Buffett Rule

Last updated

Average tax rates for selected income groups under a fixed income distribution, 1960-2010. Average Tax Rates for Selected income groups Under a fixed Income Distribution, 1960-2010.jpg
Average tax rates for selected income groups under a fixed income distribution, 1960–2010.

The Buffett Rule is part of a tax plan which would require millionaires and billionaires to pay the same tax rate as middle-class families and working people. [1] It was proposed by President Barack Obama in 2011. [2] The tax plan proposed would apply a minimum tax rate of 30 percent on individuals making more than one million dollars a year. [3] [4] According to a White House official, the new tax rate would directly affect 0.3 percent of taxpayers. [2]

Contents

History

Distribution of average tax rates including individual income tax and employee payroll tax. Distribution of Average Tax Rates (Individual Income Tax and Employee Payroll Tax) Buffett Rule.JPG
Distribution of average tax rates including individual income tax and employee payroll tax.

The Buffett Rule is named after American investor Warren Buffett, who publicly stated in early 2011 that he believed it was wrong that rich people, like himself, could pay less in federal taxes, as a portion of income, than the middle class, and voiced support for increased income taxes on the wealthy. [5] The rule would implement a higher minimum tax rate for taxpayers in the highest income bracket, to ensure that they do not pay a lower percentage of income in taxes than less-affluent Americans. [6] In October 2011, Senate leader Harry Reid (D–Nev.) proposed a 5.6 percent surtax on everyone making over a million dollars a year to pay for new stimulus provisions, but the change did not go through. [7]

A White House statement released in January 2012 defined the rule as part of "measures to ensure everyone making over a million dollars a year pays a minimum effective tax rate of at least 30 percent ... implemented in a way that is equitable, including not disadvantaging individuals who make large charitable contributions." [8] The White House also stated that "no household making more than $1 million each year should pay a smaller share of their income in taxes than a middle-class family pays." [9]

The Buffett Rule was not in the President's 2012 budget proposal and the White House initially stressed it as a guideline rather than a legislative initiative. [10] The rule, however, was later submitted for deliberation as US Senate Bill S. 2059, Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012. [4] [11] On April 16, 2012, the bill received 51 affirmative votes, but was stopped by a Republican filibuster that required 60 votes to proceed to debate and a vote on final passage. [12] [13]

Possible effects

If enacted, the rule change would result in $36.7 billion per year in additional tax revenue ($367 billion over the next decade), according to a January 2012 analysis by the Tax Foundation, a think tank. [14] These figures assume that the 2001/2003/2010 tax cuts are not extended. If the 2001-2010 tax cuts do not expire as scheduled, estimated Buffett Rule revenues would total $162 billion over the decade. [15] An alternative study released that same month by the Citizens for Tax Justice, a liberal think tank which favors the change, stated that the change would add $50 billion per year in tax revenue ($500 billion over the decade). [8] The United States Congress Joint Committee on Taxation released a letter in March 2012 estimating that the Buffett Rule would raise $46.7 billion over the next decade. [16] The divergent estimates come about because of different assumptions about the details of the Buffett Rule. For example, the Joint Committee on Taxation assumes that many high-income taxpayers would reduce the amount of capital gains realized in one year to fall beneath the Buffett Rule threshold.

The estimated $47 billion would offset by 0.7% the $6.4 trillion increase in spending over the next decade estimated by the Congressional Budget Office, based on President Obama's 2013 budget plan. [17] Using the higher estimate from the Tax Foundation, the estimated $367 billion would offset by 5.7% the $6.4 trillion spending over the next decade.

The 2013 budget proposed by the Obama administration stated that the Buffett Rule should replace the Alternative Minimum Tax. [18] The Joint Committee on Taxation calculated that the Buffett Rule plus the repeal of the Alternative Minimum Tax would increase the deficit by $793.3 billion in the next decade. [19] The $793.3 billion loss projected did not take into account additional proposed measures, such as incremental increases in retirement age and payroll tax lifetime contributions raised to $190,000 by 2020, about $22,000 higher than it would be under current law. [20]

Part of the reason for the inequality in taxation is that revenue from long-term capital gains is taxed at a maximum rate of 23.8%. [21] It's not entirely clear how many individuals would be affected by the change. An October 2011 study by the Congressional Research Service found that a 30% minimum tax rate rule would mean up to 200,000 taxpayers, equivalent to 0.06% of all U.S. citizens, paying more. [14]

