Teresa Heinz's 12.3% EFFECTIVE tax rate

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

If Teresa paid a "reasonable" effective tax rate of say 20%, we are talking about a deficit reduction of about a half a million dollars. I believe the deficit is 413MM.  Gee, find 825 more of these people and we have no deficit.  I hope the democrats are still proud of Teresa.

How did you decide on the "reasonable" rate?  The current GOP administration obviously doesn't believe this rate is "reasonable" because they capped capital gains tax rates at 15%! 

If you saying this rate is too low, then I absolutely agree!  It is the people in your party who believe that people like Teresa shouldn't have to pay much in taxes, because they will stimulate the economy and thereby increase revenues.

[CollectiveInterest]

If Teresa paid a "reasonable" effective tax rate of say 20%, we are talking about a deficit reduction of about a half a million dollars. I believe the deficit is 413MM.  Gee, find 825 more of these people and we have no deficit.  I hope the democrats are still proud of Teresa.

Yeah, you're only off by a factor of 1,000. The Bush-GOP deficit is $420 billion. Maybe when you learn the facts you'll change your mind about stuff? Or does the infallibility of George W. Bush trump reality?

[CollectiveInterest]

What does that have to with anything?

Philip, based on your angry and impulsive statements I doubted you have the temperment for a high-powered job.

Gov't does things that cost money. Gov't gets the money to do these things through taxes.

Philip, you seem to lack the maturity to grasp this fairly simple idea. And people who can't deal with this reality don't normally draw $200K+ paychecks.

I've said before that I'm 16. So no, believe it or not, I'm not making $200,000+ at 16 years old. I'm such a failure.

Maybe when you grow-up and actually have to deal with money you'll have opinions better grounded in reallity.

[A18]

I thought you were like 7 or something

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If Teresa paid a "reasonable" effective tax rate of say 20%, we are talking about a deficit reduction of about a half a million dollars. I believe the deficit is 413MM.  Gee, find 825 more of these people and we have no deficit.  I hope the democrats are still proud of Teresa.

The deficit is $600 BILLION a year.

[Pollwatch99]

If Teresa paid a "reasonable" effective tax rate of say 20%, we are talking about a deficit reduction of about a half a million dollars. I believe the deficit is 413MM.  Gee, find 825 more of these people and we have no deficit.  I hope the democrats are still proud of Teresa.

The deficit is $600 BILLION a year.

I stand corrected it's 413B.  I need to control my passion

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

If Teresa paid a "reasonable" effective tax rate of say 20%, we are talking about a deficit reduction of about a half a million dollars. I believe the deficit is 413MM.  Gee, find 825 more of these people and we have no deficit.  I hope the democrats are still proud of Teresa.

The deficit is $600 BILLION a year.

I stand corrected it's 413B.  I need to control my passion

$600 billion if you count money borrowed from SS, and unallocated money for Iraq.

[??????????]

TeReZa makes more money a year then Bush is worth! She makes 50 million a year according to her tax returns.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

A person who makes millions a year in capital gains pays only 15%, while a middle-class wage earner pays triple that (28% tax bracket plus 16% in payroll taxes)!

Middle-class wage earners do NOT pay higher than 15% on their capital gains.  15% is the MAX capital gains tax rate, regardless of your income level.

In fact, many middle-class wage earners pay less than 15% on their capital gains.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

A person who makes millions a year in capital gains pays only 15%, while a middle-class wage earner pays triple that (28% tax bracket plus 16% in payroll taxes)!

Middle-class wage earners do NOT pay higher than 15% on their capital gains.  15% is the MAX capital gains tax rate, regardless of your income level.

In fact, many middle-class wage earners pay less than 15% on their capital gains.

I was distinguishing between very rich people who make all their income in capital gains (who pay 15%) and middle class wage earners who make their income in wages, which are taxed at around 45% at the margins. 

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I was distinguishing between very rich people who make all their income in capital gains (who pay 15%) and middle class wage earners who make their income in wages, which are taxed at around 45% at the margins. 

Well, comparing investing (risk of losing 100%) with wage earning (ZERO risk) is kinda like comparing apples to coconuts, isn't it?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I was distinguishing between very rich people who make all their income in capital gains (who pay 15%) and middle class wage earners who make their income in wages, which are taxed at around 45% at the margins. 

Well, comparing investing (risk of losing 100%) with wage earning (ZERO risk) is kinda like comparing apples to coconuts, isn't it?

No, I think all kinds of income should be subject to the same tax structure.

But in any case, the original poster in this thread was complaining that Teresa paid a lower tax rate than most wage earners.  I was simply pointing out that wages were taxed at a much higher rate than capital gains (thanks to Republicans), and thus there is nothing underhanded about very rich people paying a lower rate than middle class people.   The system may be morally wrong, but there is nothing wrong with an individual paying their taxes according to the appropriate rates.

