Hooray for the tax cut…

[PatentGuy]

Buffet and/or Gates “supported” paying the same tax rates on capital gains and dividends as on ordinary income? I must have missed that news. My bad.

[CA renter]

[quote=PatentGuy]Buffet and/or Gates “supported” paying the same tax rates on capital gains and dividends as on ordinary income? I must have missed that news. My bad.[/quote]

NEW YORK, June 26 — Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class.

Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. “I don’t have a tax shelter,” he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who “clean our offices” are taxed, to loud applause.

The event comes as public frustration has grown over executive compensation and disparity in pay. It also comes as Congress debates changes to the tax code that would decrease take-home pay for managers of private-equity firms and hedge funds, pools of money for wealthy families and institutional investors. The rich can take advantage of tax loopholes, including one that allows those managers to pay the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent instead of the ordinary top income tax rate of 35 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html

[CA renter]

[quote=PatentGuy]Buffet and/or Gates “supported” paying the same tax rates on capital gains and dividends as on ordinary income? I must have missed that news. My bad.[/quote]

NEW YORK, June 26 — Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class.

Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. “I don’t have a tax shelter,” he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who “clean our offices” are taxed, to loud applause.

The event comes as public frustration has grown over executive compensation and disparity in pay. It also comes as Congress debates changes to the tax code that would decrease take-home pay for managers of private-equity firms and hedge funds, pools of money for wealthy families and institutional investors. The rich can take advantage of tax loopholes, including one that allows those managers to pay the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent instead of the ordinary top income tax rate of 35 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html

[CA renter]

[quote=PatentGuy]Buffet and/or Gates “supported” paying the same tax rates on capital gains and dividends as on ordinary income? I must have missed that news. My bad.[/quote]

NEW YORK, June 26 — Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class.

Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. “I don’t have a tax shelter,” he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who “clean our offices” are taxed, to loud applause.

The event comes as public frustration has grown over executive compensation and disparity in pay. It also comes as Congress debates changes to the tax code that would decrease take-home pay for managers of private-equity firms and hedge funds, pools of money for wealthy families and institutional investors. The rich can take advantage of tax loopholes, including one that allows those managers to pay the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent instead of the ordinary top income tax rate of 35 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html

[CA renter]

[quote=PatentGuy]Buffet and/or Gates “supported” paying the same tax rates on capital gains and dividends as on ordinary income? I must have missed that news. My bad.[/quote]

NEW YORK, June 26 — Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class.

Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. “I don’t have a tax shelter,” he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who “clean our offices” are taxed, to loud applause.

The event comes as public frustration has grown over executive compensation and disparity in pay. It also comes as Congress debates changes to the tax code that would decrease take-home pay for managers of private-equity firms and hedge funds, pools of money for wealthy families and institutional investors. The rich can take advantage of tax loopholes, including one that allows those managers to pay the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent instead of the ordinary top income tax rate of 35 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html

[CA renter]

[quote=PatentGuy]Buffet and/or Gates “supported” paying the same tax rates on capital gains and dividends as on ordinary income? I must have missed that news. My bad.[/quote]

NEW YORK, June 26 — Warren E. Buffett was his usual folksy self Tuesday night at a fundraiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as he slammed a system that allows the very rich to pay taxes at a lower rate than the middle class.

Buffett cited himself, the third-richest person in the world, as an example. Last year, Buffett said, he was taxed at 17.7 percent on his taxable income of more than $46 million. His receptionist was taxed at about 30 percent.

Buffett said that was despite the fact that he was not trying to avoid paying higher taxes. “I don’t have a tax shelter,” he said. And he challenged Congress and his audience to see what the people who “clean our offices” are taxed, to loud applause.

The event comes as public frustration has grown over executive compensation and disparity in pay. It also comes as Congress debates changes to the tax code that would decrease take-home pay for managers of private-equity firms and hedge funds, pools of money for wealthy families and institutional investors. The rich can take advantage of tax loopholes, including one that allows those managers to pay the capital gains tax rate of 15 percent instead of the ordinary top income tax rate of 35 percent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html

[GoUSC]

[quote=UCGal][quote=enron_by_the_sea]I was first be happy to not have to pay more in taxes next year. Two seconds later I realized that I would be paying that with interest one way or another in the future anyway! So I don’t what the big deal is about.

If they had done it without adding to the deficit (in the long term) then I might have been impressed….[/quote]
+10.

This just added a trillion bucks to the deficit. Much bigger than TARP 1.

One of the little things in the law – the rich (and anyone else with a spare $10Million) can now gift their kids $10M, tax free. If they do it in the next 2 years. This is in addition to the estate tax changes… ($5M tax free.)

So if your older and may die in the next 2 years – you could give $15M to your kids tax free.

Now where did I put that spare $10 million….[/quote]

I have never agreed with the gift or estate tax. It is pure double taxation. Why should my kids have to pay taxes on money that I earned and paid taxes on already? The answer is not more taxes. The answer is less government spending.

