. Period.
Rebel, while it's obvious we spend too much the question now becomes how do we reduce spending without completely gutting the government. Keep in mind that almost 2/3 of spending is related to defense, SS and interest on debt, 3 areas that are extremely difficult to significantly cut back in even the medium term. Balancng the budget without addressing these areas would require cutting back on everything else by about 50%, which isn't feasible.
The US has among the lowest income tax rates in the world and it's difficult to see how the deficit can be addressed without raising taxes at least in the short-term.
Mark - we have the highest corp. tax rates and that also applies to small business owners (1 - 500 employees) who pay tax corp. and tax 1040 on the profit on their corporations books:
http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/27/pf/taxes/corporate-taxes/index.htm
Now, we can remove the loopholes that allow most corps. to pay tax atabout 18-25%. But we cannot thrive at a 38% rate.
And it is feasible to cut the size of govt. We can start by closing the Depts. of No Energy and No Education. That would save about $500B a year.
Defense spending is not the boogie man. Medicare and SS are. And the Dems will not address it.
Best we remember the words of Abe Lincoln:
“I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.”
And it is not a half and half split between entitlement and subjugation it is 00.006% of those few that have hoarded the nation’s wealth and political power compared to the 99.994% of a declining middle class, working poor, totally destitute, and younger generation struggling to find a start from under a huge pile of educational debt.
Sam - best you remember Lincoln also said "it is true all men are created equal. But that does not mean all men are guaranteed the same station in life. But the possibility exists with hard work, thrift and industry the employee may one day become an employer, too."
You make more money, you pay more taxes. It's common sense, isn't it? Why make it so complicated? There's no need to demonize the rich just to pander to the poor, like some politicians and news media are doing right now. Class conflicts only trigger hatred and won't get this country anywhere.
"We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes"
-Leona Helmsley
The GOP philosophy summed up in one sentence. It holds as true now as it did in the 90s.
Rack - you mean the 90s when the Republican-controlled House and Senate balanced the budget 4 straight years?
"Rack - you mean the 90s when the Republican-controlled House and Senate balanced the budget 4 straight years?"
That is false Rebel. It simply did not happen.