Skip to main content

While Grover Norquist maintains his no new revenues pledge, Republican legislators are reported to be sounding a more reasonable note about being flexible by softening their position on raising more money from taxes, admitting the need for additional revenues to put the country's finances in order.

Is this the basis of a fair compromise?  Are the republicans finally willing to defy Norquist for the good of the country?  We should be skeptical...

The answer can be found in what the GOP has put on the table: they have offered only to raise new revenues by reducing loopholes, all in exchange for no change in tax rates. That strange bargain is problematic and revealing.

Many have observed that there's a couple of problems with trying to raise the needed revenues from closing loopholes. One is that it's hard to raise the same amount of revenue you can get by raising rates.  The second is that the burden of closing loopholes will fall disproportionately on the middle class -- the very people Obama wants to protect.  So it seems that the GOP is aiming to both minimize the amount of new revenue and put its burdens on the middle class.

But that's just for starters.  The real reason why the GOP wants to offer reduced loopholes in exchange for keeping existing rates is that the very rich would be almost completely unaffected by closing loopholes. The rate increases that are coming, however, will hurt the rich.

Consider the GOP's presidential candidate, Mitt Romney.  A lot of people were taken aback when whey discovered that he was only paying a 13.9% rate on his 2010 taxes.  That low tax rate, widely perceived as unfairly low, helped boost President Obama's goal of not extending the Bush tax cuts for income over $250K past their January 2013 expiration.

So if we eliminate all tax deductions and closed every last loophole, how much would Mitt pay? A smidgen over 15%. Why still so little? Because Mitt's income is mostly from investment earnings, not wages, and under the current tax rates, investment income is taxed at 15% tops.

Compare that to what happens to Mitt on January 1st if nothing changes: his  investment income is going to get taxed a higher tax rate, some of it at a lot higher rate.

When the Bush tax cuts expire, the very rich will find their tax rates for capital gains go up from 15% to 20%, and their tax rates for dividends go from 15% to 39.6%. You can see why the GOP wants to keep the rates unchanged.

And something else happens on January 1st: investment income becomes subject to an additional 3.8% medicare tax as part of financing the Affordable Care Act (the ACA, aka Obamacare).  Combined, the expiring Bush cuts and the new ACA tax will raise Mitt's (and his fellow 1%ers') capital gains tax rate from 15% to 23.8% starting 1/1/2013. Talk about a financial hangover on New Year's day!

That's why Eric Cantor said, this morning, that Obama has to put the ACA on the table in any fiscal cliff talks.  The GOP wants the medicare tax on investments repealed and rate increases on investment income stopped -- all to keep the super wealthy from paying more in taxes.

The GOP may be trying to present a new image of moderation and compromise, but beneath the image they are struggling to find a way to shield their ultra rich backers from any increase in taxes.  Br'er Grover may yell and holler at the GOP not to throw him into the Briar Patch of closing loopholes, but we would only have ourselves to blame if we fell for his act.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Why is Everyone (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    General Hubbub
    Republican legislators are reported to be sounding a more reasonable note about being flexible by softening their position on raising more money from taxes
    Sellin this Spin, every word out of those 'supposedly' backing away from their pledge, which in our government one should Not be legislating by, is Still Sayin What They Said Before Related to Taxes, and McConnel still hasn't cleared his well plugged ears out yet as he's Still calling for Obama to lead by making the offers, which he's already spoken out numorous times about!!

    They haven't walked back a thing but are once again succeeding in making almost everyone 'think' they're moving!!!!!!!!!!

    What is legislating by 'pledge' called in modern political ideologies 'Communism' and a party doing so would be described as a 'Communist Party', rule by party line controlled by party bosses inside and out, most from the outside, of the government, no other but in dictatorships would you find legislators, paid to represent their people, doing policy by 'pledges' but in afore-mentioned!!

    Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

    by jimstaro on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 04:35:03 PM PST

  •  If they succeed in cutting out the Mortgage (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OooSillyMe

    Interest Tax Deduction, the middle class will no longer be able to purchase a home and the economy will come to a screeching halt. People will be voluntarily giving back their homes to the bank.
    I know I would and I'd do it under breech of contract. I would guarantee you either the Realtor or Mortgage company mentioned the mortgage tax deduction.
    Certainly the tax code at the time of purchase allowed it.
    I know I'd possibly lose, but I'd lose less than a 30 year mortgage would cost me with no interest deduction.
    The rich wouldn't feel the pinch at all, so at best it would be revenue neutral and at worst it would be revenue negative.

    "If you tell the truth, you won't have to remember anything", Mark Twain

    by Cruzankenny on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 04:50:28 PM PST

    •  You're joking, right? Please tell me you're joking (0+ / 0-)

      The Mortgage Interest Deduction is a subsidy to the high priced coasts.

      According to the IRS, 2/3 of households do not itemize.
      IRS.Gov: Tax Stats at a Glance

      Percent that claim standard deductions (TY 2009) [3]  65.7%
      Percent that claim itemized deductions (TY 2009) [3]       32.5%
      Since you have to itemize to claim the MID, none of these people benefit from the MID.

      -7.75 -4.67

      "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose."

      There are no Christians in foxholes.

      by Odysseus on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 05:07:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Or... (0+ / 0-)

      ...perhaps it would be another nail in the McMansion coffin, and not necessarily the end  home ownership in general.  

      I'm not always political, but when I am I vote Democratic. Stay Democratic, my friends. -The Most Interesting Man in the World

      by boran2 on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 06:22:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site