Still seems like he could have been more forthcoming when he made his initial comparisson between himself and his secretary. It was sound bite material to be sure and not wholly accurate given that they are two entirely different types of taxpayers. And surely his mindset for investing is subjective? If he feels he doesn’t pay enough then can’t he write a check to the IRS or perhaps take less deductions?
You’re missing the point. The government must raise enough in taxes to cover its expenses and pay down its debt. The only way to do this is to raise taxes on corporations and the wealthy. Buffet or some other wealthy person deciding to pay more than they’re asked isn’t going to make enough of a difference, and why should they chose to do so when so many others are getting off easy? It’s ridiculous to say that wealthy people who feel taxes are higher should just pay more. The government isn’t a charity. Paying taxes is an obligation of living in a civilized society, and the wealthy receive the greatest benefit.
That goes both ways though. Buffet can afford to pontificate on raising taxes when such a tax raise has no real effect on him. Put another way, even if he were taxed at 99 percent his lifestyle would unlikely to be affected, he is so rich that none of this will truly affect him As such, I find it disconcerting that someone for whom tax increases will make no real difference is being given such deference especially in light of what I feel are his sound bite comments on his taxes versus his secretary’s and that he appears unwilling to release his actual returns).
So you agree that raising taxes on the wealthy won’t affect them negatively?
I don’t think that he’s being given any particular deference, it’s just the irony of the world’s most successful investor saying the exact opposite of the republican claims, i.e., that raising taxes will hinder investment.
And it’s hardly a sound bite, he wrote a whole column. And why should he release his returns? Do you think he’s lying?
The whole point of his comparison is that he and his secretary are different kinds of taxpayers. The problem he’s trying to raise awareness of is that his kind of taxpayer is taxed less than the kind that most of us fall into. And it’s fully accurate, since what he says is that his total federal taxes are a lower percentage than hers, and that’s true. Yeah, the comparison doesn’t work if you focus exclusively on income tax, like many right-wingers do, but that’s just an illustration that focusing exclusively on income tax is short-sighted.
The recession reduced our federal receipts by 400 billion dollars and our expenditures increased by 600 billion dollars in 2009 (in no small part due to heavier burdens caused by higher unemployment and poverty). When teh recession is over this stuff disappears and we are left with our long term structural deficit that is largely elimianted by repealing the Bush tax cuts and ending our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We still need long term stuff like health care reform and tax reform but the recession itself accounts for the majority of the deficit.
No, because then its not a tax, its a contribution.
The notion that those who think that taxes are too low can just pay more is stupid beyond belief. The question is whether we should be taxing income from investment so much lower than we tax income from work.
The Wall Street financial gamblers pay 15 percent. That is a horror. They should have their gains taxed as income.
We should reinstate the transaction fees.
Which is fine but he didn’t appear to make that point when he compared his tax returns with his secretaries. It was an intentionally misleading comment to make a point. And it isn’t stupid to suggest that he make a contribution. If he feels he is paying too little in taxes then he ought to make a contribution. Consider it an example to the rest of us. Moreover, Buffett does get upset at certain taxes (see his reaction to proposals to change the way the IRS taxes the use of corporate jets).
Upstream a poster said that Buffet has claimed that taxes do not colour his desire to invest. I find that extraordinary as that is the exact opposite of what I have seen in 15 years in the business. Tax is often a massive driver (if not the driver) in many investments. Think of it as the silent partner in every deal who must get paid at some point.
People who take an investment risk shouldn’t be taxed the same as ordinary income because they lose a lot of the upside of said risk. If we raise the rate on capital gains too highly I do think we run the risk of further weakning the US capital markets.
You (and others) keep saying things like this but have yet to provide a single shred of evidence and ignore all the evidence to the contrary. Your belief that it’s true isn’t convincing the rest of us.
Other than a supposed quote from Buffet (which I have not seen a citation for) you certainly have not proved otherwise either (not sure who the “rest of us” you are referring to are).
Look at it this way, tax clearly is an investment driver otherwise we wouldn’t have the massive tax preparation and limitation industry that we have. Off shore shelters, accountants, lawyers, special vehicles etc. etc. Tax is an industry onto itself and it would not have gotten that way if paying taxes were not a big issue for businesses and investors.
No cite for Buffet’s statements? This was all over the news a couple of months ago. You might try paying attention sometime. Since you can’t be bothered to google it, here’s the original piece
No one said it’s not an issue, it’s the attitude that there’s an indisputable 1-1 correspondence with investment that people are objecting to. Where’s the proof that raising taxes decreases investment significantly, in particular so much that it outweighs the benefits of the stimulus activities the government could fund with the additional revenue? I.e., say something more substantial than “they’re job creators!”
I asked for a cite for something that was quoted. Not for me to go searching.
Here is what you said:
No you are saying that no one is saying that it isn’t an issue? I’m sorry but you seem a little lost.
If you are referring to the quote I put in post #99, I also included in that post a link to Buffett’s original article where the quote came from.
That you did. My apologies as I missed it.
I still don’t agree with Buffet on this point. I’ve seen the exact opposite in my business. Tax is always a big driver in deals in my experience.
Huh wa? I didn’t contradict myself at all. Now how about answering the question?