3 in 10 Workers Need a Permission Slip from the Government

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Dorothy Jetter on Friday, January 30th, 2015, 3:06 PM PERMALINK


On paper, the goal of occupational licensing requirements is to protect the consumers, but in reality these government mandates can cause more harm than good.   Most positions that require an occupational license are those typically held by middle class Americans. During these difficult economic times, workers simply cannot afford the time and money required to obtain a government issued license. 
 
Professor Alan B. Krueger, a Princeton economist and former advisor to President Obama, comes to a logical conclusion:
 
“Lower-income people suffer from licensing.  It raises the costs of many services and prevents low-income people from getting into some professions.”
 
Mandated occupational licensing has been on the rise for over 60 years.  In 1950 the regulation affected 5% of workers and in 1970s the number increased to 10%.  
 
Today, 30% of all workers in the United States must have a license and the laborers required to obtain these licenses are probably not who you think.  For example, the average cosmetologist spends 372 days in training to receive a license from the government and the average EMT trains for just 33 days.  In fact, “across all states, interior designers, barbers, cosmetologists, and manicurists all face greater average licensing requirements than do EMTs.”
 
Numerous professions continue to be affected by negative occupational licensing. For example, superfluous government regulation is prominent in the hair braiding industry.  Many states require hair braiders to obtain a hair styling or cosmetology license, although that is not their chosen profession.  The Institute for Justice works diligently to award them, along with other Americans, economic liberty. 
 
Cumbersome regulations are not just inconvenient, they are preventing economic recovery in the United States by hindering free markets.  According to a study done by the Brooking Institute, consumers pay 15 percent more for services when an occupation is licensed.
  
There is an indication that the Obama Administration may propose licensing “reform” in its upcoming budget. "We would like all states to ask whether licensing requirements meet a cost-benefit test,” said Betsey Stevenson of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.
 
While the President ponders the idea of possibly recommending studies and tests, Rep. Paul Ryan has already proposed concrete reforms.  In the study, “Expanding Opportunity in America”, Ryan recommends the elimination of frivolous licensing requirements to create more opportunities for laborers and shrink costs for consumers.  

 

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


ATR Urges South Carolina Legislators to Support Governor Nikki Haley's Proposal to Reduce the State's Income Tax

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Patrick M. Gleason on Thursday, January 29th, 2015, 2:14 PM PERMALINK


Some South Carolina legislators are trying to pass a gas tax hike and block the income tax relief plan put forward by Gov. Nikki Haley during her State of the State Address last week. Today, Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist sent a letter to the South Carolina State Legislature urging legislators to support Governor Nikki Haley’s proposal to reduce the state income tax. The proposal would better allow the Palmetto State to compete with nearby states for investments and jobs.  

The letter reads as follows:

Dear Members of the South Carolina Legislature,

On behalf of Americans for Tax Reform and our membership across South Carolina, I am contacting you today to urge you to support Gov. Nikki Haley’s proposal to reduce the state income tax rate. There are two states in the region, Tennessee and Florida, that boast no income tax for individuals, families, and small businesses. North Carolina just cut their income tax so that it is now lower than South Carolina’s, and Georgia lawmakers are looking to follow suit. As such, it is imperative that South Carolina lawmakers use the 2015 session to cut the state income tax. Failing to do so will put the state at a disadvantage in the competition for jobs and investment.

Some legislators are proposing to raise the gas tax and ignore the proposal to cut the income tax. South Carolinians have been hit with over 20 federal tax increases in recent years; the last thing they need is another tax increase at the state level. That’s why it’s important that a gas tax increase be contingent upon the passage of an income tax cut. Otherwise, lawmakers will simply be voting for higher taxes.

Income tax relief isn’t just good politics, it’s good policy. Tax Foundation economist William McBride reviewed academic literature going back three decades and found, "While there are a variety of methods and data sources, the results consistently point to significant negative effects of taxes on economic growth even after controlling for various other factors such as government spending, business cycle conditions and monetary policy."

In McBride's survey of 26 studies, dating to 1983, he found "all but three of those studies, and every study in the last 15 years, find a negative effect of taxes on growth." John Hood, former president of the John Locke Foundation, found that keeping state and local tax and regulatory burdens as low as possible fosters economic growth, when he analyzed 681 peer-reviewed academic journal articles going back to 1990."Most studies find," Hood stated, "that lower levels of taxes and spending, less-intrusive regulation correlate with stronger economic performance."

