Developing controversy on the expiration of “Bush tax cuts”

February 2nd, 2010

Evening update: Media Matters, a left-wing media watchdog has posted an article that refutes many of the assertions in the original Reuters piece. Keeping an eye on this story . . . I want to see how many of the Obama proposals to extend the Bush tax cuts actually appear in the final budget.

__________________________

Earlier today, Reuters posted a story regarding the Bush tax cuts that will expire later this year. The taxes were represented as “backdoor taxes” or a de facto tax increase on people making as little as $33,000 per year. The new article was originally posted here.

As you can see, it was removed about an hour later. No one knows why. EducationNews preserved and posted the text of the article. I have copied and pasted below.

The facts in the article seem to be correct, Reuters has not given an explanation for removal of the article.

Backdoor taxes to hit middle class

NEW YORK (Reuters.com) –The Obama administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.

In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year — effectively a tax hike by stealth.

While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.

The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration’s Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.

If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.

Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 — though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.

Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a “patch” that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.

Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year’s levels, the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy — the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.

Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:

  • Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;
  • The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;
  • The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses
  • Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;
  • The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free.
  • Blog Traffic Exchange Related Posts Blog Traffic Exchange Related Websites

    Fear the Boom and Bust

    January 26th, 2010

    A Hayek vs. Keynes Rap Anthem

    This is quite possibly the only rap video that I have ever watched from start to finish. The video pretty much summarizes a major economic debate in about seven minutes.

    Blog Traffic Exchange Related Posts Blog Traffic Exchange Related Websites

    Do corporate donations equal free speech?

    January 23rd, 2010

    Last, Friday, on Consumerism Commentary, staff writer, Smithee, discussed the recent Supreme Court ruling that struck down most the limitations on campaign donations. Particularly, the limitations put into place by the McCain-Feingold legislation. In the article entitled, Democracy, Incorporated, Smithee did not deal with the details and intricacies of the ruling, but rather the big idea that “corporations are people”. Smithee asserted that the ruling was a bad idea. Since I agree with Smithee when he says:

    I had thought things were moving in a positive direction with the proliferation of the Internet. It’s never been easier to encounter dissenting opinions or do your own research. I’ve been having some healthy (and some insipid) debates through Facebook for the last couple of years, the kind that would’ve otherwise happened only with friends or co-workers. I like having those. It’s incredibly important to be available to hear other points of view. Not to mention the continued release of government data available for analysis by anyone. Together, we can help each other get to the truth.

    I am going to present an opposing viewpoint and you can decide who is right. Smithee calls himself an independent who leans Democrat, I am an independent who leans libertarian.

    Are corporations, people?

    Corporations are people who are interested in profit. Corporate money in politics is a form of free speech. Who is interested in corporate profits? Is it just the “fat cats” at the top, as President Obama recently referred to big bankers? Who benefits when a company does well? Here is a list just off the top of my head: Shareholders, retirees, stockbrokers, employees, suppliers to that company, contractors for that company, local, state, federal governments (more taxes are paid), and all the businesses who sell products and services to everyone on the aforementioned list – to say nothing of the advertisers, employees of advertising companies and campaign workers for the candidate who is the target for that money.

    You see, when a large company gives money in order to get favor from the government, it isn’t just the guys at the top who benefit. Corporate donations do represent people.

    Do corporate dollars always go to Republicans?

    Smithee makes the case that this ruling only benefits Republicans, since corporations only give to Republicans. I mostly agree with him about the effect of the ruling, although I would dispute the assumption that the big money only give to the GOP. What he does not mention is that unions such as the trial lawyers, auto workers, service unions and more were not limited in their donations. While these entities are not corporations, they certainly command a great deal of wealth. Unions are big business. What did their money buy? Well, many unions were exempted from the “Cadillac” tax in the recent (failed?) health care bill. The head of the SEIU has visited the White House more than any other private individual in the president’s first year. The auto workers benefited from bailouts of the auto industry – including a more favorable debt settlement during the Chrysler bankruptcy. Trial lawyers have a stranglehold on the Democrat party as evidenced by the fact that there was nothing about tort reform in the recent health care legislation.

    So the bottom line is that the McCain-Feingold law restricted donations from corporations (large groups of individuals looking buy favor from the government), but not donations from unions (large groups of individuals looking to buy favor from the government).

    Corporate dollars go to Democrats too. Sometimes those dollars pay off in a big way. Watch this video from John Stoessel about a little “green” window company.

    So how do we get big money out of politics?

    Well, we can’t. Not under the current paradigm. I agree with Smithee that money in politics is a problem. The fact is that as long as government has the power to pick winners and losers (as under the TARP legislation, some companies favored over others), regulate health care (domestic drug companies and health insurers were going to get billions), regulated energy consumption (General Electric was a major supporter of the Obama candidacy both in cash and through its ownership of MSNBC and GE stands to make a huge profit from future “green” legislation.), or bankrupt certain industries, companies, corporations and other groups will see to find ways to influence that legislation.

    Do not get me wrong – the other party is by no means innocent. Republicans are as guilty of crony capitalism as the Democrats. Ear marks are standard ways to peddle influence on both sides of the aisle.

    In my view, here are the only ways to get money out of politics:

    • No limits on donations. Why not? It is a way to make sure that everything is fair and honest. Do you really believe that companies are always following the rules anyway? If all campaign donations were banned, we would have just as much corruption as we do under current rules.
    • Full disclosure. If big companies or unions or foreign governments are giving big money to politicians, I want to know about it and you should too.
    • Limited government. This is the key. The only way to get corruption out of government is to get the government out of everything other than Constitutionally defined powers. I know this is a point of contention, but if government has the power to pick the kind of widgets that we all can use, then the widget manufacturers are going to do everything they can to influence government widget policy.

    These solutions are just a start, there are no easy solutions to campaign finance issues in the United States. All I know is that we, the people, need to be active in knowing what is happening in our government. If you know who owns your politicians, you have the power to counteract corruption.

    Photo by Rob Crawley
    Blog Traffic Exchange Related Posts Blog Traffic Exchange Related Websites

    My favorite credit card is back

    January 20th, 2010

    The Chase Freedom card was taken off of most blogs and networks last year and I am glad to see it come back. My household uses this card almost exclusively. They have changed the rewards structure slightly, but I just ordered a $50 gift card to Shell gas stations last night and we are well on our way to earning more points through the Chase FreedomSM card. The Freedom card has a great rewards program, an introductory 0% APR and no annual fee!

    In this economy, we need to save every penny. I control my spending, always pay off my balance and get great cash back from Chase.

    Blog Traffic Exchange Related Posts Blog Traffic Exchange Related Websites