Abigail Marone

A Scary Reminder: Hillary Wanted a 65% Death Tax

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Abigail Marone on Monday, October 30th, 2017, 4:34 PM PERMALINK

Halloween brings to life many people’s deepest fears such as ghosts, goblins, and fat-free candy bars. But hopefully, there’s one nightmare you won’t have to worry about haunting you this All Hallow’s Eve: Hillary Clinton’s 65% Death Tax.

A year ago, High Tax Hillary was traveling all across the United States (except for Wisconsin and Michigan) discussing her plot to drastically increase taxes. Her plan included introducing Death Tax brackets of 50 percent, 55 percent, and 65 percent. That’s right, Hillary wanted to tax you beyond the grave. What’s scarier than that?

Luckily, Americans rejected her and her spooky tax increases. The GOP House and Senate must fully repeal the Death Tax:

Repeal of the Death Tax will spur economic growth. In 2016, the Tax Foundation estimated that repeal of the Death Tax would create 150,000 jobs. Additionally, the Joint Economic Committee reported that the Death Tax has suppressed over $1.1 trillion of capital in the United States’ economy since being introduced. Much of this comes from small businesses, who are the core of America’s economy. This loss of capital ultimately results in fewer jobs and lower wages for American workers.

The Death Tax is bad for jobs and repeal would give families a raise. Again according to the Tax Foundation the Death Tax is an economy killer. They have a macroeconomic “dynamic” model to see what killing the Death Tax would do to the job market. This model projects that killing the death tax would create 139,000 jobs, increase private business hours by 0.1 percent, and increase wages by 0.7 percent.

Numerous studies have found that majority of Americans oppose the Death Tax and support its repeal. For example, a recent report by NPR found that 76 percent of Americans support full, permanent repeal of the Death Tax.  

In addition, the Death Tax contributes a miniscule amount of revenue relative to the size of federal government. In all, it makes up only one half of one percent of all federal revenue. Because the Death Tax is so economically destructive, almost all the revenue lost would be offset by increased economic growth. As noted by the Tax Foundation, repealing the Death Tax would result in $240 billion in lower taxes over a decade. However, the economic growth created by repealing the Death Tax would produce $221 billion in federal revenue because of increased wages and more jobs.

Repeal of the Death Tax pays for itself. The same Tax Foundation report says that the death tax would increase the economy by 0.8 percent (or $137 billion in today’s dollars). Because this additional economic growth would be subject to taxation all its own, it would more than make up for the revenue lost by repealing the Death Tax–it would make up the $20 billion per year, plus yield an extra $8 billion per year on top of that. You heard that right–we’d actually collect more tax revenue if we stopped collecting the Death Tax.

Photo Credit:

More from Americans for Tax Reform


Norquist Calls Out Schumer for Lying About Tax Reform

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Abigail Marone on Wednesday, October 11th, 2017, 2:44 PM PERMALINK

Today ATR president Grover Norquist called out Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) for lying about tax reform.

As a guest on Fox News Channel’s Fox & Friends, Norquist hit back at Schumer’s knowingly false assertion that the “bottom rate on working class families goes up” under the GOP tax cut plan.

Norquist said:

“Schumer is lying. There are eight rates now, they’re going to go down to four. The bottom rate is zero -- the 10% rate goes down to zero --  the 15% rate goes down to 12%. All of the rates go down, so there will be 0%, 12%, 25%, 35%. Everybody who pays taxes sees lower rates. The game that Schumer is playing, is he pretends there isn’t a zero rate but there is and it is expanded under the Trump-Republican plan. It’s very dishonest, and what it does tell you is that Schumer is not going to play any role in working with the Republicans in Congress or the White House to play any role in tax reform. I didn’t expect him to, but this kind of dishonesty explains that he’s not even part of the discussion.”

Schumer’s lying is especially rich given that his candidate, Hillary Clinton, offered NO income tax rate reduction for ANY American of any income level. 

Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore


Fate of Obamacare’s Individual Mandate Tax Hangs in Balance

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by John Kartch, Abigail Marone on Friday, September 22nd, 2017, 2:35 PM PERMALINK

Kindly urge Sen. Rand Paul to vote YES on Graham-Cassidy to abolish Obamacare's mandate tax.
Twitter: @randpaul
Bowling Green, KY Office: 270-782-8303
Washington, DC Office: 202-224-4343

The Graham-Cassidy bill repeals Obamacare’s individual mandate tax. The tax hits 6.7 million American households. 79% of these households have incomes of less than $50,000 per year. A new state-by-state breakdown compiled by the office of Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) using official IRS data for tax year 2015 can be found here.