I urge you to protect South Carolina taxpayers by voting for income tax relief this session. Americans for Tax Reform will continue to follow these issues closely throughout session and will be educating your constituents as to how you vote on these important matters.

Onward,

Grover Norquist

Photo Credit: 
Gage Skidmore

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Nikki Haley Is Leading The Southern Tax Reform Charge

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Patrick M. Gleason on Wednesday, January 28th, 2015, 10:44 PM PERMALINK


Florida doesn’t have one. Neither does Tennessee. North Carolina just lowered theirs. These are some of the reasons why South Carolina’s seven percent top state income tax rate puts the Palmetto State at a regional disadvantage. The good news is Gov. Nikki Haley has a proposal to fix this problem, if the legislature will let her.

During her State of the State Address last week, Haley called for a significant income tax cut for individuals, families, and businesses across the state. Gov. Haley has proposed taking the top marginal income tax rate from seven to five percent, about a 30 percent reduction in the rate. Such a proposal would be good for the South Carolina economy. Gov. Haley, however, is running into resistance from her state legislature.

While Gov. Haley is trying to increase the disposable income had by individuals, families, and small businesses, some lawmakers in Columbia only want to do one thing – raise the gas tax.

Americans for Tax Reform urges South Carolina lawmakers to only vote for a gas tax increase if it is in conjunction with Gov. Haley’s income tax reduction. After more than 20 new or higher taxes signed into law at the federal level over the last six years, South Carolinians are in need of tax relief. Gov. Nikki Haley recognizes this, as is evidenced by her proposal to cut the state income tax.

If South Carolina lawmakers wish to raise the gas tax, they should only do so in conjunction with the income tax cut that Gov. Haley has proposed. North Carolina passed one of the most significant tax relief packages in 2013, taking their income tax rate down to 5.75 percent. It’s time for South Carolina to catch up. Gov. Haley’s proposal will do so, and ensure that South Carolina remains competitive regionally, nationally, and globally.

 
Photo Credit: 
Savannah River Site

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


Obama Still Believes in Taxing College Savings Plans

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by John Kartch on Wednesday, January 28th, 2015, 2:42 PM PERMALINK


The White House today confirmed the Obama administration still believes in taxing college savings plans:

Question: "So you call this [taxing 529 college savings plans] a distraction. Do you still think this is a good policy? There was so much backlash particularly from middle class Americans who said - we really value these plans, so do you still stand by this as good policy?”

White House spokesman Eric Schultz: “Sure. We do.”The White House also confirmed that the tax hike on 529s will remain in the President’s official budget:

Schultz: "I do want to give you one heads up for your planning which is the 529 piece will still be in the written budget that will be released. The announcement yesterday was made after the book was in the shop to be produced so just for your planning.”
 

Timeline: Obama 529 Plan Hypocrisy

Obama's New State Of The Union Tax Hike On Middle Class 529 College Savers

Obama calls for $320 Billion in New Taxes

Obama's 529 College Savings Plan Tax Hike is an Assault on the American Dream

Obama Tax Hike on College Savings Plans Breaks Middle Class Tax Pledge

Obamas Make Jumbo 529 Contribution While Pushing Repeal for Everyone Else

Will Obama's 529 Tax Hike Also Hit Disabled Kids?

As Senator, Obama Voted to Make 529 College Savings Plans Permanent

Obama Praised 529 College Savings Plans in "The Audacity of Hope”

 

Photo Credit: 
US Embassy New Zealand

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments


The Grover Norquist Show: 3 Reasons Why Congress Doesn't Need to Raise the Gas Tax

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Cassandra Carroll on Wednesday, January 28th, 2015, 9:30 AM PERMALINK


This week, ATR’s Grover Norquist and Chris Prandoni discussed the potential gasoline tax hike, which congress has been considering as a solution to our rapidly draining Highway Trust Fund. Despite the fact that lower gas prices will save American families $550 per year, politicians are still talking about hiking the gas tax. 