Reactions and public opinion

Support

Paul Krugman, The New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize–winning economist, wrote in January 2012 that "such low taxes on the very rich are indefensible". [22] He stated that "the economic record certainly doesn’t support the notion that superlow taxes on the superrich are the key to prosperity" asserting that since the U.S. economy added 11.5 million jobs during President Bill Clinton's first term, when the capital gains tax rate was over 29 percent, he thinks there's no real reason to keep from raising the tax rate. [23]

A CBS News/ The New York Times poll released in January 2012 found that 52 percent of Americans agreed that investments should be taxed at the same rate as income. [24] A Gallup poll released in April 2012 also found that 60 percent of Americans support the rule. A similar poll released later that month by CNN found that 72 percent of Americans support the idea. [25] [26]

Opposition

Representative Paul Ryan (R–Wis.), who was the chairman of the House Budget Committee, criticized the new tax provisions. He labeled it as class warfare and also stated that it would negatively impact job creation and investment. [27] Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.) said the conditions of the U.S. economy were ill-disposed to raising taxes. [28] House Speaker John Boehner (R–Ohio) has spoken against the proposed rule and said that, "there's a reason we have low rates on capital gains ... because it spurs new investment in our economy and allows capital to move more quickly." [24] Dana Milbank from The Washington Post criticized the proposed tax as a gimmick, stating that President Obama was prioritizing the Buffett Rule over the alternative minimum tax for political, not economic reasons. [29]

See also

Related Research Articles

A dividend tax is a tax imposed by a jurisdiction on dividends paid by a corporation to its shareholders (stockholders). The primary tax liability is that of the shareholder, though a tax obligation may also be imposed on the corporation in the form of a withholding tax. In some cases the withholding tax may be the extent of the tax liability in relation to the dividend. A dividend tax is in addition to any tax imposed directly on the corporation on its profits. Some jurisdictions do not tax dividends.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Progressive tax</span> Higher tax on richer source

A progressive tax is a tax in which the tax rate increases as the taxable amount increases. The term progressive refers to the way the tax rate progresses from low to high, with the result that a taxpayer's average tax rate is less than the person's marginal tax rate. The term can be applied to individual taxes or to a tax system as a whole. Progressive taxes are imposed in an attempt to reduce the tax incidence of people with a lower ability to pay, as such taxes shift the incidence increasingly to those with a higher ability-to-pay. The opposite of a progressive tax is a regressive tax, such as a sales tax, where the poor pay a larger proportion of their income compared to the rich.

Tax avoidance is the legal usage of the tax regime in a single territory to one's own advantage to reduce the amount of tax that is payable by means that are within the law. A tax shelter is one type of tax avoidance, and tax havens are jurisdictions that facilitate reduced taxes. Tax avoidance should not be confused with tax evasion, which is illegal. Both tax evasion and tax avoidance can be viewed as forms of tax noncompliance, as they describe a range of activities that intend to subvert a state's tax system.

A wealth tax is a tax on an entity's holdings of assets or an entity's net worth. This includes the total value of personal assets, including cash, bank deposits, real estate, assets in insurance and pension plans, ownership of unincorporated businesses, financial securities, and personal trusts. Typically, wealth taxation often involves the exclusion of an individual's liabilities, such as mortgages and other debts, from their total assets. Accordingly, this type of taxation is frequently denoted as a netwealth tax.

Tax amnesty allows taxpayers to voluntarily disclose and pay tax owing in exchange for avoiding tax evasion penalties. It is a limited-time opportunity for a specified group of taxpayers to pay a defined amount, in exchange for forgiveness of a tax liability relating to previous tax periods. It typically expires when some authority begins a tax investigation of the past-due tax.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States federal budget</span> Budget of the U.S. federal government

The United States budget comprises the spending and revenues of the U.S. federal government. The budget is the financial representation of the priorities of the government, reflecting historical debates and competing economic philosophies. The government primarily spends on healthcare, retirement, and defense programs. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office provides extensive analysis of the budget and its economic effects. CBO estimated in February 2024 that Federal debt held by the public is projected to rise from 99 percent of GDP in 2024 to 116 percent in 2034 and would continue to grow if current laws generally remained unchanged. Over that period, the growth of interest costs and mandatory spending outpaces the growth of revenues and the economy, driving up debt. Those factors persist beyond 2034, pushing federal debt higher still, to 172 percent of GDP in 2054.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Income tax in India</span> Form of taxation in India

Income tax in India is governed by Entry 82 of the Union List of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India, empowering the central government to tax non-agricultural income; agricultural income is defined in Section 10(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Income-tax law consists of the 1961 act, Income Tax Rules 1962, Notifications and Circulars issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), annual Finance Acts, and judicial pronouncements by the Supreme and high courts.