[dazzleman]

I was distinguishing between very rich people who make all their income in capital gains (who pay 15%) and middle class wage earners who make their income in wages, which are taxed at around 45% at the margins. 

Well, comparing investing (risk of losing 100%) with wage earning (ZERO risk) is kinda like comparing apples to coconuts, isn't it?

No, I think all kinds of income should be subject to the same tax structure.

But in any case, the original poster in this thread was complaining that Teresa paid a lower tax rate than most wage earners.  I was simply pointing out that wages were taxed at a much higher rate than capital gains (thanks to Republicans), and thus there is nothing underhanded about very rich people paying a lower rate than middle class people.   The system may be morally wrong, but there is nothing wrong with an individual paying their taxes according to the appropriate rates.

It was actually President Clinton who signed a large reduction of the capital gains tax, to 20%, in 1997.  So it isn't just a Republican policy.

Kerry's wife doesn't work, and therefore her income is passive, or unearned.  Kerry seeks to more heavily tax high income wage-earners, so I don't see how his plan addresses the huge tax gap between wage earners and those wealthy enough not to work.

While I am not a fan of Kerry or his wife, I think these low effective tax rates for people who live off investment income are a necessary evil, so to speak.  To raise those rates to ordinary income rates would discourage investment, depress the economy, and hurt wage earners as a whole through economic contraction.

But politically, these low rates of taxation for his loud-mouthed wife do create political problems for Kerry, given his (falsely) populist rhetoric.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No, I think all kinds of income should be subject to the same tax structure.

Then let investors write-off 100% of their losses, instead of just $3k/year.  A person can make $100k/year salary, lose $20k in the stock market, and still have to pay taxes on $97k.  If you want to make everything even, then make it even.

---

The system may be morally wrong....

Oh please!

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I was distinguishing between very rich people who make all their income in capital gains (who pay 15%) and middle class wage earners who make their income in wages, which are taxed at around 45% at the margins. 

Well, comparing investing (risk of losing 100%) with wage earning (ZERO risk) is kinda like comparing apples to coconuts, isn't it?

No, I think all kinds of income should be subject to the same tax structure.

But in any case, the original poster in this thread was complaining that Teresa paid a lower tax rate than most wage earners.  I was simply pointing out that wages were taxed at a much higher rate than capital gains (thanks to Republicans), and thus there is nothing underhanded about very rich people paying a lower rate than middle class people.   The system may be morally wrong, but there is nothing wrong with an individual paying their taxes according to the appropriate rates.

It was actually President Clinton who signed a large reduction of the capital gains tax, to 20%, in 1997.  So it isn't just a Republican policy.

Kerry's wife doesn't work, and therefore her income is passive, or unearned.  Kerry seeks to more heavily tax high income wage-earners, so I don't see how his plan addresses the huge tax gap between wage earners and those wealthy enough not to work.

While I am not a fan of Kerry or his wife, I think these low effective tax rates for people who live off investment income are a necessary evil, so to speak.  To raise those rates to ordinary income rates would discourage investment, depress the economy, and hurt wage earners as a whole through economic contraction.

But politically, these low rates of taxation for his loud-mouthed wife do create political problems for Kerry, given his (falsely) populist rhetoric.

I believe you're right that Kerry's plan would not tax capital gains at the same rate as wage income.  This was John Edwards's proposal, and was a major reason why I think he would have made a better candidate and president.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

No, I think all kinds of income should be subject to the same tax structure.

Then let investors write-off 100% of their losses, instead of just $3k/year.  A person can make $100k/year salary, lose $20k in the stock market, and still have to pay taxes on $97k.  If you want to make everything even, then make it even.

---

The system may be morally wrong....

Oh please!

I would agree that if capital gains are taxed at the same level as other kinds of income, then one should be able to use capital losses to offset any kind of income.

[??????????]

What does that have to with anything?

Philip, based on your angry and impulsive statements I doubted you have the temperment for a high-powered job.

Gov't does things that cost money. Gov't gets the money to do these things through taxes.

Philip, you seem to lack the maturity to grasp this fairly simple idea. And people who can't deal with this reality don't normally draw $200K+ paychecks.

I've said before that I'm 16. So no, believe it or not, I'm not making $200,000+ at 16 years old. I'm such a failure.

Maybe when you grow-up and actually have to deal with money you'll have opinions better grounded in reallity.

Collective,

How about we cool it down a bit and stop insulting Republicans and those who disagree with your "truths".

[CollectiveInterest]

What does that have to with anything?

Philip, based on your angry and impulsive statements I doubted you have the temperment for a high-powered job.

Gov't does things that cost money. Gov't gets the money to do these things through taxes.