The current gas tax, which was intended to be a kind of “user fee” for the highway system, is anything but. Although slated to net the federal government between 35-40 billion dollars in this year alone, much of these gas tax dollars will go to unrelated services such as mass transit and rail. A higher gas tax would only mean more of the same. The Highway Trust Fund is also extensively used to fund mass transit projects rather than the highways for which it was intended and named, causing the fund to be slated to run dry by (link to previous ATR blog post about Highway Trust Fund running dry)

Prandoni also points out that some of the revenue generated from the gasoline tax goes toward an anachronistic and racist piece of legislation called Davis-Bacon, which was originally meant to keep African Americans out of the labor force, and now serves to make highway projects 22% more expensive due to requiring that higher wages be paid to the workers.

Between allowing for more offshore drilling, wiser spending of gas tax and Highway Trust Fund revenues, and allowing states to build and maintain their own highway systems, Norquist and Prandoni discuss several viable options for raising revenue without sticking it to the middle class with a gas tax hike. You can listen to their discussion in its entirety below:

Photo Credit: 
Gage Skidmore

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Jaegolfin

It would not make a difference, when has giving government more money worked?? Fuel consumption has also massively increased over the years, thus increasing revenue.
It is never enough!

Lickylick

The criminal abuse of revenue collected by government should be easily and swiftly punishable. I'm sick and tired of reading about all the thieves who not only go unpunished but also retain their salaries while investigated and eventually outed as criminals but then getting to keep their position or getting promoted or reassigned. This country has a huge problem of scumbags in offices of authority. We need to clean house and inform people just how much their being lied to by media controllers in those places needing to be cleaned.

John D

Mass transit is directly related to highways. How about we shut down the DC Metro and see how the road system performs?

Cars are much more fuel efficient, so a flat rate gas tax from 30 years ago doesn't work. I would gladly pay a few cents more per gallon to have roads and transit systems that work.


Timeline: Obama Hypocrisy on 529 College Savings Plans

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by John Kartch on Tuesday, January 27th, 2015, 5:46 PM PERMALINK


August 3, 2006: As U.S. Senator, votes to make 529s permanent.

2006: Praises 529s in his book, The Audacity of Hope.

2007: Makes a $240,000 contribution to his own 529 accounts.

Sept. 9, 2009: White House Task Force on Middle Class Working Families issues a detailed report on 529s. Top conclusion from the report: 

"529 plans are an attractive and convenient means of saving for college.”

The report makes several recommendations on how to further promote 529s.

Sept. 9, 2009: Vice President Biden, Treasury Secretary Geithner, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan share a stage at a Middle Class Task Force event at Syracuse University. Geithner strongly touts 529 plans:

"As the Vice President has said, we are also working to implement, expand or improve a wide array of other government programs that encourage education savings and increase college enrollment. Today I want to highlight one program in particular, Section 529 savings plans. 

These plans can be an immensely effective way for Americans to save for college. They are generally administered by the states, and they allow people to put aside money for college and enjoy investment earnings that are free of federal taxes and, in some cases, receive state tax benefits, as well. When state tax benefits are included, a typical middle class family can accumulate 25 percent more in 529 accounts than they can in a typical taxable savings account." 

Sept. 9, 2009: Official White House statement praises 529s:

"A 529 plan, offered by states, provides a convenient, tax-preferred way for families to save for college, and works much like ROTH IRAs, wherein contributions are made with after-tax income, returns accumulate tax free and distributions can be for qualified educational expenses without taxes." 

July 23, 2010: President Obama sits for a lengthy interview on ABC’s Good Morning America. He was asked, “can you feel the pain directly that other Americans are feeling?” Obama answers by citing his 529s as a example of how he can identify with the middle class: 

"Well, part of it has, that part that is devoted to Malia and Sasha's college fund was in a 529, you know, that had been set up when I was still a state senator. And, obviously, that goes up and down with the stock market and so it's lost value like everybody else."

Jan. 17, 2015: On a Saturday evening, the White House shares with reporters an outline of President Obama’s tax plan. The ten-page, single-spaced document describes 529s as “upside-down. 

Jan. 23, 2015: White House Council of Economic Advisers chairman Jason Furman, in an interview with BloombergBusinessweek, deems 529s “ineffective” and “tilted towards the upper end."

Jan. 23, 2015: White House spokesman Josh Earnest dismisses a reporter question on 529s:

"My guess is those who are saying that are critics of the president. And that’s fine. The—I think the facts about the president’s proposal speak for themselves."

Jan. 27, 2015: Anonymous Obama administration official announces that the White House is abandoning its plans to tax 529s.