The economic policy and legacy of the George W. Bush administration was characterized by significant income tax cuts in 2001 and 2003, the implementation of Medicare Part D in 2003, increased military spending for two wars, a housing bubble that contributed to the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007–2008, and the Great Recession that followed. Economic performance during the period was adversely affected by two recessions, in 2001 and 2007–2009.

In the United States, individuals and corporations pay a tax on the net total of all their capital gains. The tax rate depends on both the investor's tax bracket and the amount of time the investment was held. Short-term capital gains are taxed at the investor's ordinary income tax rate and are defined as investments held for a year or less before being sold. Long-term capital gains, on dispositions of assets held for more than one year, are taxed at a lower rate.

The history of taxation in the United States begins with the colonial protest against British taxation policy in the 1760s, leading to the American Revolution. The independent nation collected taxes on imports ("tariffs"), whiskey, and on glass windows. States and localities collected poll taxes on voters and property taxes on land and commercial buildings. In addition, there were the state and federal excise taxes. State and federal inheritance taxes began after 1900, while the states began collecting sales taxes in the 1930s. The United States imposed income taxes briefly during the Civil War and the 1890s. In 1913, the 16th Amendment was ratified, however, the United States Constitution Article 1, Section 9 defines a direct tax. The Sixteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution did not create a new tax.

The phrase Bush tax cuts refers to changes to the United States tax code passed originally during the presidency of George W. Bush and extended during the presidency of Barack Obama, through:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carried interest</span> Fee paid to an investment manager.

Carried interest, or carry, in finance, is a share of the profits of an investment paid to the investment manager specifically in alternative investments. It is a performance fee, rewarding the manager for enhancing performance. Since these fees are generally not taxed as normal income, some believe that the structure unfairly takes advantage of favorable tax treatment, e.g. in the United States.

The economic policy of the Barack Obama administration, or in its colloquial portmanteau form "Obamanomics", was characterized by moderate tax increases on higher income Americans designed to fund health care reform, reduce the federal budget deficit, and decrease income inequality. President Obama's first term (2009–2013) included measures designed to address the Great Recession and subprime mortgage crisis, which began in 2007. These included a major stimulus package, banking regulation, and comprehensive healthcare reform. As the economy improved and job creation continued during his second term (2013–2017), the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire for the highest income taxpayers and a spending sequester (cap) was implemented, to further reduce the deficit back to typical historical levels. The number of persons without health insurance was reduced by 20 million, reaching a record low level as a percent of the population. By the end of his second term, the number of persons with jobs, real median household income, stock market, and real household net worth were all at record levels, while the unemployment rate was well below historical average.

The alternative minimum tax (AMT) is a tax imposed by the United States federal government in addition to the regular income tax for certain individuals, estates, and trusts. As of tax year 2018, the AMT raises about $5.2 billion, or 0.4% of all federal income tax revenue, affecting 0.1% of taxpayers, mostly in the upper income ranges.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010</span> 2010 Tax Relief Act

The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, also known as the 2010 Tax Relief Act, was passed by the United States Congress on December 16, 2010, and signed into law by President Barack Obama on December 17, 2010.

Political debates about the United States federal budget discusses some of the more significant U.S. budgetary debates of the 21st century. These include the causes of debt increases, the impact of tax cuts, specific events such as the United States fiscal cliff, the effectiveness of stimulus, and the impact of the Great Recession, among others. The article explains how to analyze the U.S. budget as well as the competing economic schools of thought that support the budgetary positions of the major parties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Deficit reduction in the United States</span> Economic policy debate

Deficit reduction in the United States refers to taxation, spending, and economic policy debates and proposals designed to reduce the federal government budget deficit. Government agencies including the Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the U.S. Treasury Department have reported that the federal government is facing a series of important long-run financing challenges, mainly driven by an aging population, rising healthcare costs per person, and rising interest payments on the national debt.

The United States fiscal cliff refers to the combined effect of several previously-enacted laws that came into effect simultaneously in January 2013, increasing taxes and decreasing spending.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012</span> Federal law in the United States changing taxation, "ATRA".

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (ATRA) was enacted and passed by the United States Congress on January 1, 2013, and was signed into law by US President Barack Obama the next day. ATRA gave permanence to the lower rates of much of the "Bush tax cuts".