The fate of the tax depends on the votes of the senators from key states below:

ALASKA

  • If Sen. Lisa Murkowski votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 19,970 Alaska households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $12,836,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $644 per household
  • 64% of Alaska households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. Murkowski votes NO, Alaskans will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

MAINE

  • If Sen. Susan Collins votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 34,030 Maine households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $15,490,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $455 per household.
  • 79% of Maine households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. Collins votes NO, Mainers will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

ARIZONA

  • If Sen. John McCain votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 153,700 Arizona households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $69,770,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $454 per household.
  • 82% of Arizona households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. McCain votes NO, Arizonans will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

KENTUCKY

  • If Sen. Rand Paul votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 79,260 Kentucky households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $31,262,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $394 per household.
  • 83% of Kentucky households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. Paul votes NO, Kentuckians will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

INDIANA

  • If Sen. Joe Donnelly votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 138,170 Indiana households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $59,463,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $430 per household.
  • 81% of Indiana households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. Donnelly votes NO, Indianans will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

MISSOURI

  • If Sen. Claire McCaskill votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 116,580 Missouri households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $50,016,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $429 per household.
  • 81% of Missouri households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. McCaskill votes NO, Missourians will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

MONTANA        

  • If Sen. Jon Tester votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 29,450 Montana households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $14,341,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $487 per household.
  • 75% of Montana households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. Tester votes NO, Montanans will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

NORTH DAKOTA

  • If Sen. Heidi Heitkamp votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 17,170 North Dakota households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $7,826,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $456 per household.
  • 77% of North Dakota households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. Heitkamp votes NO, North Dakotans will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.

 

WEST VIRGINIA

  • If Sen. Joe Manchin votes YES on Graham-Cassidy 34,360 households will no longer be stuck paying Obamacare’s individual mandate tax.
  • In 2015, these households had to pay the IRS $14,680,000 for choosing not to purchase Obamacare, an average tax of $427 per household.
  • 81% of West Virginia households paying this tax make less than $50,000 per year.
  • If Sen. Manchin votes NO, West Virginians will be forced to pay Obamacare’s individual mandate tax simply for choosing not to purchase Obamacare.
     

The individual mandate tax is one of many Obamacare taxes that violate Obama’s “firm pledge” not to raise any form of tax on any American making less than $250,000 per year. Documentation of Obama’s shattered promise can be found here. Senators voting NO on Graham-Cassidy are voting to continue to stick their constituents with this tax.

Please visit the website of the office of Sen. Daines to get a handy PDF of the state by state IRS Obamacare tax data. Call your Senators and urge them to vote YES on Graham-Cassidy.

Photo Credit: Pictures of Money

More from Americans for Tax Reform


Hillary ‘fascinated’ by Carbon Tax

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Abigail Marone, John Kartch on Wednesday, September 13th, 2017, 3:20 PM PERMALINK

In her new book What Happened Hillary Clinton reveals she was “fascinated” by the idea of a carbon tax and a financial transactions tax. She wanted to take the money generated by both taxes, filter it through the Washington D.C. bureaucracy, and then send everyone a check as part of a Universal Basic Income scheme.

The whole process would be “a way of making every American feel more connected to our country and to one another – part of something bigger than ourselves.”

She writes:

If you view the nation’s financial system as a shared resource, then you can start raising real money from things like a financial transactions tax. Same with the air we breathe and carbon pricing. Once you capitalize the fund, you can provide every American with a modest basic income every year. Besides cash in people’s pockets, it would also be a way of making every American feel more connected to our country and to one another – part of something bigger than ourselves.

Clinton said she worked for weeks on the issue:

I was fascinated by this idea, as was my husband, and we spent weeks working with our policy team to see if it could be viable enough to include in my campaign.

Though she found the idea “exciting” and “tantalizing” it was only dropped because she “couldn’t make the numbers work.”

During the campaign, Clinton publicly proposed a series of tax increases, which amounted to a minimum $1 trillion over ten years. She campaigned on a 65% Death Tax, a personal income tax hike, a corporate income tax hike, and an “exit tax.” She also said she would not veto a payroll tax hike on all Americans, and cracked open the door to a carbon tax. Clinton even endorsed a steep new local soda tax in Philadelphia.

The official 2016 Democrat Party platform calls for a carbon tax. The official 2016 Republican Party platform rejects any and all carbon taxes.

In the book, Clinton suggested yet another tax: “taxing net worth.” She describes this tax as a “transformative” idea.

Americans for Tax Reform has documented Clinton’s entire tax hike career, at a dedicated website: www.HighTaxHillary.com

Photo Credit:


Grover Norquist Op-Ed in Washington Examiner: Trump’s Tax Reform Campaign is a Huge Deal

Share on Facebook
Tweet this Story
Pin this Image

Posted by Abigail Marone on Thursday, August 31st, 2017, 11:03 AM PERMALINK

Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist authored an op-ed today in the Washington Examiner describing the magnitude of President Trump’s tax reform agenda.

Norquist explained that in the 31 years since President Reagan last reformed the tax code, the Washington establishment has burdened Americans with thousands of pages of tax regulations and created more loopholes for special interests.

President Trump’s agenda of lowering taxes and simplifying the tax code has the potential to increase America’s growth rate while benefiting individuals and small businesses alike: 

Trump pointed out that if America grew at 3 percent a year rather than the anemic 2 percent a year for the next 10 years, our nominal GDP would be $16 trillion higher than our current path. Federal revenues would be $2.9 trillion higher, allowing tax cuts and/or debt reduction, plus workers would have $7 trillion more in wages and salaries.

Read the full op-ed and find out more on why this is such a huge deal for American taxpayers.

Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore

Photo Credit:

More from Americans for Tax Reform


×