Well, maybe not pouncing, but, arguing, but, if the data shows this, is there any argument? Well, CNN sure gives it ago in defending the bill
Americans of all incomes would see their federal taxes rise under the climate and health care package that was negotiated last week between Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and moderate Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, according to data from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation released Saturday by Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee.
However, the analysis takes into account the indirect effect of the bill’s provision to impose a 15% minimum tax on certain corporations. Economists assume companies would then pass along part of their tax increase to employees by reducing their after-tax wages and job opportunities. Also, shareholders would take a hit since the value of their stock holdings, including those held in pensions and mutual funds, would likely decline.
Well, yes, because that’s what happens when you raise taxes on a specific group, it gets passed around. This is Economics 101. Of course, CNN and Democrats like in Government Economics, which is divorced from The Way Things Work In Reality Land.
Republicans are pointing to the report as proof that the package, which Democrats hope to push through the evenly divided Senate through the reconciliation process so they wouldn’t need any GOP votes, would violate the pledge by President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats not to raise taxes on those earning less than $400,000.
But that’s a “bogus argument,” said Steve Rosenthal, senior fellow at the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, calling it “more of a gotcha kind of thing.” The President and Democratic leaders have promised not to directly raise taxes on Americans earning below that threshold, he said.
Oh, well, if it’s indirect, that’s OK, right?
Federal taxes would increase by $16.7 billion on American taxpayers earning less than $200,000 next year, according to the JCT. And those making between $200,000 and $500,000 would see their levy jump by $14.1 billion. Those with incomes above half-a-million dollars would be hit with a $23.5 billion increase.
No biggie, right?
By 2031, when the new energy credits and subsidies are set to provide an even greater benefit to higher-income Americans, those earning below $400,000 are projected to pay as much as two-thirds of the additional tax revenue collected that year, according to the Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee.
Oh, so, middle and lower class citizens will be paying the bulk while the rich are hooked up?
The ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ Is A Lie, Pure And Simple
If Democratic lawmakers had to comply with federal truth-in-advertising laws, they’d all be up on charges for the blatantly false name given to the “Inflation Reduction Act.”
President Joe Biden claimed last week that “this bill will, in fact, reduce inflationary pressure on the economy.” In fact, it won’t. It was never meant to.
The University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School examined the bill. Here’s what it concluded.
“The impact on inflation is statistically indistinguishable from zero.”
Because it’s not about dealing with inflation, it’s about the Watermelon (green on the outside, red on the inside) agenda, with a few perks thrown in for voting blocks.
Worse, “the Act would very slightly increase inflation until 2024 and decrease inflation thereafter.”
In other words, it would add inflationary pressure today, when inflation is already running red hot, draining worker wages, and causing pain and suffering across the land.
Who cares what it does years from now, when, unless Biden really screws things up, inflation should be back to normal anyway?
How bad will Biden make it while taking executive action after the GOP retakes the House and Senate?
My last month’s check was for 11000 dollars… Everything I did was basic online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this office I found over the web and they paid me 95 bucks each hour… Attempt it yourself….Check this site.. Read more
Under Reagan in the 80s the tax burden shifted with the corporate tax going down the burden shifted to individuals.
The rich paid less the poor more
They were supposed to trickle down on us.
When corporate tax was high they had a choice of paying big tax or reducing their tax liability by reinvesting it into the company. Low tax meant the ability for those profits to be taken out weakening the company but personally enriching its owners
When you read someone saying, “Under Reagan in the 80s the tax burden shifted with the corporate tax going down the burden shifted to individuals,” you know that that someone doesn’t have even the slightest grasp of economics.
Corporations pay no taxes! Corporation simply collect taxes from the end users of their goods or services in the prices that they charge. If they cannot collect enough in sales to cover their taxes, they lose money and eventually go broke. But politicians, Republicans as well as Democrats, think that the voters are too stupid to realize this.
