- Daily Media Spotlight September 3, 2010
- Dina Titus Attack Ad on Joe Heck and the Taxpayer Protection Pledge is Thoroughly Misleading
-
120 Days to Go Until the
Largest Tax Hikes in History - Government vs. Private Control and "Balkanization" of the Internet
-
Get 'Em While They're Hot:
Medicine Cabinet Tax Hits in 120 Days
Friday, September 3, 2010
- Vote 'NO!' to Government Regulation of Privacy at The Economist
- FCC Stalls on Internet Regulation; Asks for More Comments
- Why was the Volcker Commission Constrained by Obama’s Tax Pledge, but not the Simpson-Bowles?
- Daily Media Spotlight September 2, 2010
- Harry Reid Looks to Resurrect RES During Lame-Duck
- Calculating the Cost of Government (CFA Site »)
Thursday, September 2, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight September 1, 2010
-
Obama Tax Commission Report:
Baby Step Toward IRS Tax Preparation - Dina Titus Launches False Attack Ad on Joe Heck and the Taxpayer Protection Pledge
- Indiana LaunchesTransparency Website (CFA Site »)
- Rally for Jobs Kicks Off Today in Texas
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 31, 2010
- Let us All Join in on the NOT so “Green Cause”
- California Bag Ban Bill Up for Vote Today
- Norquist to Gov. Pat Quinn: Pick a Flawed Income Tax Hike and Stick With It
- Phil Moffett Signs Taxpayer Protection Pledge in Kentucky Gubernatorial Race
- New Mexico Sets Trends in Transparency Websites (CFA Site »)
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
- Robert Gibbs’s Fuzzy Tax Hike Math
- Daily Media Spotlight August 30, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
- 2011 Could Be Ugly for Nevada Taxpayers
- Lame Duck Governor Ed Rendell Not Going Gently Into That Good Night – New Call for Higher Taxes
- Happy Cost of Government Day, California
- Bay Staters Spent 239 Days Paying for Government Burdens in 2010 (CFA Site »)
- Washington Welcomes Cost of Government Day (CFA Site »)
Friday, August 27, 2010
- Spill Commission Should Lift Moratorium Which Has Cost Gulf Residents 12,000 Jobs and $2.1 Billion
- Daily Media Spotlight August 26, 2010
- Why is Dan Onorato Knowingly Misleading Pennsylvania Voters?
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle
- Utah Tobacco Sellers Feeling the Impact of Tax Hikes
Thursday, August 26, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 25, 2010
- WI Democrats Launch “Blatantly False” Attack on Sean Duffy
- Unions plan on spending big this election cycle (AWF Site »)
- Philly's New Blog Tax May Foreshadow Other eTaxes
- BNA: For 14 States, Existing Tax Code Leaves Room for Etax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Philly's $300 Blogger Tax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Cost of Government Day Arrives in the Commonwealth
- Pennsylvania Finally Celebrates Cost of Government Day
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
- California Budget Proposal Advocates eTax (Stop eTaxes Site »)
- Daily Media Spotlight August 24, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
- Daily Media Spotlight August 23, 2010
- Government Workers' Pensions are Underfunded by $3 Trillion
Monday, August 23, 2010
- Fourteen Ways to Reduce Government Spending
Friday, August 20, 2010
State of the Union Myth/Fact:
Obama's New Taxes on Your 401(k)
From Ryan Ellis on Thursday, January 28, 2010 11:40 AM
MYTH: “To recover the rest [of TARP], I have proposed a fee on the biggest banks. I know Wall Street isn't keen on this idea, but if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need.”
FACT: The President himself pointed out that most of the money from the bailout has been recovered from the banks. This new “bank tax” has nothing to do with TARP—it is being assessed on banks which never accepted TARP funds (or have since paid them back with interest), and is not being assessed on TARP recipients who still owe the taxpayers money (like Government Motors). It’s a money grab.
In fact, this new “bank tax” will be passed along by the banks to ordinary Americans. It will be paid in the form of higher 401(k) fees, higher bank fees, higher mortgage and credit card interest rates, and lower interest rates on savings.
MYTH: “We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families…we haven’t raised income taxes by a single dime on a single person. Not a single dime.”
FACT: It’s mathematically impossible to cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. According to the IRS, fully one-third of all tax returns owed no income tax last year. Nearly 20 percent of returns had neither an income nor a payroll tax liability. These people cannot see their taxes cut any further. Anything given to them is pure spending.
Obama, Pelosi, and Reid may not have raised income taxes last year, but they surely tried to. Last year’s administration budget submission had dozens of tax hikes. The health care legislation they are still pushing has 18 separate tax hikes. All told, ATR has calculated that President Obama proposed or supported $2.1 trillion in tax hikes in 2009. And let’s not forget that he signed into law a $65 billion tax hike on cigarette smokers 16 days into his administration. The median income of a smoker is $36,000.
