“Sadly, an administration that promised it would focus on jobs is wasting yet another day on a political event that won’t take a single person off the unemployment line,” Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, said Wednesday.
“With millions out of work, gas at nearly $4 a gallon, and the election still seven months away, Republicans are calling on the President to join us in support of the dozens of jobs and energy bills that have passed the House but are stalled in the Democrat-led Senate. We should be focused on jobs and energy legislation that can pass—not tax-hike show-votes designed to fail,” McConnell said.
The Buffett rule is a fraud and next to the faux war on women, it is one of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated on the American people.
Stephen Hayes said it well on Fox News’s Special Report Tuesday when he said that the 30% income tax rate on capital gains “would raise less than 6% of the total cost of the stimulus” and “would raise roughly the same amount in one year” as “the U.S. government accumulates in debt in a single day.” Hayes said the Buffett rule was totally meaningless, not serious, and reporters should do their job and put this in perspective.
The sad thing is that Stephen Hayes is right. The media is going along with this hoax and pretending that the Buffett rule will make the difference. Buffett didn’t even define the rule the way Obama is defining it – check his video at the end to see how confused he is. This is nothing more than a political ruse.
Obama explained his Buffett Rule with a host of millionaires nodding in agreement on Wednesday. He even pretended he was another Reagan who actually did lower taxes, which is not what Obama has in store for us.
Did anyone ask the millionaires present why they don’t pay extra taxes – they are allowed to do that. Obama pretends he represents the middle class and the American Dream which is the opposite of what he actually represents.
Here is his speech on the subject -
Obama is not telling the American people the truth. As noted in the WSJ, “the top 1% of earners in America pay about 40% of the nations federal income taxes–nearly double the share they paid in 1980. Mayor Mike Bloomberg disputed the Buffett doctrine and said that, “A very small percentage in this country pay a big chunk of the taxes.”
Our tax system is already overly progressive as noted in the same WSJ article. -
An article in the Economist states the answer quite simply: “In America the income share of the rich has grown faster than the share of taxes paid.”
Data from the Tax Foundation bears this out. Between 1987 and 2008, the share of income controlled by the top 1% grew to 20% from 12%. That signals a total share growth of 67%. During the same period, their share of taxes went to 28% from 24%, suggesting share growth of 17%.
In other words, the top 1% share of income grew nearly five times faster than their share of taxes.
Obama had an opportunity to get his taxes on the rich and refused to do it. If he was serious about taxing the rich, why didn’t he take the opportunity?
Back in July, House Speaker John Boehner agreed to a budget deal with President Obama: $1.2 trillion in agency cuts, smaller cost-of-living increases for Social Security recipients, $250 billion in Medicare savings partly achieved by raising the eligibility age, and $800 billion in new taxes. President Obama is the one who rejected the deal and then lied about it. Read here: Blog American
Obama, instead of actually doing something to create jobs, is back talking about the Buffett Rule.
Warren Buffett is not exactly a pillar of the patriotic taxpayer. He won’t even pay his own taxes.
Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. owes $1 billion in back taxes, yes, it’s true, and been true for a decade. And it’s not the first time he’s tried to cop out of paying taxes. [Newsmax]
Buffett said he should be paying more taxes and that he pays less taxes than his secretary to make a Democratic political point.
What is interesting is that Buffett is embroiled in a protracted legal battle with the Internal Revenue Service over a bill that one analyst estimates may total $1 billion. Buffett doesn’t want to pay the taxes!!!!
Buffett gets to promote Obama, make himself look ever the patriotic philanthropist, and make millions of dollars all in one fell swoop, but it’s all a sham, he’s a sham, a shill, hypocrite, a total phony.
If Buffett thinks he should pay more, why doesn’t he drop the suit and pay? The hypocrisy here is mind-boggling. Click to learn more about Warren Buffett, the hypocrite extraordinaire.
Here’s an excerpt from Newsmax and the LI Post: “The notation means that Berkshire Hathaway’s own auditors have probably said that $1 billion is more likely than not owed to the government,” the ALG report explained.
That $1 billion represents about 0.2 percent of the company’s $372 billion in total assets, according to ALG.
As Wilson points out, “On one hand Buffett advocates for paying more taxes, but when it comes to his own company’s taxes, he has gone through great lengths to pay less. That’s rich.”
Here are the key section from Berkshire’s report:
“We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (‘IRS’) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years at the IRS Appeals Division within the next 12 months,” the report states. “The IRS has completed its examination of our consolidated U.S. federal income tax returns for the 2005 and 2006 tax years and the proposed adjustments are currently being reviewed by the IRS Appeals Division process. The IRS is currently auditing our consolidated U.S. federal income tax returns for the 2007 through 2009 tax years.”
Wilson also points to a prior tax fight the company fought. “Apparently, this is not the first time that Berkshire Hathaway has tangled with the IRS. They fought a 14-year battle over the dividends received deduction. That case was just resolved in 2005,” Wilson reports..
Buffett has profited from his relationship with Obama. For instance, Buffett loaned Bank of America $5 billion and was granted warrants that enabled him to buy 700 shares cheaply. When Obama worked out the mortgage deal, Buffett’s stake increased in value by $154 million. Check it out: The Washington Free Beacon.
Obama uses Buffett’s secretary as an example of someone who pays higher taxes than the rich which is patently false since they are comparing apples to oranges [Check it out here] but what is really interesting is his secretary is rich. Debbie Bosanek, Warren Buffett’s secretary, likely makes between $200,000 and $300,000. Tell me again, why should we worry about her tax rate?
From Forbes -
She was the President’s chief display of the alleged unfairness of our tax system – a little person paying a higher tax rate than her billionaire boss.
Bosanek’s prominent role in Obama’s “fairness” campaign piqued my curiosity, and I imagine the curiosity of others. How much does her boss pay this downtrodden woman? So far, no one has volunteered this information.
We can get an approximate answer by consulting IRS data on tax rates by adjusted gross income, which would approximate her salary, assuming she does not have significant dividend, interest or capital-gains income (like her boss). I assume Buffet keeps her too busy for her to hold a second job. I also do not know if she is married and filing jointly. If so, it is deceptive for Obama to use her as an example. The higher rate may be due to her husband’s income. So I assume the tax rate Obama refers to is from her own earnings.
Insofar as Buffet (like Mitt Romney) earns income primarily from capital gains, which are taxed at 15 percent (and according to Obama need to be raised for reasons of fairness), we need to determine how much income a taxpayer like Bosanek must earn in order to pay an average tax rate above fifteen percent. This is easy to do.
The IRS publishes detailed tax tables by income level. The latest results are for 2009. They show that taxpayers earning an adjusted gross income between$100,000 and $200,000 pay an average rate oftwelve percent. This is below Buffet’s rate; so she must earn more than that. Taxpayers earning adjusted gross incomes of $200,000 to $500,000, pay an average tax rate of nineteen percent. Therefore Buffet must pay Debbie Bosanke a salary above two hundred thousand.
We must wait for further details to learn how much more than $200,000 she earns. The tax tables tell us about average ranges. For all we know she earns closer to a half million each year, but that is pure speculation…
The Obama plan isn’t exactly what Buffet was calling for. He seems very confused.