“Nevadans and Americans across the country agree that we can strengthen the middle class by adopting a balanced fiscal policy that requires millionaires and billionaires to pay a little more. In July, the Senate passed a bill to cut taxes for the 98% of Americans and 97% of small businesses making less than $250,000. House Republicans should stop trying to protect the wealthiest Americans from contributing their fair share and pass this bill immediately. Middle class Americans will have more opportunities to succeed when we level the playing field and make tax policy fairer.” Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) 11/19/12″ (emphasis added)
In order to effectively expound on this message it is necessary to plant oneself firmly in the Reality Based World, and to dismiss some common misconceptions being promoted by the plutocrats and their GOP allies.
#1. When the GOP says “your taxes will be raised” they are not talking to 98% of the American public who earn less than $250,000 in adjusted gross income annually. The Obama Administration’s proposal is to allow the Bush Tax cuts to expire on earnings above $250,000; and to KEEP the Bush era tax rates in place for those individuals earning less than $250,000 in adjusted gross income annually.
#2. When the GOP says taxes will increase on small businesses, they are including those 3% of “small businesses” which are lobby shops, major law firms, large hedge funds, etc. They are NOT speaking of the 97% of American small businesses which are small partnerships, single proprietorships, or small corporations which constitute the backbone of the American economy.
#3. Social Security and Medicare are called “entitlements” because they are earned benefits, which individuals have paid for and therefore are entitlements. These programs are not the problem, they are simply the target of choice from the Republican leadership which wants to cut Social Security and privatize Medicare. These programs have NO place in budget negotiations concerning the reduction of the federal debt.
#4. The legislation to which Senator Reid refers is S. 3412. The terms of which can be generally summarized as:
“The Senate bill (S. 3412), passed on July 25, 2012, would extend current tax rates for lower- and middle-income persons, would increase tax rates on higher-income persons, would extend for one year (through 2013) certain tax provisions that expire at the end of 2012, and would patch the alternative minimum tax for one year only (2012).” [source]
#5. “Harry and Louise” style ads from the Edison Electrical Institute (DefendTheDividend) notwithstanding, S. 3412 and the Obama Administration proposals are NOT an attack on retirement savings. Remember the threshold levels: “Individuals with incomes above these threshold levels, would have some of their itemized deductions and personal exemptions limited by phase-outs, would have a 20% rate on dividends and long-term gains, and would face tax rates of 33%, 36% and 39.6%” [source] The current rate for investors is 15%.
Who would be affected by the Obama Administration’s tax proposals on capital gains? Information from the Tax Policy Center is helpful.
Things to note — there are NO changes for those individuals in the bottom four income quintiles. Only those individuals who are in the TOP income brackets (the top quintile, especially those in the top 1% or the top 0.1%) would be affected by the proposed changes in tax treatment of dividends.
#6. There is NO correlation between low tax rates and economic growth. The non-partisan Congressional Research Service came to this conclusion after studying data from the last 65 years.
“The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie.
However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities.” [CRS pdf]
In short, the only economic feature impacted by a reduction in tax rates is income inequality. Nothing says “Support The Plutocrats and Financialists” better than saying we can’t raise taxes on the top 2% without cutting earned benefit programs like Social Security and Medicare.