See also:

Obama's New State Of The Union Tax Hike On Middle Class 529 College Savers

Obama calls for $320 Billion in New Taxes

Obama's 529 College Savings Plan Tax Hike is an Assault on the American Dream

Obama Tax Hike on College Savings Plans Breaks Middle Class Tax Pledge

Obamas Make Jumbo 529 Contribution While Pushing Repeal for Everyone Else

Will Obama's 529 Tax Hike Also Hit Disabled Kids?

As Senator, Obama Voted to Make 529 College Savings Plans Permanent

Obama Praised 529 College Savings Plans in "The Audacity of Hope"

 

Photo Credit: 
Mehlam786

Top Comments


Super Bowl Stadium Drives Glendale Broke, Despite Outrageous Taxes

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Will Upton on Tuesday, January 27th, 2015, 3:18 PM PERMALINK


The 2015 Super Bowl will be played at the University of Phoenix Stadium in sunny Glendale, Arizona. At first glance, it is a nearly perfect location for what is arguably the biggest event in American professional sports (my apologies to the World Series). But in an odd twist, considering the sports world’s current obsession with the Super Bowl bound New England Patriots and #DeflateGate, the financing scheme behind the University of Phoenix Stadium has left the City of Glendale’s finances… deflated.

Financing sports arenas and stadiums through taxes and public debt is never a good idea. Americans for Tax Reform has addressed this before. But the University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale really takes the cake. The City of Glendale itself has a bit of a reputation, according to the New York Times, of throwing money at sports facilities in efforts to lure sports team there. The NYT notes: “But the scale of spending in the city of 230,000 residents is unique. According to Moody’s Investors Service, Glendale’s debt is equal to 4.9 percent of its tax base, nearly four times the national median and twice the average rate for cities in Arizona. More than 40 percent of the city’s debt is dedicated to paying off sports complexes.”

In the case of the University of Phoenix Stadium, advocates attempted to fund its construction via rental car taxes – specifically a 3.25-percent tax on rentals. They claimed that out-of-state tourists would pay the brunt of the tax on rental cars and thus finance the stadium – though, again, Americans for Tax Reform has detailed how rental car taxes actually disproportionately hit local taxpayers hardest. Instead, an Arizona judge ruled last year that rental car taxes are vehicle taxes and are thus required, by the Arizona constitution, to be spent on projects such as road and highway construction – not sports stadiums. According to The Republic, this ruling could leave Arizona on the hook for roughly $150 million.

Even without the legal ruling against the stadium financing, it is clear that taxes such as rental car taxes are discriminatory, reduce local accountability as to how revenue is appropriated, and play into the misguided notion that if you tax it, they will still come.

The Associated Press notes that most Super Bowl revelers aren’t even staying in Glendale, opting to stay and enjoy the nightlife in nearby Phoenix and Scottsdale instead. Glendale, and Maricopa County as a whole, relies on a 1-percent tax on hotel occupancy for, you guessed it, repaying $1.2 billion in bonds to finance stadium construction. Glendale’s predicted boost in tax revenue appears to be up in smoke, leaving the city’s taxpayers on the hook with even more debt.

Photo Credit: 
Peter Eisenman

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Lt_Scrounge

The stadium generates other tax revenues to the city though. It is in an area that includes some serious shopping and the stadium also hosts some very large gun shows that generate millions in sales taxes that were previously going to the city of Phoenix as the shows were being held at the fair grounds. The stadium is walking distance to shopping including the Cabela's store.

jetgraphics

We can't have people spending their own money as they see fit. Only the nation's leaders have the training and temperament to oversee such a strenuous duty. Next thing you know, they'll be questioning how Congress is "creating money" when it is only delegated power to coin money (stamp bullion) and borrow money.
[/sarcasm]

Reality Check

Professional team sports facilities should not be financed by the public purse, but by the team / sport itself. If there isn't the demand, it doesn't happen, real simple. Group pay for medical facilities is one thing, for entertainment is another.


CBO Still Refuses to Score Obamacare, Ignores 15 Tax Hikes in Healthcare Law

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Ryan Ellis on Tuesday, January 27th, 2015, 12:29 PM PERMALINK


The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) this week released their annual Budget and Economic Outlook which sets the budget baselines and estimates for the whole year.