[GoUSC]

[quote=UCGal][quote=enron_by_the_sea]I was first be happy to not have to pay more in taxes next year. Two seconds later I realized that I would be paying that with interest one way or another in the future anyway! So I don’t what the big deal is about.

If they had done it without adding to the deficit (in the long term) then I might have been impressed….[/quote]
+10.

This just added a trillion bucks to the deficit. Much bigger than TARP 1.

One of the little things in the law – the rich (and anyone else with a spare $10Million) can now gift their kids $10M, tax free. If they do it in the next 2 years. This is in addition to the estate tax changes… ($5M tax free.)

So if your older and may die in the next 2 years – you could give $15M to your kids tax free.

Now where did I put that spare $10 million….[/quote]

I have never agreed with the gift or estate tax. It is pure double taxation. Why should my kids have to pay taxes on money that I earned and paid taxes on already? The answer is not more taxes. The answer is less government spending.

[GoUSC]

[quote=UCGal][quote=enron_by_the_sea]I was first be happy to not have to pay more in taxes next year. Two seconds later I realized that I would be paying that with interest one way or another in the future anyway! So I don’t what the big deal is about.

If they had done it without adding to the deficit (in the long term) then I might have been impressed….[/quote]
+10.

This just added a trillion bucks to the deficit. Much bigger than TARP 1.

One of the little things in the law – the rich (and anyone else with a spare $10Million) can now gift their kids $10M, tax free. If they do it in the next 2 years. This is in addition to the estate tax changes… ($5M tax free.)

So if your older and may die in the next 2 years – you could give $15M to your kids tax free.

Now where did I put that spare $10 million….[/quote]

I have never agreed with the gift or estate tax. It is pure double taxation. Why should my kids have to pay taxes on money that I earned and paid taxes on already? The answer is not more taxes. The answer is less government spending.

[GoUSC]

[quote=UCGal][quote=enron_by_the_sea]I was first be happy to not have to pay more in taxes next year. Two seconds later I realized that I would be paying that with interest one way or another in the future anyway! So I don’t what the big deal is about.

If they had done it without adding to the deficit (in the long term) then I might have been impressed….[/quote]
+10.

This just added a trillion bucks to the deficit. Much bigger than TARP 1.

One of the little things in the law – the rich (and anyone else with a spare $10Million) can now gift their kids $10M, tax free. If they do it in the next 2 years. This is in addition to the estate tax changes… ($5M tax free.)

So if your older and may die in the next 2 years – you could give $15M to your kids tax free.

Now where did I put that spare $10 million….[/quote]

I have never agreed with the gift or estate tax. It is pure double taxation. Why should my kids have to pay taxes on money that I earned and paid taxes on already? The answer is not more taxes. The answer is less government spending.

[GoUSC]

[quote=UCGal][quote=enron_by_the_sea]I was first be happy to not have to pay more in taxes next year. Two seconds later I realized that I would be paying that with interest one way or another in the future anyway! So I don’t what the big deal is about.

If they had done it without adding to the deficit (in the long term) then I might have been impressed….[/quote]
+10.

This just added a trillion bucks to the deficit. Much bigger than TARP 1.

One of the little things in the law – the rich (and anyone else with a spare $10Million) can now gift their kids $10M, tax free. If they do it in the next 2 years. This is in addition to the estate tax changes… ($5M tax free.)

So if your older and may die in the next 2 years – you could give $15M to your kids tax free.

Now where did I put that spare $10 million….[/quote]

I have never agreed with the gift or estate tax. It is pure double taxation. Why should my kids have to pay taxes on money that I earned and paid taxes on already? The answer is not more taxes. The answer is less government spending.

[drboom]

[quote=pri_dk]
[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.”[/quote]

Please don’t trot out this canard. The federal deficit fell during part of Clinton’s administration, but the so-called “surplus” was the result of accounting changes that tossed Social Security contributions into the general revenue pot.

The Shrub and Obama both continued the dishonesty.

[drboom]

[quote=pri_dk]
[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.”[/quote]

Please don’t trot out this canard. The federal deficit fell during part of Clinton’s administration, but the so-called “surplus” was the result of accounting changes that tossed Social Security contributions into the general revenue pot.

The Shrub and Obama both continued the dishonesty.

[drboom]

[quote=pri_dk]
[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.”[/quote]

Please don’t trot out this canard. The federal deficit fell during part of Clinton’s administration, but the so-called “surplus” was the result of accounting changes that tossed Social Security contributions into the general revenue pot.

The Shrub and Obama both continued the dishonesty.

[drboom]

[quote=pri_dk]
[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.”[/quote]

Please don’t trot out this canard. The federal deficit fell during part of Clinton’s administration, but the so-called “surplus” was the result of accounting changes that tossed Social Security contributions into the general revenue pot.

The Shrub and Obama both continued the dishonesty.

[Author]

Posts