MYTH: “To encourage these and other businesses to stay within our borders, it's time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs in the United States of America.”
FACT: Obama is no doubt referring to his tax hikes from last year’s budget. ATR has compiled a series of one-pagers detailing his $210 billion in proposed tax hikes on American companies who have overseas income. How raising taxes on American companies will incent them to remain in the United States is a mystery. The reason these tax breaks are in place is to avoid double taxation of international corporate income. To take away these tax breaks is to tell an American company that they will potentially have to pay taxes twice on the same income. The best solution is to transition the U.S. tax code toward a territorial system (which most of the developed world has done), but getting rid of these tax breaks without doing that reform is foolish. There’s no reason that an American company with an Irish subsidiary cannot become an Irish company with an American subsidiary. America has a 39 percent “all-in” corporate rate. Ireland’s is 12.5 percent.
MYTH: “[We’re] making it easier to save for retirement by giving every worker access to a retirement account and expanding the tax credit for those who start a nest egg.”
FACT: Candidate Obama campaigned on a “forced IRA” plan for small businesses, and President Obama continues to support it. It would force every small business in America which doesn’t have a qualified retirement plan like a 401(k) or a SIMPLE IRA to open a salary-deferral IRA for their employees. Some versions of this plan would also require the employer to start making salary deferrals into this IRA unless the employee opts out. But suppose neither the business owner nor the employee wants to save in the IRA? It would still have to be set up, at the business’ expense. Retirement savings is a good thing, but not at the barrel of a gun. The best solution here is personal Social Security savings accounts for younger workers, who often don’t have the after-tax income to save adequately.
MYTH: “To help working families, we will extend our middle-class tax cuts. But at a time of record deficits, we will not continue tax cuts for oil companies, investment fund managers, and those making over $250,000 a year. We just can't afford it.”
FACT: Let’s lay out exactly what tax increases he is proposing here (leaving aside the fact that “we” are the ones who can’t afford his taxes, not the other way around):
The top two tax rates (which two-thirds of small business profits face) would rise from 33 and 35 percent today to 36 and 39.6 percent in 2010. The return of the itemized deduction and personal exemption phase-outs would take the mathematical effective top marginal tax rate to 41.6 percent.
The top capital gains rate would rise from 15 to 20 percent. The top dividends rate would skyrocket from 15 to 39.6 percent. This would be a body blow to everyone’s IRA and 401(k) as the stock market priced in this new tax wedge.
Obama-Pelosi-Reid wants to raise the capital gains tax rate for managers of investment partnerships from 15 percent to 39.6 percent. This will leave universities, charities, and pension plans holding the bag as partnership managers understandably demand a greater profit share to make them whole after-tax.
Finally, Obama is referring to repealing the “Section 199” domestic production activities deduction—but only for energy companies. This is a targeted tax hike on one industry. It will result in higher energy costs for all of us (companies don’t pay higher taxes—they pass them along to us as higher prices). It’s shortsighted and counter-productive.














Comments
question: how can obama allowing tax cuts to expire be considered a tax increase (i.e. relative to baseline of extending current policy), but when gov. strickland proposed to now allow a scheduled tax cut to go into effect, that was a tax increase too (http://www.atr.org/atr-requests-governor-strickland-veto-income-a4359) typical ATR...pick and choose your baseline and lingo when it's politically expedient with no consistency
>> hypocrisy Thursday, January 28, 2010 12:50 PM Report Comment
How awful. I can't imagine President Obama changing baselines around or anything. Oh, wait: he did in his first budget. Check out the summary tables if you don't believe me: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2010/assets/summary.pdf People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
>> Rellis Thursday, January 28, 2010 12:59 PM Report Comment
He doesn't use one baseline one second and another baseline the next second. That's what you are doing.
>> applestooranges Thursday, January 28, 2010 1:07 PM Report Comment
also, even though obama is consistent on this question and you aren't, it shouldn't matter what obama does either one is a tax hike and the other is no tax change, or vice versa
>> regardless Thursday, January 28, 2010 1:12 PM Report Comment
hypocrisy, There is a problem with your Strickland argument. The tax cut had already taken place. Individuals were getting less money taken from their checks throughout the year in withholding taxes. To turn around and change the rate later in the year is a tax increase. Nathan
>> Nathan Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:36 PM Report Comment
Obama is the epitomy of "incosistent": He promised no increases "on any of your taxes"... FAIL He promised CSPAN would be in on HCR talks... FAIL He promised closure of GITMO within a year... FAIL I could go on and on and on...
>> Mike, OH Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:03 PM Report Comment