Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

TAXES: Don’t burden ‘rich’ small businesses

Letter by Cathy Phillips, Gig Harbor on July 26, 2012 at 1:47 pm with 23 Comments »
July 26, 2012 2:14 pm

When politicians talk about “taxing the rich,” this includes not just rich individuals but small businesses earning more than $250,000 – regardless of how many salaries this money supports.

Many small businesses are now faced with 30 percent health care premium increases this coming renewal period and possibly the same next year, thanks to the unaffordable health care act.

This could be a disaster for many small businesses. Encourage legislators to tax rich individuals, not small businesses.

Leave a comment Comments → 23
  1. LeePHill says:

    “Many small businesses are now faced with 30 percent health care premium increases this coming renewal period and possibly the same next year, thanks to the unaffordable health care act.”

    Is that what the US Chamber said to send in your LTE?

    With mandatory insurance, there is no reason for premiums to rise. You’be been taken again, by the conservative business consortium.

  2. menopaws says:

    Well, by all means–let’s stick it to the policy holders across the board rather than your business providing employees with important benefits. All along, taxpayers have footed the bill for the uninsured and that apparently is okay—as long as YOUR business doesn’t have to pony up any $$$$……..As one of those taxpayers, I feel like everyone’s free ride needs to end. Those who REFUSE to buy insurance , those who refuse to offer it—-your freeloading days are over…….And, the rest of us are tired of paying YOUR freight. the insurance pools are up and running–be a grown-up and start paying your own way.

  3. Cathy needs to learn the tax code and where the $250K figure comes in. The letter by itself in its current form is nonsense.

  4. Once again, the leftists come out against the producers.

    Rather than encourage people to be self reliant, they want to screw people that work and take a risk, pay taxes and employ people.

  5. You really should get your facts correct before posting Ms Phillips.

    The tax increases would be on people. That would include people who own small businesses but only if they have taxable income (taxable profits) over $250,000 for a couple.

    The business can have millions of revenue, and even millions of profit as long no single individual owner made more than $200,000 taxable profit, and no married individual made more than $250,000 taxable, they wouldn’t have to pay an extra penny. And if they did make more than $250,000 taxable (for a couple) the extra 3.9% would only apply to the part above $250,000.

    Hardly a disaster for any business.

  6. Many small businesses? Yeah… a whole 3%. Big deal.

  7. bobcat1a says:

    jellee, shame on you for using facts. That’s unfair. Only ideology matters.

  8. philichi says:

    My wealthy business owner friends tell me that they really are not going to fret this. They will simply work a little less, hire a few less people, and not expand. Most are tired of the Obama battle anyway. Boy that will surly lead to a great economy!

    Why are you lefties all so surprised every week when the new unemployment numbers come out bad? Is it good? Do you want more people on food Stamps?

  9. “Hardly a disaster”. That is metric for success? Lol. Even you acknowledge it is an economic negative.

    BHO himself stated that he knows taxing the producers has a negative effect on tax receipts. Look it up. Emotion “fairness” rules over reason and economics.

  10. LeePHill says:

    philichi…”hire less people”….

    Again…you demonstrate your lack of knowledge of business. If a business is providing goods and services to a market and the want for those goods and services increase, you hire more people to meet the demand. No one hires people just because they have extra money.

    It’s frightening to think that you claim to know business and others trust you.

  11. Wow Hill, I think you are getting it. So short term tax breaks for hiring does nothing because demand has not changed. Glad to see you disagree with BHO on job creation and policy.

  12. menopaws says:

    Why is it my responsibility or yours to foot the healthcare bills for her small business?????? that is the one question Republicans REFUSE to answer……Her job creation isn’t a charity I choose to support, is it?

  13. No meno, the question you refuse to answer is why should I have to pay for anyone else’s healthcare? Or this business owner. Health is an individual responsibility. She is being forced to subsidize this failed plan of cost shifting/no savings.

  14. philichi says:

    LeeHill, you are wrong. All decisions are made on the margin. Meaning, choices are made in increments. If you are a dentist and you make over $250,000 per year, as you get to keep less and less of your next revenues, you will work less and less. It is simply human nature. The dentist will take a few hours off, perhaps even an extra day. He will send an assistant home for that day. All of this will gradually slow an economy that needs to grow. That is how Europe works, that is how the Obama world works.

