SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (60666)1/2/2013 10:59:35 AM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
High Earners Facing First Major Tax Increase in Years
By LAURA SAUNDERS
January 1, 2013, 9:31 p.m. ET

The bill approved in Congress to avert the so-called fiscal cliff would bring the first major tax increase on high earners in 20 years.

While leaving income-tax rates in place for most Americans, taxpayers with more than $400,000 in taxable income or couples with $450,000 would see the top marginal tax rate rise to 39.6% in 2013 from 35% in 2012. For income earned below that level, the 2012 rates would be permanently extended.

Taxes on long-term capital gains, dividends and estates also would rise for wealthy taxpayers.

The House of Representatives passed the bill late Tuesday night, even though some Republicans in the House said the bill didn't contain enough government-spending cuts. The bill had passed early Tuesday in the Senate. Any final version signed into law by President Barack Obama could look different.

According to the bill, Americans at all income levels would see a two-percentage-point jump in the employee portion of the Social Security tax. It will return to 6.2% in 2013 after a stimulus rate of 4.2% expires.

But most of the changes in the bill affect high earners. All told, more than 90% of the tax increases in the bill would fall on households with income of $1 million or more, said economist Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group in Washington.

For a couple with one child and $1 million of income, including $250,000 of itemized deductions, the tax increase from higher rates and other provisions taking effect next year would run almost $37,000 over what they paid in 2012, according to estimates made by Dave Kautter, an official with the Kogod Tax Center at American University.

"It would be higher if more of their income is from investments, both spouses work or they have more children," said Mr. Kautter.

The bill includes some less-obvious tax increases as well. For instance, it revives two tax increases that lapsed in 2010 that will affect a large number of affluent earners, as opposed to just those earning millions of dollars.

One of these tax increases will be in the form of the personal exemption phaseout. That provision reduces or eliminates the benefit of the personal exemption. That exemption was $3,800 per person for most individuals in 2012. Under the bill it would phase out for couples with $300,000 or more of adjusted gross income, or singles with $250,000.

Another tax increase being revived is the "Pease" provision, a complex limitation on itemized deductions. Under the bill, it would eliminate up to 80% of deductions for couples above the $300,000 threshold, and singles above $250,000. The provision, named after former Rep. Donald Pease (D., Ohio), affects all deductions, including charitable donations and mortgage interest.

The formula, in effect, adds about one percentage point to the top tax rate, including the top rate on capital gains, tax experts said. As a result, "Many people who think they've dodged higher rates will actually have backdoor tax increases," said Mr. Kautter.

For millions of wage earners, the most immediate effect of the bill would be the payroll-tax increase, which would reduce their take-home pay. For an individual earning the maximum 2013 cap of $113,700 or more, the increase would amount to nearly $200 per month.

Because of all the intricacies involved, it will take up to four weeks after a law is signed for many workers to know exactly what their 2013 take-home pay will be, according to Michael O'Toole, an official of the American Payroll Association, a group of 21,000 payroll managers. The 2013 tax-filing season also is likely to be disrupted by Washington's wrangling. Normally it opens in mid-January, but this year it might be delayed till mid-February or later. As a result, many filers won't be able to receive tax refunds as early as they normally do.

"Congress's delays have pushed back the repayment of interest-free loans to the government for millions of taxpayers," said Lawrence Gibbs, a former IRS commissioner now with the Miller & Chevalier law firm in Washington, referring to tax refunds. The average refund is approaching $3,000, according to IRS data.

The bill would raise rates on long-term capital gains and dividends for top-bracket taxpayers to 20% for 2013 from 15% in 2012. Meanwhile, the 15% rate would continue to apply to taxpayers in the 25%, 28%, 33% and 35% income tax brackets. People in the 10% and 15% brackets would continue to have a zero rate on capital gains and dividends.

The bill permanently and retroactively adjusts the alternative minimum tax—originally designed to limit deductions for the highest earners—so that millions of middle-income taxpayers wouldn't be subject to it. The current fix expired at the beginning of 2012.

The estate- and gift-tax exemption would remain $5 million or more per individual. But the current 35% top tax rate on amounts above the exemption would increase to 40% in 2013.

Provisions allowing deductions for $250 of teachers' classroom expenses, tuition and related expenses, and state sales taxes in lieu of state income taxes would be extended, as would the $100,000 charitable donation of IRA assets by account owners 70 l/2 and older.

The bill would extend for five years the American Opportunity Tax Credit. For many taxpayers this dollar-for-dollar credit is worth up to $2,500 and therefore the most valuable education benefit. It also would extend for five years the current versions of the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit, which are claimed by many lower-income workers making up to about $50,000.

