Statement From Rich Anthony

Thank you, Rich (0.00 / 0)

Back pain is extemely debilitating. I hope everything goes well and you are soon fully pain free and healthy.  Dems need you!

Now we all must see what we can do to help Jeff defeat Frank Wolf!

---

by: GretchenLaskas @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 10:33:29 AM CDT

Ir Can't Be Postponed (0.00 / 0)

Treatment for that sort of injury can't be postponed. What a fine man to realize that he can't jeopardize a candidacy by "taking a vacation" from campaigning. (I wish all Democratic candidates realized that. Enuff said.)

---

by: Elaine in Roanoke @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 10:40:53 AM CDT

Condolances (0.00 / 0)

I've dealt with back pain myself, and am sorry to hear of Mr. Anthony's needing surgery.  I hope it goes well.

---

by: jack @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 12:22:45 PM CDT

Jack: (0.00 / 0)

the only pain you know about is being a pain in the butt!

---

by: TomPaine @ Thu Apr 15, 2010 at 23:22:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

As for Mr. Barnett... (0.00 / 0)

Well, I really don't think he's going to win over many independents and moderate Republicans with this platform.

"Under current laws, wealthy Americans now pay a smaller percentage of their income and capital gains than the middle class."

That is just WRONG.  The CBO has the real numbers:
http://www.cbo.gov/publication...

In 2001, the top quintile shouldered 52.3% of the federal tax burden.  That rose to 69.3% by 2006, up 32.5%.

Meanwhile, the tax burden for the middle quintile went from 14.2% to 13.2%, DOWN 7%.  In fact, the tax burden for all quintiles except the top went down:

1st: DOWN 9.3%
2nd: DOWN 8.7%
3rd: DOWN 7.0%
4th: DOWN 6.3%
5th: UP  32.5%

How much of the tax burden SHOULD the top quintile pay?  80%? 90%? ALL of it?

---

by: jack @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 12:53:42 PM CDT

The analysis does not make sense (0.00 / 0)

Mr. Barnett's refers to "percentage of their income and capital gains" -- your analysis deals with tax burden, i.e., the percentage of the collective tax burden.  

Considering tax deductions, loopholes, and estate planning, which limits their tax paid as a percentage of their income and capital gains, Mr. Barnett's statement is plausable (and probably correct).

In 2001, the top quintile shouldered 52.3% of the federal tax burden.  That rose to 69.3% by 2006, up 32.5%.

Simply means the rich are getting richer, and are thus paying more taxes.  

 

---

by: WestEndVoter @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 13:23:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Actually, top tax rates now are low (0.00 / 0)

by historic standards in this country.

And that doesn't even count all the loopholes, tax shelters, etc. that make up the "effective" tax rate for rich people.  

Follow me on Twitter.

---

by: lowkell @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 13:28:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Effective Tax Rates (0.00 / 0)

Fair enough.  Let's look at the Effective Tax Rates:
From 2001 to 2006, they are

1st Quintile: Down 15.7%
2nd Quintile: Down 11.3%
3rd Quintile: Down  7.2%
4th Quintile: Down  6.9%
5th Quintile: Down  3.4%

So the "Bush Tax Cuts" increased the overall burden for the top quintile, and reduced their effective tax rates the LEAST.

Mr. Barnett's statement that "Under current laws, wealthy Americans now pay a smaller percentage of their income and capital gains than the middle class" is still wrong, no matter how you do the analysis.

---

by: jack @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 13:44:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

More and more I realize that the Republican financial industry trolls (0.00 / 0)

are leaving NLS and posting here! "Jack" is Exhibit #1.  

---

by: TomPaine @ Wed Apr 14, 2010 at 20:09:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And the conservative wins again! (0.00 / 0)

Thank you, Tom.  In responding to CBO numbers with an ad hominem attack, you are conceding the argument.

---

by: jack @ Thu Apr 15, 2010 at 20:49:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Jack: (0.00 / 0)

I have decided to go over to "Too Conservative" to post, the Republicans over there are at least semi-intelligent. Even the Republican teabaggers over at NotLarrySabato are better that the new trolls on this site!  

---

by: TomPaine @ Thu Apr 15, 2010 at 23:27:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Another mischaracterization (0.00 / 0)

of Mr. Barnett's statement.  He did not use the term "effective tax rate," and he did not even talk about the Bush Tax Cuts in your quotation.  His statement surely takes into consideration that the wealthy use deductions, tax credits, and inheritance laws to avoid taxation, and thus shield a significant amount of income and capital gains from income and capital gains taxes.

Look up "stepped-up basis" -- one of the most unfair aspects of our tax code -- and you'll see how the wealthy can shield their assets.  "Carryover basis" is another good one.  

Next, look at President Obama's tax return for an example.  He recently inherited a half million in a Hawaii bank stock from his mother in accordance with "stepped-up basis".  No tax was paid on that inheritance, and no capital gains tax was paid on the stock as it appreciated.  To cap it off, the stock lost value in the year after the inheritance, and President Obama sold the stock for over a 100K loss from its value at the time of the inheritance -- which can then be used by President Obama to offset other capital gains.

Say that stock was worth 100K when it was purchased by President Obama's mother.  In such a scenario, she shielded 400K of capital gains from tax during her life, and President Obama was able to shield 100K from capital gains owing to a decline in the stock value prior to sale.  All from a single provision in the tax code.

Of course, the "middle class" often does not have the luxury of shielding massive capital gains from taxation, or using lucrative tax shelters, and thus, they can easily pay a larger proportion of their gross income and gross capital gains in taxes.

The near elimination the so-called "death" tax (actually, it was scheduled be be completely eliminated in 2010), along with the concepts of "carryover" and "stepped-up" basis has resulted in the loss of many billions of tax dollars by our government.  The misguided tax policy also locks up needed capital while heirs wait for their wealthy parents to die.  It is no wonder our government is awash in debt, and there is not enough capital out there for investment. All in the name of strong families, right?

 

---

by: WestEndVoter @ Fri Apr 16, 2010 at 00:28:47 AM CDT

[ Parent ]