  15. olympicmtn says:

    And by 2013 your estate will be taxed a whopping 50%!!!!!

    Get ready for families to go broke.

  16. menopaws says:

    CT&–You are reality challenged…We already are paying for other people’s healthcare………in higher rates to cover those uninsured visits to the emergency room………..That is the CURRENT reality of this horrible health care for profit and shareholders system……….We cover those costs NOW. The one brilliant part of your hated “Obamacare” was it finally penalized those who freeload off the rest of us who pay our premiums……We pay those costs now and those who can afford insurance but choose not to buy it have gamed the system and our wallets for years……….Let them get penalized………we all have spent lots of time and our money covering their free ride. And, it increased the size of the pool to make it affordable for those who truly want insurance and just can’t afford the ever escalating premiums………Every time some small business owner whines about this it makes me furious…They go to their Chamber of Commerce meetings, lobby in Washington and continue to shift those costs onto US…….That isn’t free enterprise–that is theft—pure and simple.

  17. Those who “freeload” now are not the rich or middle class, the ones who will pay the mandate turned tax. The illegals with no income (filed) will pay nothing. The poor will pay nothing.

    All this did was shift costs.

    By the way, a family member (outside of Wa) needed insurance. He was making next to nothing. It was incredibly cheap through the state. I know others in different states that have been through the same situation. Bottom line is it is already subsidized by producers, businesses, and taxpayers enough.

  18. menopaws says:

    Get real—-your family member was young, with no pre-existing conditions……….Anyone over age 50 without insurance can’t get it now…….that is a fact……Pre-existing condition—no chance……..Have cancer? Costs hit one million–you are dropped because you have reached the policy limit……..That is NATIONWIDE and any Dr. will tell you that the insurance companies treat healthcare as a bottom line profit decision………I am tired of subsidizing Chamber members who figure their obligation is to shove these costs on other consumers rather than act like responsible employers…………You on the right act as if health care in this country is just wonderful. It is a cesspool of incompetence and greed………And, everyone is paying for those who choose to walk away from their obligations , but still require care……..It isn’t just poor and illegals—over half the Chamber of Commerce members do NOT pay for group health policies for employees……I REFUSE to subsidize them anymore. They are well heeled freeloaders with lobbyists in DC. Their free ride is harming everyone….but, then, they can afford to buy off congress, can’t they?

  19. http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/06/why-hasnt-anyone-signed-up-for-the-high-risk-health-insurance-pools/239833/

    Meno- I could not make it all the way through your rant, and I guess you do not care for the truth, but get your info from sources other than political speeches.

    Talk to your personal broker about that. Talk to your broker about that.

    Talk them both about the devalued dollar. Talk to them about estate planning. Talk to them about every tax and finance decision BHO, Harry and Nancy kicked down the road.

  20. but small businesses earning more than $250,000 – regardless of how many salaries this money supports.

    Nice little confounding of information there – attempting to make income tax (which is on NET income) equivalent to WA’s B&O tax (which is on GROSS income).

    That $250K tax bracket is for PROFIT by the “small” businessman AFTER all of his expenses.

  21. And by 2013 your estate will be taxed a whopping 50%!!!!!

    Get ready for families to go broke.

    I am guessing what you are referring to is the compromise that Obama reached with REPUBLICANS in Congress that included a sunset provision.

    Since the only bills that the REPUBLICANS are putting forward to address the provision to reduce the exemption to “only” $1 million as opposed to over $5 million and raise the rate from 35% to 50% are things that are completely symbolic with “Death Tax” in the title and an attempt to get rid of all taxation on estates – it is likely that there will be no compromise bill that will go forward that the Dems will be willing to support.

    Blame the REPUBLICANS for this election year B.S. Demand that the G.O.P. start listening to what St. Ronnie said about “politics is the art of the possible” – stop tilting a windmills for effect and pass some commonsense legislation that both Parties can support.

  22. And…..though surviving family members will be less well off with 500K instead of $1mill in inheritance – they aren’t really going to “go broke”.

  23. commoncents says:

    philichi – if your wealthy friends don’t want to provide the service or product because they don’t want to get taxed that extra 3% then someone else will. That’s the beauty of our system. Someone will always step in for those that aren’t willing to take the risks. However, those that won’t risk…won’t be rewarded. Sounds to me like your friends have lost the entreprenurial spirit and likely should be employed by those that are willing to take risks rather than be employers themselves.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0