A new analysis of presidential tax plans
Up until now, the most comprehensive independent analysis of the tax cut plans put forth by the presidential campaigns of Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain has come from the Tax Policy Center in Washington.
Deloitte Tax added another perspective today with the release of its 14-page analysis.
“Upper-income taxpayers have the most to gain under McCain’s plan and the most to lose under Obama’s,’’ the Deloitte report states. “Both candidates have pledged to maintain the Bush tax cuts for middle- and low-income individuals. However, McCain would go one step further than Obama by keeping the top individual tax rate of 35 percent and keeping the top rate on capital gains and qualified dividends at 15 percent. ‘’
A copy of the report can be found at:
 www.deloitte.com/us/familiarcallforchange.
| 
Email This
Advertisements
top rate taxpayers are not only affected by the rates as
set forth in the code but by the alternative minimum tax
so that although it may appear these upper income (250
and up according to obama) may be benefiting the issue
is how much benefit do they in fact lose from the AMT
taking away their property tax, and state income tax
deductions which will now affect people making exactly
that amount
And – raising the capital gains tax, as Obama will certainly do, accomplishes nothing but to further cripple the economy, as has been often proved,
you cannot raise taxes when you have a financial system
on a respirator…even if you think its the right thing
to do…you must stimulate the economy by making it
easier to borrow…you must lower not raise interest
rates and you must continue at the very least the existing
tax brackets or you will choke off any chance of a recovery
then when the coast is clear years down the road and we
have righted the financial ship you might consider a different kind of tax, one that is fairer something like
a flat tax and then knock out deductions for the higest
tax earnerns and I am not talking about 250,000…
that is hardly rich…1million a year or more and they
can pay a little more at the margin …more important
social security and medicare need to be changed
a combination of increased retirement ages based on
the morbity rates ie people living longer, lower benefits
again for those whose unearned income is 700,000 or more
pro rated over time and graduated as the income goes up
people earning millions do not need a govt check for
2200 a month..that is not what social security was meant
to do…it was meant to be a safety net…
and you cannot under any circumstances increase the
capital gains tax for anyone…that is a prescription for
no investment, no job creation and no wealth accumlation
which translates into savings as well as liquidity
Here is a beauty on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and it’s from that Liberal Bible, the NY Times, too.
Who is to blame for this crisis? Check Google by putting in “Labaton” + NY Times + Sept. 11 2003 + Fannie Mae. The article will come right up.
Stephen Labaton was the Times’ reporter. And the blame is squarely on the Democrats, as the Times itself very clearly points out in this article back on Sept. 11 ‘03. Barney Frank and friends are on the record.