Buried in Appendix B of the report is CBO's attempt to provide an updated score of Obamacare. But that's not what they did.  They only scored the "coverage provisions" of the law, ignoring some fifteen tax increases which are also a part of Obamacare and its cost to taxpayers.

Here's what the report says about its half score:

"Those estimates address only the insurance coverage provisions of the ACA and do not reflect all of the act’s budgetary effects. Because the provisions of the ACA that relate to health insurance coverage established entirely new programs or components of programs and because those provisions have mostly just begun to be implemented,CBO and JCT have produced separate estimates of the effects of the provisions as part of the baseline process. By contrast, because the provisions of the ACA that do not relate directly to health insurance coverage generally modified existing federal programs (such as Medicare) or made various changes to the tax code, determining what would have happened since the enactment of the ACA had the law not been in effect is becoming increasingly difficult. The incremental budgetary effects of those noncoverage provisions are embedded in CBO’s baseline projections for those programs and tax revenues, respectively, but they cannot all be separately identified using the agency’s normal procedures. As a result, CBO does not produce estimates of the budgetary effects of the ACA as a whole as part of the baseline process."

This is just another version of "we can't score it anymore" that CBO Director Doug Elmendorf (and his Gruber-gate methodology on Obamacare) has become known for.

List of tax hikes ignored in the CBO half-score of Obamacare

-3.8 percent surtax on investment income
-Hike in top Medicare payroll tax rate to 3.8 percent
-Medicine cabinet tax
-Additional surtax on health savings account (HSA) distributions
-Cap on flexible spending accounts (FSAs)
-Medical device tax
-High medical bills tax
-Tanning tax
-Tax on employer retiree drug coverage in Medicare
-Charitable hospital tax
-Pharmaceutical manufacturers tax
-Health insurance tax
-Tax on executive compensation in the health sector
-"Black liquor" tax hike
-Codification of "economic substance doctrine"

All these tax increases can be read about in detail here.

All this is simply not credible.  The Joint Tax Committee (JCT) produced all sorts of revenue estimates in the larger CBO report.  JCT projects how much the death tax will collect each and every year for the next ten years, for example.  It claims to know how much the federal government will collect in gas taxes.  Is it believable that JCT could not also project how much a dozen or so Obamacare tax provisions will generate?

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

disqus_Cc3PcBrXQA

Yeah, I don't feel like doing my job either. Anyways, if I did I would just anger the boss by projecting losses as far as the eye can see . . .

Only in Federal Bureaucracy Land is that kind of attitude even considered employable.

JapaneseRamenNoodle

Obamacare: Created behind closed doors...by extreme partisans...without dissenting opinions...ignoring doctors...spread by lies...glossed over by media propaganda...rushed through Congress...deemed "passed" through unprecedented partisan Congressional action...continued to be defended with lies...glossed over by media Liberals...and helping few Americans while costing more than the actual people ($$$-wise) that it helps.

It is the worst piece of legislation in U.S. history.

Texgal1

..and the left is so proud of it that they proclaim it "the law of the land." Lie of the Land is more accurate.


Obama Praised 529 College Savings Plans in “The Audacity of Hope”

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by John Kartch on Tuesday, January 27th, 2015, 8:15 AM PERMALINK


In his 2006 bestseller, The Audacity of Hope, then-Senator Barack Obama praised the tax-free college savings accounts he now seeks to scuttle.

On page 165 — within a chapter titled “Opportunity” — Obama writes:

But no matter how well we do in controlling the spiraling cost of education, we will still need to provide many students and parents with more direct help in meeting college expenses, whether through grants, low-interest loans, tax-free educational savings accounts, or full deductibility of tuition and fees.

One year later, in 2007, Obama took advantage of the opportunity afforded by 529 college savings plans. As first reported by the Wall Street Journal, Obama made a jumbo $240,000 contribution to his own family 529 plans. (View the actual tax form here).

Also in 2006, then-Senator Obama voted to make the current tax treatment of 529 plans permanent.

Fast forward to 2015. On Jan. 17, late on a Saturday night, the Obama administration proposed raising taxes on 529 accounts, criticizing the plans as “upside down.”

Then on Jan. 23, White House Council of Economic Advisors chairman Jason Furman told BloombergBusinessweek that 529 plans are “ineffective” and "tilted towards the upper end."

