I don’t know if anything’s going to get done in Congress in 2012, but one thing is becoming clear – Senate Democrats will try to put Republicans up against the wall on taxes. They already have on the record multiple instances of Republicans voting almost in unison against millionaire’s surtaxes. Now we’ll see votes on fossil fuel subsidies and that alternative minimum corporate tax the President mentioned in the State of the Union and other tax fairness issues:
Democratic leaders are embracing a new strategy for tax reform that leans on President Obama’s State of the Union call for tax fairness and economic equality [...]
“We intend to pursue a different kind of tax reform that borrows from the president’s proposals,” Schumer, a leader in crafting Democratic messaging, told reporters.
Such a strategy would seem to have little chance of winning Republican support, making it seem more like election-year politics than a way to actually pass a bill.
I don’t think there’s any question about that. But it’s also a prelude to trying to extract concessions down the road. Witness, for example, Sheldon Whitehouse’s Buffett rule bill:
Picture this scenario. The Senate holds a high-profile vote on a proposal focused directly on implementing the Buffett Rule, one that would bring the current tax rate for millionaires paying lower rates on investments up to 30 percent. This, at at exactly the moment when the GOP is picking a nominee who is worth $250 million and is personally benefitting to an enormous degree from the current rate — one that’s lower than many middle class taxpayers pay.
It could happen. I’m told that Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is set to announce a proposal to do just this. The Senate Dem leadership is not commenting on this idea, but Dem leaders are looking for ways to hold votes on the agenda Obama laid out in his State of the Union speech. This would accomplish that perfectly.
Harry Reid has spoken positively about the general idea of a vote on the Buffett Rule, so it seems likely that Whitehouse’s idea will get serious consideration.
Whitehouse will call it the “Paying a Fair Share Act,” and it will set up a minimum tax for millionaires at 30% on their adjusted income after deductions.
Polling shows a good deal of popularity for this idea. I personally would probably rather just move up the capital gains tax, which is the source of most of the lower tax rate among millionaires, and be done with it. But there is a political advantage to bills like these for obvious reasons. Before the end of the year Republicans will be successfully painted as the protectors of the rich and connected, more willing to raise taxes on the poor than on millionaires. And in all likelihood they’ll have a Presidential nominee who is the living embodiment of that type of rich, connected person using the tax system to their advantage.




24 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
no, David, I think it is a good idea to enable seniors and others with AGIs under 250k to pay a lower cap gains tax than the truly wealthy.
perhaps even 0 for an AGI under 50k and 10% for 100k and 15% for 150k.
I dont know that the 30% needs to start at a million.
Maybe 250k or 300k, just to keep the rhythm going.
Typical Dem kabuki. Introduce a bill you know won’t pass — and you wouldn’t vote for if it could — so you can look good before the election.
All lies, all bullshit, all the time. That’s the Democrats.
Enough with the drama. You don’t know what you are talking about. Winning elections is the only thing that matters. If your ilk hadn’t screwed up the election for Democrats in 2010 we would already have something like the Fair Share Act in place.
It was DEMOCRATS who voted to extend the Bush tax cuts for just the middle class and have them go up for the wealthy, which Republicans filibustered, but I’m sure you have conveniently forgotten.
Bullshit. The tax extension was kabuki. All the Dems had to do — if they really wanted to end the Bush tax cuts for the top 1%-2% was let ALL the tax breaks expire on Dec. 31, 2010, then come back in January with a new bill to reinstate those breaks for those making less than $200K or $250K. This would have forced the GOP into either caving-in, or going on record as opposed to tax relief for 98% of the country. Of course, the problem with that strategy is that it would have ended up killing the tax break for most Dems in Congress AND their big money bosses/contributors.
The asshole in the WH screwed up the 2010 elections — giving folks who voted for him in 2008 NO reason to vote D again.
Phuck the Democrats in Congress and all those who think they care a wit about the 99%. The Democratic loyalists are as diseased as the Republican loyalists.
and you think “elections” still matter? What a fool but then the powers that be depend on fools like you.
Winning elections is the only thing that matters.
Actually, governing well, for the people, is the only thing that matters, something that Obysmal forgot around January 2009.
2012 could have been so much easier.
AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen David Dayen:
How about simply crankin’ up the capital gains tax to 30% AND ending the Bush tax cuts. I’m afraid that the Democrats are playin 3 card monte here and will simply end up lowerin’ the highest tax rate to 30% from 35% instead of flippin’ the conservative monologue of reducing the capital gains tax. We all know that we need at least 3 more tax brackets above $250,000 ending at at least 50% AND we need a capital gains tax that is lower than the highest regular income bracket but higher than the rate workin’ folks pay.
The canard about lower capital gains taxes being incentive for investment must be blown out of the water and the Democrats are not doin’ the job so far.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, THERE WILL BE NO JUSTICE WITHOUT CONFISCATORY TAXATION!!
There is no difference between the two corporate parties.
Citizen Bluetoe2:
At ease patriot…you just gotta stop shootin’ at your own troops. Callin’ “Democratic loyalists” diseased simply does the fascists job for them…ask the labor unionists, the socialists and the democratic liberals in Wiemar Germany how the communist tactic of demonizin’ the non-fascist liberals worked out. No brother Bluetoe, just aim at the right targets before you pull the trigger.
Our friend “Jake” just signed up two days ago so he could troll here.
Citizen jake2492:
You been snookered, citizen…the Democrats did indeed vote for extendin’ the middle class tax break when they knew that it wouldn’t go anywhere and it was our Democratic President who compromised with the fascists and extended the tax breaks for everyone and lost the Democratic majority in the House as a result.
That’s okay. Maybe he and the other trolls will learn something…hopefully.
This Sheldon Whitehouse is as much of a disappointment as the Obama Whitehouse. Oh, and he’s another much-touted principled legal genius, fresh off “as violent a betrayal of the U.S. Constitution as one can imagine, literally” and settling comfortably into this month’s Dem phony hero rotation.
Wasn’t the Alternative Minimum Tax supposed to close loopholes that very high earners used to get much lower marginal tax rates?
Now AMT falls on incomes at about 80th percentile – upper middle class. 99th percentile is able to avoid it.
So how did that amendment pass and become law if neither Karl Rove nor Diebold machines were born yet?
Rumor has it that the federal income tax law chiefly ensured that no one else would be able to amass the kind of wealth that Rockefeller, Morgan, Carnegie, and such had amassed, that those families would rule forever.
Now that there are numerous billionaires, we have a second tier of ownership who scratch the backs of the countless millionaires, who all get to vote early and often.
I tried all afternoon to post a comment to the Book Salon, but the FDL server kept error-messaging my submits. I asked if occasional surtaxes are stagflationary and if occasional tax rebates are inflationary.
It’s kabuki….You really think millionaire Dems in the Senate are going to
pass legislation that impact ‘emselves…..look if you do,I am selling the Brooklyn Bridge for 50 bucks.
Like BeachPopulist pointed out above,Dems had the opportunity to when they held the majority in both chambers of congress but think that they can fool Americans once more into buying their bullshit at election time.
Don’t be surprised folks if the Employee Free Choice Act suddenly makes another comeback.
Exactly BM and Beach. These dems are the millionaires, the 1 percent.
About we change the tax code from Swiss cheese TO AMERICAN CHEESE. By this I mean plug all the f’n loopholes, because regular folk can’t afford very expensive attorneys. Only in America, if your rich and make a million, you can get to pay taxes on 100,000.
“Whitehouse will call it the “Paying a Fair Share Act,”
Nooooo….it’s the Buffet Rule you political moron. Buffet suggested it. People respect him as non-partisan, the ultimate capitalist. His name on it is PERFECT.
Repeating the meaningless Congressional jargon totally takes the political power out of the tax proposal.
Q: How many Democrats does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A: Depends on how far you bend over
too late to this thread to have an impact but important to post for peeps reading after the fact;
this is the way to lose the debate, “fairness” is subjective, what’s fair to us is not fair to them
this SHOULD read;
Senate Democrats Line Up Message Votes on Tax Equality, So the Lower Classes Aren’t Paying the Bills of the Rich”
when regressive taxes are considered lower class pay FAR less then the upper class, it’s not a subjective point of view like “fair/unfail” it’s mathematical fact
correct that fact and the fairness follows
the whitehouse will not do what will get this bill passed, and that will be calling it “the tax equalizing bill”…which of course it still does not come close to equalizing tax burden but it’s a step