The economic policy of the Donald Trump administration was characterized by the individual and corporate tax cuts, attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"), trade protectionism, deregulation focused on the energy and financial sectors, and responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

References

  1. ↑ United States. Congress (2012). Congrassional Record : Proceedings and Debates of the 112th Congress : Second Session. U.S. Government Printing Office. p.  5249.
  2. 1 2 Carrie Budoff Brown. "Obama's 'Buffett Rule' to call for higher tax rate for millionaires". Politico , September 17, 2011.
  3. ↑ "The Buffett Rule: a Basic Principle of Tax Fairness" (PDF). White House. April 2012. Retrieved April 17, 2012– via National Archives.
  4. 1 2 "S.2059 - Paying a Fair Share Act of 2012" (PDF).
  5. ↑ Buffett, Warren (August 14, 2011). "Stop Coddling the Super-Rich". The New York Times. Retrieved April 16, 2017.
  6. ↑ "US economy: New Obama plan to tax wealthiest". BBC News. September 18, 2011. Retrieved September 18, 2011.
  7. ↑ Jake Tapper. "Buffett rule tax set at 30 percent: Obama speech’". Archived January 28, 2012, at the Wayback Machine Yahoo News , January 25, 2012.
  8. 1 2 "CTJ Calculates Buffett Rule Would Raise $50 Billion in One Year and Affect Only the Richest 0.08 Percent of Taxpayers". Citizens for Tax Justice. January 27, 2012. Archived from the original on October 8, 2012. Retrieved January 30, 2012.
  9. ↑ "The Buffett Rule | The White House". White House. April 10, 2012. Retrieved April 17, 2012– via National Archives.
  10. ↑ Annie Lowrey. "The Buffett Tax Rule Is Really More of a Guideline". The New York Times , February 16, 2012.
  11. ↑ "Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - S.2230 - THOMAS (Library of Congress)". loc.gov. Archived from the original on December 16, 2012. Retrieved April 17, 2012.
  12. ↑ "Senate Blocks Buffett Rule With 51-45 Vote". Consumerist.
  13. ↑ "Bill defeat". USA Today. April 16, 2012.
  14. 1 2 Boak, Josh (January 26, 2012). "Buffett Rule's impact? W.H. won't say". The Politico. Archived from the original on January 28, 2012. Retrieved January 30, 2012.
  15. ↑ Williams, Roberton (May 2, 2012). "Why The Buffett Rule Would Raise More Revenue Than Critics Say". Forbes . Retrieved May 6, 2012.
  16. ↑ United States Congress Joint Committee on Taxation. "Memo On 'Buffett Rule' Revenue Estimates" (PDF). Retrieved April 11, 2012.
  17. ↑ Richard Rubin (March 20, 2012). "Buffett Rule Tax Bill Would Raise $47 Billion Over 10 Years". Bloomberg BusinessWeek. Archived from the original on March 22, 2012. Retrieved April 16, 2012.
  18. ↑ "Cutting Waste, Reducing the Deficit, and Asking All to Pay Their Fair Share" (PDF). Office of Management and Budget. n.d. Retrieved May 6, 2012– via National Archives.
  19. ↑ "The Buffett Tax Loss". The Wall Street Journal. April 13, 2012. Retrieved April 16, 2012.
  20. ↑ Sahadi, Jeanne (April 13, 2012). "Debt commission: What Obama's panel said". Money CNN Online. Retrieved May 6, 2012.
  21. ↑ Stein, Harry (June 25, 2014). "How the Government Subsidizes Wealth Inequality". Center for American Progress. Retrieved August 1, 2014.
  22. ↑ "The Case for the Buffett Rule".
  23. ↑ Paul Krugman (January 19, 2012). "Taxes at the Top". The New York Times. Retrieved January 30, 2012.
  24. 1 2 Caldwell, Leigh Ann (January 25, 2012). "Obama details "Buffett Rule," says millionaires should pay at least 30 percent tax rate". CBS News . Retrieved January 30, 2012.
  25. ↑ Memoli, Michael A. (April 13, 2012). "Gallup poll: 60% back Obama's 'Buffett Rule' - Los Angeles Times". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved April 17, 2012.
  26. ↑ Geiger, Kim (April 16, 2012). "Polls: Americans divided over taxes but support 'Buffett Rule'". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved April 17, 2012.
  27. ↑ "Rep. Ryan Accuses Obama of Waging 'Class Warfare' With Millionaire Tax Plan". Fox News Channel. September 18, 2011. Retrieved September 18, 2011.
  28. ↑ Eldridge, David (September 18, 2011). "GOP slams Obama's millionaire's tax as 'class warfare'". The Washington Times . Retrieved September 19, 2011.
  29. ↑ Dana Milbank (April 11, 2012). "Rebuffing Obama's gimmicky 'Buffett Rule'". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 16, 2012.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.