The tax burden shifted to individuals because of two things: First the democrats reneged on their promise to CUT SPENDING and second the democrats refused to balance the budget. The Reagan tax cuts were based on fiscal cooperation with a party of communists, grifters and liars so it was doomed to fail.
Hairy your communist proclivities notwithstanding you really have a thin understanding of economics and business and an even lesser awareness of human nature. You have cemented your mind into commie thought even while living a great life in a country provided to you by capitalists. You are an ungrateful pig.
FJB
Politicians know that enough voters are that stupid.
When this idiotic bill fails to result in what we are told it will result, the Democrats will claim that it’s all Joe Manchin’s fault, for demanding a slimmed-down bill.
When was the last time that a bill based on economic projections actually resulted in those economic projections being realized?
Some economists make the case that corporate “taxes” be eliminated, yet economists cannot agree on who ultimately pays the tax! Anyway, people, not corporations, pay taxes.
But there is little question that corporate “taxes” skew markets and add little to the nation’s coffers. Shareholders, the economy and workers pay for the tax. End it. The multibillion dollar tax avoidance industry (lawyers, consultants and CPAs) will squawk, but that money is better spent on productivity.
There is little question that payroll taxes, which account for nearly 40% of US receipts and supposedly shared between employer and worker, actually falls on workers.
There is little question that the US taxation system is unfair, economically counterproductive and needs a complete overall. The American working class needs relief.
“Flat” and “Fair” tax schemes still benefit the wealthy.
Regressive state and local taxes also take some 10% of personal income.
Ya know Dowd, for once in your life you had me nodding in agreement while reading your first four paragraphs. Then you had to go and fuk it up with your commie class envy shit. Ya just had to make it a political statement rather than an economic one with “Flat” and “Fair” tax schemes still benefit the wealthy.” Do all and every flat and/or fair tax ideas only benefit the wealthy? Have you ever explored them? Don’t regressive taxes also benefit the wealthy by placing the burden on the lower incomes rather than the higher?
You want taxes to make citizens financially equal. That’s not what taxes are for. You seem to think if I make more money than you for some reason I should be penalized for my productivity. Why is that? Should a janitor and a CEO make the same money? Should a sex and drug addict make more money than a cancer researcher?
Taxes are there to raise money to run the functions of the government. Maybe you want the government to have too many functions. Or maybe you see taxes as the Great Equalizer punishing those who are more productive, imaginative, inventive or just plain luckier than you?
Sadly for those first four paragraphs I started to think you became an adult and dumped the childish commie crap. Ya fooled me.
FJB
Just Dang, LGB, you caused me to actually read some of Dowd’s drivel. Yes, he started to make a little sense then fornicated it all up with the commie crap, again. All taxes are regressive. Some level of taxation is necessary for the operation of government functions, we can discuss those functions later. A fundamental in taxation is that only “the wealthy” pay taxes since the poor don’t have anything to take.
I keep telling you that Jeff or down is mentally ill. He is under the impression that it is his job to protect all underlings. That is the issue with him in that he thinks he is so superior to blacks that he must be their voice and savior. Kind of like the great white hunter in Africa stories.
He does not understand that the top 50% of earners in the US pay almost all taxes, so if you reduce taxes then of course you will benefit the upper crust as they are paying the greater proportion. Now if he responds to this he will begin to blabber about the poor people forced to pay payroll taxes, so unfair in his view.
The guy is nuts.
Yep.
Teach2,
You are so full of shit. Why you cunnies only consider income taxes is bizarre. Your worship of the rich plutocrats has been systematically killing the working class of America for over four decades. Payroll taxes which account for 40% of federal taxes are paid exclusively by the working class. Sales taxes are paid by the working class.
You claim your sockpuppet persona was once a doctor who got rich from Medicare and Medicaid payments.
Don’t take the word of your handlers at FOX and Gateway. Read about taxes for yourself.
See, crazy as bat shit.
LGB,
You misunderstand. We DO understand that you, a government employee, want the gravy train to keep running.