The Obama 529 tax hike plan, and arrogant comments to the media -- often from anonymous administration officials -- have since caused a nationwide uproar. And according to the College Savings Foundation:

-"Over a million middle class students are currently enrolled in college and benefiting from 529s."

-"Almost 95 percent of 529 accounts are in households with income below $250,000."

The $250,000 statistic is significant in rebutting Obama administration claims: It is the number President Obama has used repeatedly since 2008 to define "middle class."

See also:

Obama's New State Of The Union Tax Hike On Middle Class 529 College Savers

Obama calls for $320 Billion in New Taxes

Obama Tax Hike on College Savings Plans Breaks Middle Class Tax Pledge

Obama's 529 College Savings Plan Tax Hike is an Assault on the American Dream

Obamas Make Jumbo 529 Contribution While Pushing Repeal for Everyone Else

Will Obama's 529 Tax Hike Also Hit Disabled Kids?

As Senator, Obama Voted to Make 529 College Savings Plans Permanent

Photo Credit: 
Peter Howe

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

Steven Colantuoni

Save for almost for almost twenty years under the 529 as a consequence of how the accounts were set up to function. Now they want to ding those of us who saved for a decade or two to fund "free" education.


Public Backlash of Obama’s 529 Plan Proposal Continues to Grow

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Dorothy Jetter on Monday, January 26th, 2015, 4:25 PM PERMALINK


President Obama rolled out a new initiative for “free” community college in his State of the Union Address, but in order to fund this program the administration has proposed taxing 529 college savings plans.  In 2006, Obama voted to keep these plans permanently tax free, but now in 2015 the administration has described the 529 plan as “ineffective in serving its goals.”

In their current form, 529 plans allow families to save for their children’s education by putting after tax savings into a tax free account that collects interest.  The account remains untaxed, so long as the savings are used to pay for college.

As Ryan Ellis and John Kartch of Americans for Tax Reform point out, college savings plans will now be subject to taxation under Obama’s new proposal:

“Under Obama’s plan, earnings in “Section 529” (named for its location in the Internal Revenue Code) college savings plans will face full income taxation upon withdrawal.  Under current law, earnings growth in 529 plans is tax-free if account distributions are used to pay for college tuition and fees. The Obama plan will tax earnings in these accounts even if they are used to pay for college tuition and fees.”

The people who use these accounts are largely middle class Americans.  The Wall Street Journal quoted Ryan Ellis in an article on January 23:

“This idea that this is an account for the preserve of the Huxtables out there that make $250,000 a year is kind of ridiculous. Many owners of 529 plans are young parents who take pride in saving money in advance for their children’s college education. You’ve made them look like chumps for saving whatever they’ve saved so far.”

Perhaps the Obama Administration did not foresee a public outcry of such magnitude, but this proposal has been widely ill-received. Many are criticizing this proposed plan for what is really is, an attack on the middle class.  It would deter middle class families from saving for college.  In doing so, the Obama Administration is, yet again, making people more dependent on big government and less reliant on themselves.  

Betty Lochner, head of the College Savings Plan Network, explains:

“What these accounts are designed for is the middle-income families that can’t afford to pay as you go and aren’t going to get need-based aid.  It doesn’t make any sense to take away incentive to save.”

State treasurers from Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska have all spoken out.  Kansas Treasurer Ron Estes reasoned, “Why would you ever have 529s anymore? If I have to pay taxes on my earnings, why don’t I keep it in my own individual investment account?”

Joe Hurley, founder of SavingforCollege.com, described this idea as “anti-middle class for families trying to afford college.”   Mark Kantrowitz, publisher of Edvisors.com went as far as to say, “‘this would eliminate all new investment in 529 plans.”

While the administration has referred to 529 plans as “inefficient”, this must not have been the case in 2007 when Obama and his wife invested $240,000 in 529 plans for their own daughters.    President Obama’s family benefited from the 529 plan, but now he wants to take away the opportunity for other Americans to do the same.       

More from Americans for Tax Reform

Top Comments

JJLLD

He is a clown voted into office by a legion of clowns!

ImMikeSpike

RACIST! Blacks are known not to save, while whites are known to have savings, making Obama's wanting to reduce 529's that blacks have seldom participated. Free anything appeals to black voters.

gift to minors

once again, only the very poor or very wealthy can go to college. It means that the middle classis getting squeezed out


hidden