Re: “Why should Lady Gaga pay a higher tax rate than Mitt Romney?” (Katie Baird column, 2-14).
Your initial investment for any capital gain comes from income you paid regular taxes on. You have to take a risk to make a capital gain. If the investment doesn’t pay off, you lose the investment.
There is a difference between wage income and capital gains. There is no risk when you have a job. Yes, you could lose it or have to take a pay cut, but you are not risking money to earn it.
Baird talks about middle-class day traders paying less than Joe Plumbers. Day traders sell stocks frequently, usually holding them for only a few days. Any capital gains on investments held less than one year are taxed at the same rate as wage income.
When the tax rate on capital gains was lowered from 28 percent to 15 percent, the government saw an increase in capital gain tax revenue. Why? The more frequently people are willing to sell assets, the more tax revenue is generated.
People who invest in stock or real estate take a gamble on whether or not they will make money. They can deduct their losses but only against their gains except for the first $3,000. If people and business didn’t invest in stocks there would be no business because there would be no capital to fund them.
The wealthy aren’t the only people who benefit from a lower tax rate on their capital gains. A lot of middle-class people and retirees rely on capital gains for their income.
Now, now George …….. Your letter is very insensitive to the left or “Progressives”, as they wish to called. (At least until they also defile this particular label, again)
They get offended and dismissive if you try to “scare” them with math.
Soooo before taxes on cap gains were cut there weren’t any businesses being invested in?
George – your letter avoids discussing the proposal that has been put forward to make Capital Gains tax rates progressive so that people making millions per year pay a higher rate than those making thousands per year.
But then…that would be harder to sell – wouldn’t it?
Well said George. The tax the rich crowd is going to come attacking.
Without capital to invest our greatest companies would not exist, hiring millions of workers.
I too was concerned about how an increase in the Capital Gains tax would affect retirees and retirement accounts, but as beerBoy pointed out the current proposal would continue to tax the lower gain incomes (in the thousands rather than millions) at a lower rate that won’t impact retirement investments as much. I can live with that.
Judging from the reaction of the likes of Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, or even Mitt Romney, it seems they wouldn’t have a problem with it either.
All the BS talk that the conservatives do about “flat tax”, but try to equalize their tax rate to the tax rate of a working person and watch the excuses fly.
As to hiring workers – workers are hired when there is work to do. Labor is driven by demand. Since businesses have lowered the demand for products, by outsourcing labor, they have no one to blame but their greedy selves.
This one illustrates the ignorance that permeates the problem:
“There is no risk when you have a job.”
Yeah…no risk, unless you are self employed or unless your employer is looking for any excuse to pay himself more, even if it means that his labor force – those who got him where he is today – suffers.
Stock players (with their insurance coverage for losses) will continually whine, even after the market has climbed fairly steadily since the 2008 crash.
ManualM, there you go spouting off crap again: (Yeah…no risk, unless you are self employed or unless your employer is looking for any excuse to pay himself more, even if it means that his labor force – those who got him where he is today – suffers)
Excuse me??? Without the EMPLOYER there are no EMPLOYEES! And, I do believe that the point of owning a business is to make money, or is that a sin in your book? It’s called free enterprise.
Darlin – please…avoid talking to me. You don’t even come close to comprehending the subject matter.
MM- the rich, minus a few famous exceptions, pay a much higher tax rate then the rest of us. As a whole, they pay for the bulk of entitlements the majority uses.
Those crazy facts get in the way of your progressive rhetoric again.
50% of everything over $200K adjusted gross income, including capital gains, should about do it and be fair at the same time.
I doubt many complainers here need to worry.
MM. “but try to equalize their tax rate to the tax rate of a working person and watch the excuses fly.” 45% of the “working people pay no income tax at all. Don’t start talking about the payroll tax because all of that is earmarked for Social Security. On top of the percentage of people that pay no income tax we give lower income families with children a credit. A family with 1 child making $30,000 a year that has $1600 withheld gets a refund of $4100. Not only do they not pay any taxes, we pay them to have kids. Let them have their withholding back but not more. The income tax program is supposed to be a revenue generating program, not another entitlement program. Let the social programs we have take care of supporting those in need and let the tax program be a revenue program.
Publico. What % are you willing to pay. I am guessing you are probably in the 45% that don’t contribute anything. You think that taking 1/2 of everything over $200,000 is fair? The government needs more revenue but we need to look at spending. $4 million dollars for a kennel at JBLM sound like a bargain to you? What do you have against people that have worked hard over the years and achieved some wealth? We pay athletes huge sums of money for their skills. Why can’t people that produce jobs and employee people make more than $200,000? Your 50% tax hits all of the small businesses that make more than $200,000 which impacts their ability to invest in their business. We need comprehensive tax reform that looks at all aspects of the tax code. We also need to look at where government spends the money it gets. The government is not as efficient at spending as the public is. Take a look at all of the fraud and mis-spent government funds. Solyndra-$535 million dollar loss. This is a lot bigger than just taxing the “rich”.
“I am guessing you are probably in the 45% that don’t contribute anything.”