No, people shouldn’t all make the same income. But Oprah ($315 million/year) LeBron ($121 million), Beyonce ($115 million), Giannis Antetokounmpo ($81 million), James Harden ($74.4), Naomi Osaka ($59 million) should pay a higher rate than a kindergarten teacher.
Americans who receive pay for their actual labor pay effectively 12.4% to Social Security on their first $147,000 of income.
We should all understand that rewards and social value are unrelated. A cancer researcher, police officer, fire fighter or a kindergarten teacher are more socially valuable than an NBA player or rapper, but that’s the price we pay for our economic system. But we can certainly shift some of the burden from the teachers to the wealthy.
Of course, the wealthy and their bought and paid-for gov’t officials like it the way it is. They prefer the 100 million+ in the working class carry the burden.
Can a CEO really be productive enough to “earn” over $100 million/year? In addition many CEOs sit on multiple corporate boards accumulating stock and options as well a $70,000 a year for four meetings a year. The tax code advantages corporations to where the CEO’s family gets to fly for free on the corporate jets. Curiously, CEO and executive pay keeps skyrocketing but they still get hired!
Our 800 or so BILLIONAIRES have twice as much wealth as the bottom 50% of earners (families earning less than $69,000 per year).
As an aside, we’ve noted several of the cun-menters here admit to being gov’t employees, two former government contractors and a millionaire paid by the gov’t to house illegal aliens!! But someone arguing for tax fairness is a communist. You guys are a riot.
First, I have no idea why you felt it necessary to shift into attack mode since I did agree with the beginning of your comment. But You need to know I am not a millionaire although my father is 100 times over and as a real estate developer and property owner worked very hard for his money. I don’t think you are in a position to determine who should earn what or how much each job is worth. Do you? Are you Joseph Stalin? Or God?
I will argue for tax fairness any day of the week along side of you but not if the power to tax is used as a political club to beat people you don’t like. And not as long as you all keep pissing money away on trains to nowhere, private investments to make your friends rich like Solyndra or warring with Russia to keep Hunter’s laundry operating.
You also snidely stated “You misunderstand. We DO understand that you, a government employee, want the gravy train to keep running.” I see. Since I was a fire fighter I want government dole? Or did you make that callous statement because now I am a fire inspector and try to make buildings safe for YOU? Either way I was never a “government employee” I was serving people like you all my life and was paid by people like you all my life. I was not attached to the democrat party or any other party. My total loyalty belonged to getting people like you out of harms way. Period. I didn’t sit at a desk in some patronage job collecting a check for watching kiddie porn and going to “Gay Pride” or “Climate” events on the public dime. I ran into burning buildings to save democrats, blacks, and anyone else in peril. It was my job. Now my job is to try and insure houses are built in the safest way possible for the same reason, to protect the public.
I think billionaires and such are ridiculous. If you notice all our billionaires got there by sucking at the teat of government. If the government today is still doing what it has done for the last 60 years and the democrats control Congress and the WH then whose fault is it? If you guys are gonna keep pissing money away on bullshit then taxes will go up. And you can try and tax away the billionaires but they will just move somewhere else like the French did.
FJB
LGB,
Notice that Jeff finds issues with everyone. In my case he thinks that somehow I became rich off of Medicaid patients. In the past we called that taking care of the poor.
As I said he is mental.
If you say the government should spend les, well his only remedy is to stop SSI rather than eliminating government agencies.
Totally mental.
Whatever our Johnny says, the opposite is usually true. The Reagan presidency began to he era of “the rich” paying a higher share of the total tax bill
Whatever our Jilly says, the opposite is usually true. When the proportion of “the rich” increases their share of the “total tax” bill increases!
Put another way, if you drop the income tax rate 25% on “the rich”, but you increase the percentage of “the rich” 50%, their “total tax” bill (that is, the aggregate that all “the rich” pay, added together). This is a common ploy of apologists for “the rich”.