The bill also includes a one-year extension of current "bonus" depreciation rules, which allow businesses to deduct up to 50% of the cost of a wide variety of property and equipment, excluding real estate.

online.wsj.com



To: Hope Praytochange who wrote (60666)1/8/2013 9:22:48 AM
From: Peter Dierks  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 71588
 
Tables Are Turned in Debt Ceiling Fight
Fight against President Obama’s overspending is winnable
By: Grover Norquist
1/8/2013 05:15 AM

The 2001 and 2003 “Bush tax cuts” were enacted with an expiration date because 60 votes are required in the Senate to make a tax cut permanent. Other tax cuts such as the “patch” limiting the Alternative Minimum Tax and the Research and Development Tax Credit would lapse every two years giving politicians an opportunity to “sell the same horse” again and again to voters and campaign contributors.

Hence the “fiscal cliff” of an automatic tax increase scheduled for Jan. 1, 2013 that would result in taxes increasing $500 billion in that one year alone as all these “temporary” tax cuts lapsed together. Only legislation passed by the Democratic-controlled Senate, the Republican House, and signed by President Barack Obama would stop the tax increases.

The world was upside down. Normally it takes the House, Senate and president acting together to raise taxes. Now it would take all three to stop any or all of the tax cuts from lapsing—and from taxes increasing on all Americans.

This Alice in Wonderland situation flowed from the modern Democrat Party’s hostility to tax reduction. Back in 1981 the Reagan tax cuts were made permanent. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 reduced the top rate from 50 percent to 28 percent—permanently.

The legislation passed by the House, Senate and now signed by the president that makes 85 percent of the Bush tax cuts permanent is a bittersweet victory or defeat. Income tax rates fall for 99 percent of Americans. Those reductions are now permanent. And yet Americans rightly worry about Obama’s ability to force the top rate to automatically jump back to Clinton’s 39.6 percent from Bush’s 35 percent. Obama won his class warfare pound of flesh.

One hundred and fifty seven House Republicans voted “no” on the legislation to make most of the Bush tax cuts permanent out of understandable frustration that there was no vote or action they could have taken to restore the full Bush tax cut.

So now what?

Now the tables have turned. The income tax rates and important credits and deductions are now permanent. It takes an affirmative vote by the House and Senate to increase taxes ever again. (Good luck with that, Mr. President.)

And what about spending? Were we not promised jillions of dollars in spending reduction in return for tax increases? Was that not the mantra of the Washington Establishment, the promise of the 2010 bipartisan panel that came to be known as the Simpson-Bowles commission? That was always a fool’s errand, the Lucy-and-the-football ploy that defeated and humiliated Republicans in 1982 and 1990.

We now leave a battlefield where the proponents of bigger government had the upper hand—the default position was a $500 billion a year tax hike—to one where the default position is cut spending.

Three virtuous “fiscal cliffs”

There are now the three virtuous “fiscal cliffs.” First, the sequester. If Congress does nothing, unless the House, Senate, and President Obama agree on an alternative, there is an automatic sequester of $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years. One hundred billion dollars in spending cuts a year—automatically. House Republicans have already offered an alternative savings package of the same amount that shifts the cuts from defense to other areas.

The second virtuous cliff is the debt ceiling Obama is spending—again—at a rate that runs up more than $1 trillion in deficits each year. He must come back hat in hand to ask for a debt ceiling increase. The “Boehner rule” first applied with great effect in 2011 requires a dollar-for-dollar savings to “pay” for any debt ceiling hike. Obama wants/needs $1 trillion dollars in debt ceiling—so, he needs to come up with $1 trillion in reduced spending. Or not increase in the debt.

In 2011, conservatives won a $2.5 trillion spending cut in return for the higher debt ceiling.

The third lever for conservatives in the fight to limit federal spending is the fact that the Democrats in the Senate no longer do budgets. It is too embarrassing to write and vote on budgets that clearly run up trillions in debt. So our federal government operates on a series of “continuing resolutions” that allow money to be spent for a month or six months or a year.

Now Republicans in the House can offer Obama another month of “allowance” in return for actual cuts in spending. This worked in early 2011 and was abandoned as a strategy only because the slow pace of progress frustrated them. Now Republicans understand that slow progress is the only road to limiting the damage Obama’s spending is doing. There is no partner available for a grand bargain. Obama does not wish to reform entitlements or end his Chicago style “pay to play,” “pork for the boys” tax and spend policies.

Three levers to control spending. This time they are in our hands.

There is great anger that Obama could force higher tax rates on small businesses simply by saying no. Now is the time to channel that anger and energy into the very winnable fight against Obama overspending.

Grover Norquist is president of Americans for Tax Reform. Follow him on Twitter: @GroverNorquist.

humanevents.com