Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Emile Vidrine who wrote (580611)	8/11/2010 11:35:06 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576186

Buffet who made some 2.5 billion in dividends paid less taxes than his secretary. Know he didn't. He paid vastly more than his secretary. He may have paid a lower percentage than his secretary, but if that's the case he's a bit unusual for the extremely rich, since while they do pay a lower percentage in federal taxes than the merely very rich, they do pay a higher percentage than the middle class, even the upper middle class. And that's not counting the corporate tax paid by the companies they own (or their share for their share of ownership in the company), its also not counting the interest forgone in lieu of paying taxes when they own municipal bonds. And if the wealthy but much less than extremely rich are paying less than the extremely rich its because their tax rates are too high, not because the extremely rich are paying too low of tax rate. Two and half billion in dividend income and zero taxes Dividends for his stock holdings are not tax free. "Zero taxes" is nonsense even if you don't count his share of the corporate taxes based on his ownership share (and reasonably you should). To the extent he does avoid tax liability, by donating to charity, 1 - Is that really such a bad thing? and 2 - Raising the tax rates won't get that money.