Standard line from a conservative. I wonder how many of the Republican voters in Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, etc. are among the 45% that don’t make enough money to pay income tax. Considering that those are “right to work” states where people make notoriously low wages……
As to Solyndra – the Bush Administration started that loan. Is it still wrong?
When the oil companies quit getting subsidies, after being the wealthiest companies on the planet, I’ll start worrying about Americans not making enough money to pay taxes.
Bush turned it down because the company’s plan was terrible.
Nice blame Bush, thread shift. Darn facts again.
50% is fair? Half of the fruits of your labor? To pay for people to sit on the couch, have babies at 17 with no second thought or responsibility, fund additional bailouts, 99 weeks of unemployment, give illegal aliens check just for filing a tax return (look up that great program), etc.
You are advocating for theft by govt.
The Solyndra loan may have started with the Bush Administration but it was the Obama Administration that fast tracked it and ignored some of the warning signs that there was a problem with the companies finances.
And more states are looking at becoming right to work states in an effort to secure more business. Do you do all of your shopping in the small neighborhood stores that charge more or do you go to the big box stores because they are cheaper. Do you but items on the Internet to avoid paying sales tax? A large number of people do. Most people are trying to get the best cost possible. Why should it be different for a business/
Why is it that the right wingers here are all so bitter? We live in a great state in a great country and both are slowly getting better all the time. Women are under attack and that is serious, but with President Obama’s ability to use the veto pen I sleep well each night knowing that major harm will not be done on his watch. As the affordable care act is implimented day by day, I feel real progress is in the works to get us to a system of universal health care before too many years go by.
More and more states are recognizing increased equality for some of our legitimate minorities. More and more people are recognizing some religious institutions for what they are as they interfere in the political arena which is and should be secular. Having the rich pay a fair share for the benefits they have derived from our great nation is only just.
Maybe they are bitter because their guy doesn’t have a snowball’s chance to win in November. Romney or Santorum; makes no difference.
implemented! darn.
They do not derive their riches from the nation. You must be speaking about long term welfare and freeloaders.
The ‘rich’ are most likely two professionals with multiple degrees. They studied hard and work harder. You demonize them, I thank them. You demand govt takes their money, I hope someday my ability matches theirs and I earn that money.
Bitter? No. Scared for OUR future? You bet.
We paid for the roads they use to get their goods to market. That is just one example that can be repeated thousands of times. They do too derive their wealth from the nation…….unless you are talking about those who inherited theirs. That’s another story.
Our future is secure unless the right wing nuts succeed in taking us back to the dark ages.
And they pay dozens of taxes that pay for roads, bridges, etc. Straw man. So do their employees. US corps pay the highest corp tax. Keep trying.
The producers pay for everything. What do the freeloaders pay? Before you say sales tax, where does that income come from to pay the tax?
the point is, comcerned, that they could not do it themselves. You still don’t get it and probably never will. Sad.
concerned continues to make up things as the dialog develops.
In the small mind there are “producers” and “freeloaders”. Since the investors live off the fruits of someone elses labor, I guess they are the “freeloaders”.
MM Do you think investors just had money fall in their lap? Most of them worked hard to accumulate money to invest, money they paid taxes on when they earned it. You lump them in with the very small percentage of the population that makes multi-million dollar salaries. As was stated in the original letter, if there were no investors there would be no business. If you don’t think that is true then you need to talk to someone with an economics background that can explain it to you.
The producers pay for everything.
Ah yes…that Ayn Rand claptrap….
Investors aren’t really producing anything – especially if what they are investing in are derivatives and other debt-”products”.
Even Ayn Rand had enough sense to make her fictional whiny “producer” an engineer who actually produced something ….but then she conveniently overlooked all of the Government funded R&D and infrastructure that made that possible….
Capital gains made on investments that move, support or create jobs outside the U.S. should be taxed at a 99% rate. Make capital investments in companies that do not directly support the people of the U.S. then kiss your money goodbye, you greedy so-n-so!
Make a capital investment that actually does create, support or retain jobs here in the U.S. then you get taxed at 1%.
That’s my version of the 1%ers, versus the 99%ers.
What do you think of that?
“Nice that Kard had my last comment deleted. Sally”
The ficticious Kard strikes again. By the way, who is “Kard” today?
“MM Do you think investors just had money fall in their lap?”
Yes. Most of them were handed a pile by their families. Next question?
“When the tax rate on capital gains was lowered from 28 percent to 15 percent, the government saw an increase in capital gain tax revenue.”
The capital gains tax was reduced from 28% to 15% in 2001. Capital gains tax receipts that year were 100 billion dollars.