Philip, you seem to lack the maturity to grasp this fairly simple idea. And people who can't deal with this reality don't normally draw $200K+ paychecks.

I've said before that I'm 16. So no, believe it or not, I'm not making $200,000+ at 16 years old. I'm such a failure.

Maybe when you grow-up and actually have to deal with money you'll have opinions better grounded in reallity.

Collective,

How about we cool it down a bit and stop insulting Republicans and those who disagree with your "truths".

Tell you what. When you Bush supporters grow-up and start dealing with reality instead of hallucenating your Neo Con never-never land, I'll stop pointing-out that you guys are completely immature and ignorant about policy.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I was distinguishing between very rich people who make all their income in capital gains (who pay 15%) and middle class wage earners who make their income in wages, which are taxed at around 45% at the margins. 

Well, comparing investing (risk of losing 100%) with wage earning (ZERO risk) is kinda like comparing apples to coconuts, isn't it?

No, I think all kinds of income should be subject to the same tax structure.

But in any case, the original poster in this thread was complaining that Teresa paid a lower tax rate than most wage earners.  I was simply pointing out that wages were taxed at a much higher rate than capital gains (thanks to Republicans), and thus there is nothing underhanded about very rich people paying a lower rate than middle class people.   The system may be morally wrong, but there is nothing wrong with an individual paying their taxes according to the appropriate rates.

It was actually President Clinton who signed a large reduction of the capital gains tax, to 20%, in 1997.  So it isn't just a Republican policy.

Kerry's wife doesn't work, and therefore her income is passive, or unearned.  Kerry seeks to more heavily tax high income wage-earners, so I don't see how his plan addresses the huge tax gap between wage earners and those wealthy enough not to work.

While I am not a fan of Kerry or his wife, I think these low effective tax rates for people who live off investment income are a necessary evil, so to speak.  To raise those rates to ordinary income rates would discourage investment, depress the economy, and hurt wage earners as a whole through economic contraction.

But politically, these low rates of taxation for his loud-mouthed wife do create political problems for Kerry, given his (falsely) populist rhetoric.

I believe you're right that Kerry's plan would not tax capital gains at the same rate as wage income.  This was John Edwards's proposal, and was a major reason why I think he would have made a better candidate and president.

I don't think there's much difference between their positions. The hard thing will be getting the Republican House to ever pass anything.

[Mikem]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Tell you what. When you Bush supporters grow-up and start dealing with reality instead of hallucenating your Neo Con never-never land, I'll stop pointing-out that you guys are completely immature and ignorant about policy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I'll tell you what.  How about you quit trying to characterize Republicans as underage hacks.  I'm sure there are a few more Dems and Independants fitting that description since we have all the stereotypical old misers filling our ranks.  Sounds like you are the one who needs to grow up by making a logical response instead of ad hominem attacks.

[CollectiveInterest]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Tell you what. When you Bush supporters grow-up and start dealing with reality instead of hallucenating your Neo Con never-never land, I'll stop pointing-out that you guys are completely immature and ignorant about policy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I'll tell you what.  How about you quit trying to characterize Republicans as underage hacks.  I'm sure there are a few more Dems and Independants fitting that description since we have all the stereotypical old misers filling our ranks.  Sounds like you are the one who needs to grow up by making a logical response instead of ad hominem attacks.

Have you read the premise of this thread?

[??????????]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Tell you what. When you Bush supporters grow-up and start dealing with reality instead of hallucenating your Neo Con never-never land, I'll stop pointing-out that you guys are completely immature and ignorant about policy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I'll tell you what.  How about you quit trying to characterize Republicans as underage hacks.  I'm sure there are a few more Dems and Independants fitting that description since we have all the stereotypical old misers filling our ranks.  Sounds like you are the one who needs to grow up by making a logical response instead of ad hominem attacks.

Have you read the premise of this thread?

Collective,

[CollectiveInterest]

If the shoe fits wear it.

You're just another ideologue that doesn't let facts and logic disuade you from what you "know" to be right.

[Huckleberry Finn]

Doesn't Teresa's low tax rate just show how much more important it is to raise taxes on the wealthy?  Why should we have a tax system where billionaires pay a much lower rate than the middle class?  Why should capital gains be taxed at a much lower rate than wages?   

America is not only one. We have same kind of taxation in Finland. It's mainly because money hasn't homeland, but people have. The general capital income tax percent is 28 and the dividend income tax is about 20. It was ZERO before current centre-left government raised it up. Middle class people pay usually 30-50 percent, people with big salary over 50.

 

[MODU]

Doesn't Teresa's low tax rate just show how much more important it is to raise taxes on the wealthy?  Why should we have a tax system where billionaires pay a much lower rate than the middle class?  Why should capital gains be taxed at a much lower rate than wages?   

No, we don't need to raise the rate.  We just need to curb the loopholes.