CBO: Buffett Tax would only bring in $47B over 10 years

3,949
1,197
Joined
Nov 16, 2001
For those who haven't been keeping up, we are running deficits of $1.5T per year.  This is equivalent to 3% of the total annual budget deficit.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-03-20-13-02-33


Report: Just $47B from Buffett rule tax on rich

By ALAN FRAM
Associated Press
[table][tr][td][table][tr][td]
AP Photo/Charles Dharapak[/td][/tr][/table][/td] [/tr][/table][table][tr][td]
[/td] [/tr][/table][table][tr][td][table][tr][td]
[/td][/tr][/table][table][tr][td]
[/td][/tr][/table][/td] [/tr][/table][table][tr][td][table][tr][td]
blank.gif
[/td][/tr][/table][/td] [/tr][/table][table][tr][td]
[/td] [/tr][/table][table][tr][td][table][tr][td]
[/td][/tr][/table][/td] [/tr][/table]
A

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A bill designed to enact President Barack Obama's plan for a "Buffett rule" tax on the wealthy would rake in just $47 billion over the next 11 years, according to an estimate by Congress' official tax analysts obtained by The Associated Press.

That figure would be a drop in the bucket of the over $7 trillion in federal budget deficits projected during that period. It is also minuscule compared to the many hundreds of billions it would cost to repeal the alternative minimum tax, which Obama's budget last month said he would replace with the Buffett rule tax.

The alternative minimum tax, originally aimed at ensuring that wealthy Americans pay taxes despite deductions and other breaks, has begun affecting upper middle-class families. Congress acts every year to minimize its impact.

The Buffett rule has become a leading symbol of Obama's and congressional Democrats' election-year efforts to persuade voters that they are the party championing economic fairness. Republicans have mocked it as one aimed at scoring political points that would have little real budgetary impact.

The plan is named for billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who has said taxes on the rich are too low. Obama has proposed requiring that people earning at least $1 million annually pay at least 30 percent of their income in taxes, but has provided few details.

In an analysis provided to The AP on Tuesday, Congress' Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that a bill introduced last month by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., attempting to enshrine Obama's proposal into law would collect $47 billion through 2022. The measure has little chance of advancing soon, especially before the November elections.

Earlier Tuesday, the joint committee had projected that the tax change would net the government $31 billion over that same period of time. In a letter, committee officials said they had earlier overestimated the degree to which wealthy taxpayers would shield their income from the higher taxes by limiting the capital gains they would enjoy from profitable sales of property.

"Now that we have this analysis, I hope the president will stop the class warfare and start leading by putting out real proposals to bring down our debt, get rid of the AMT and reform our broken tax code," Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said in a written statement, using the alternative minimum tax's acronym.

Hatch's Finance committee GOP aides requested the study.

Whitehouse said other groups, including the respected bipartisan Tax Policy Center, have estimated that the proposal could earn more than the joint panel had estimated.

"No matter how you slice it, that's real money that could help bring down our deficit. Most important: It's simply the right thing to do," he said in a statement.

Whitehouse's bill would require people making at least $2 million a year pay at least 30 percent of their earnings in taxes, though they could deduct certain amounts for their charitable contributions. The tax would be phased in for people earning at least $1 million annually.
 
I'm thinking about setting up a 501c3 so I can send all my money to a non taxable non-profit organization.
 
it's not the wealthy's job to pull this country out of the hole the poor put it in.
getting taxed 300k if you make 1mil is horse !**$
 
[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]Good luck with that.[/color]

igvxu8.jpg


[color= rgb(255, 0, 0)]I'm guessing the real number is around 18-22
30t6p3b.gif
[/color]
 
I am not taking a side in this discussion but....

The CBO has a horrible track record of accurate projections on well .....anything.

So take their "numbers" with a grain of salt.
 
Originally Posted by a55a5in11

it's not the wealthy's job to pull this country out of the hole the poor put it in.
getting taxed 300k if you make 1mil is horse !**$
really?.. you think it was "the poor" that put the US economy in its current state?
 
I'm starting to consider voting for Romney. Between this and Obamacare proving to be a bust that will actually cost more people healthcare when employers elect to pay the $2000 penalty over what could be 20 grand for employee coverage, I'm very disappointed.
 
wow i was sitting here thinking they would start taxing the buffets so people wouldnt get fatter lmao.
 
Originally Posted by a55a5in11

it's not the wealthy's job to pull this country out of the hole the poor put it in.
getting taxed 300k if you make 1mil is horse !**$
indifferent.gif
 
That estimate is probably overly optimistic. The CBO is staffed by economists but they are required to act like accountants. They have to assume that higher taxes will not change behavior. After higher earners hide their income and change their behavior, the Treasury will probably receive less money.

This "Buffet Rule" was never meant to even put a dent in the national debt. It was purely political. Preside Obama wanted to look like he was addressing our soaring national debt as well as to shift the economic discussion from high unemployment, inflation and barriers to upward mobility and towards a discussion over income disparity.
 
Originally Posted by Mycoldyourdone

wow i was sitting here thinking they would start taxing the buffets so people wouldnt get fatter lmao.

I did too, was thinking 47B for taxing buffets? why didnt they do it earlier lol
 
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
@ "only" 47 billion

That 47B could be used for education or something

Or like a couple of drone strikes.
 
Originally Posted by Thizz Marley

Prolly a dumb question. But what is a 1.5 trillion deficit? Where is the money coming from?
Basically we're overspending by 1.5trillion. We have an annual budget, and we're going over it by 1.5 trillion. Some of the money is borrowed, some is printed....
Essentially, we're just spending money that we have no way of paying back. 
 
Originally Posted by MissDivaDoll

Originally Posted by a55a5in11

it's not the wealthy's job to pull this country out of the hole the poor put it in.
getting taxed 300k if you make 1mil is horse !**$

roll.gif


2njvjbq.gif


roll.gif
Got me dying EARLY in the damn morning.
 
Originally Posted by Mycoldyourdone

wow i was sitting here thinking they would start taxing the buffets so people wouldnt get fatter lmao.

me too! I was like "man fat people are gonna be pissed!"
 
Originally Posted by Thizz Marley

Prolly a dumb question. But what is a 1.5 trillion deficit? Where is the money coming from?

It is the amount the government spends above and beyond what they collect in tax revenues.

The money is coming from who ever is buying US Government bonds.
 
Originally Posted by MissDivaDoll

Originally Posted by a55a5in11

it's not the wealthy's job to pull this country out of the hole the poor put it in.
getting taxed 300k if you make 1mil is horse !**$

roll.gif


2njvjbq.gif

roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif
roll.gif


47 bn is a lot, but not enough obviously, but charging 30 percent?! I'd be outraged, that I should pay that amount towards the government if I mkae that kind of living from work...
 
Tax rate should go back to 94% like the good old days. Then we'd have some damn equality.

We'd be out of debt in like 2 years.



Problem rich folk?
 
Originally Posted by solegit08til

Tax rate should go back to 94% like the good old days. Then we'd have some damn equality.

We'd be out of debt in like 2 years.



Problem rich folk?

Dude you can tax at a 100% and it wouldn't make a dent. Only around 50% of people in this country pay a Federal Income Tax, and the 1% hides their earnings in non-profit organizations. So taxing isn't the issue, it's a spending issue.
 
Back
Top Bottom