Year — Receipts (billions)
2000 — $119
2001 — $100
2002 — $58
2003 — $50
2004 — $61
2005 — $86
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8917/01-23-2008_BudgetOutlook.pdf
Myth. Busted.
concer — you have posted 6 of the 27 comments so far, and you haven’t stated a single fact. you rarely if ever back up any real numbers with a legitimate source. you should invest more of your time spent on actual research, rather than just ranting.
swmp — your numbers are ridiculous. $1600 withheld on $30k? i personally made $14K last year and had $1400 withheld. you are being dishonest. also, you claim that %45 of working people don’t pay taxes? that’s because they are in poverty. they pay state taxes, sales taxes… remember the seattle paper? “lowest 20% of earners pay 17.3% in taxes, while top earners pay 2%”?
and, the lowest two income brackets pay 5% capital gains tax, so the argument about retirees and middle class people is moot.
letter writer — the reason more people would choose to pay capital gains taxes when the rate goes down to 15%? BECAUSE THE RATE WAS LOWERED TO 15%! there is a reason mitt romney pays less than 14%; deferments. people will obviously shift their compensation toward the least taxed form of income. why do you think mitt has all of those investments in the first place? as ceo, he chose to have some of compensation in stocks form rather that payroll, so he could pay the lower rate. but income is income, and capital gains are income. gains are income. the gains should be taxes like regular income.
also, there is no risk in having a job?! what about when you lose the job? then what do you have? if you don’t have the resources to make investments, you are just out of luck. if you don’t have the resources to make those investments, then your are shut out of the low capital gains tax brackets.
why is a paycheck treated as less worthy in our tax code, than interest made off of people’s extra money they had laying around?
synergy |ˈsinərjē| (also synergism |-ˌjizəm|)
noun
the interaction or cooperation of two or more organizations, substances, or other agents to produce a combined effect greater than the sum of their separate effects : the synergy between artist and record company.
“It’s the economy stupid!”
And the success of the U.S. economy has always been because of synergy. It’s the chicken and the egg. You can’t have one without the other. The reason the U.S. economy has gone south is because the rich have abandoned the idea of synergy for personal profits for themselves and to hell with anyone else!
Any manufacturer who makes products to sell in the U.S. isn’t going to sell much in the U.S. if all the wages he pays are to veritable slave laborers in China.
The economy soured in the U.S. because government made laws that actually encouraged the so called “job creators” to create those jobs anywhere else but the U.S. That was under the Bush Administration. (Along with starting wars based on lies.)
Now, under the Obama Administration, that trend can be turned around to bring those jobs back home to the U.S. for American workers, and severely punish any American company that does not do that, by taxing them and their investors at a 99% rate as a start.
Let the greedy ultra-rich anti-American business owner and investors pay for his/her/their unpatriotic choice of screwing American workers and thus screwing the American economy just so he/she/they could personally and selfishly benefit and put their ill-gotten-gains into Cayman Island and Swiss bank accounts.
Jellee- these arguments are, for the most part, recycled. Do I need to link to irs.gov and show the bulk of taxes are paid for by the top earners, or is that common knowledge? Do I need to show that as a group the top 1%, top 10%, and top 20% all pay substantial and progressive effective rates?
President Obama just made a speech in Milwaukee WI, at the Master Lock Plant, saying that he is in favor of providing government support and tax incentives to American businesses who bring jobs back to the U.S., and taking away the incentives that have led to companies shipping American jobs out of America.
Now, as far as I am concerned, that is good tax policy and is Pro-Business.
Anyone have a problem with that?
Republicans will find a problem.
In 1986, St. Ronnie raised the capital gains tax from 20 to 28% which was one of many tax increases he implemented to correct his tax cuts of 1981 which, he recognized, were rapidly proving to be excessive. Reagan also took away the Federal tax deduction for state sales tax, which amounted to a big tax increase for citizens of this state. Under Reagan the numerous tax increases which followed his 1981 cuts were implemented to counter the burgeoning deficits, which were ballooning out of control.
Today, Reagan’s actions are called class-warfare and envy of the rich, whereas under Reagan the increases were called sound fiscal policy and achieving equity in the system.
concer — are you trying to convince me that rich people pay taxes? is that your whole point? really? http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=213
in my lifetime, marginal tax rate half been cut in half, from 70% in 1980 to 35% today, leading to the our gov’t working with 1960′s era budgetary funding.
Those top rates do not equal effective rates.
As an example, in the 90s the effective rate for the wealthiest was in the teens, even those the max bracket was almost 40%.
https://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=6051&type=0&sequence=1
And do you think 70% of one’s income should go to govt? Why? Why should one individual carry te burden for so many? Because he went to school, married a professional, and waited to have kids? Because they are responsible they should get punished?
Muck- all for bringing the jobs back home. Many industries are already doing that based on the superior performance of the American worker and increased cost of labor overseas. But now we have to make the business environment better here. Once they bring the jobs and mufacturing back, they cannot be declared evil by the left and nickel and dimed by the federal govt.
The Obamers cannot have it both ways. The POTUS and his advisors claim that national debt is not all that important, but squeal like stuck pigs for massive (class warfare) tax increases to cut the debt. Which is it? Wait, I’ll tell you. Pitting the middle class and below against the rich is a good reelection ploy. He’s also got the racial warfare thang all worked up again, too. If that man just went away at the end of this term, and let an American take the job, even Hillary, this country would be leagues ahead.
“massive (gratuitous insult removed) tax increases”
ROFL – the “massive” increase is from 35% to 38.5% on only a percentage of earned income.
Again – looking at the abysmal jobs creation numbers since the Capital Gains tax rates were cut, explain how low rates on the “jobs creators” are effective in encouraging the “producers” to actual produce jobs in America.