I've read this before but here is the gist of the research showing that neither the top 1%, nor the top 5%, nor even all those making over $160,000 could be taxed sufficiently to pay for these deficits and programs:
From Cesar Conda at NRO: "supply-side economist Dr. Richard W. Rahn, my old boss from my days at the U.S. Chamber in the 1980s, does a much better job of debunking this fraudulent notion that only taxing the wealthy can take care of Obama's spending and deficit-cutting promises:
"The Congressional Budget Office projects a total additional deficit of approximately $4.9 trillion dollars during President Obama's first term (2009-2012). Currently, the top 1 percent of taxpayers pay 40 percent of the tax, or $450 billion a year, or approximately $1.8 trillion dollars during the next four years, leaving a $3.1 trillion hole. Increasing the tax rate on those high earners to 100 percent might yield an additional $1.5 trillion the first year, but this will only work for the first year. Most people, after being taxed 100 percent on their income, will quit work and/or put their investments in nontaxable entities, such as tax-free local government bonds...
"It is also not mathematically possible to take care of all the new spending by increasing taxes on the top 5 percent of taxpayers (those making $160,000 or more annually) who already pay 61 percent of the federal tax (or $676 billion per year)...
"Quite simply, upper-income people have options. History shows that when tax rates are raised, many will choose to work less (leisure is nontaxable), retire earlier than they had planned and save and invest less in taxable, productive activities. Those making more than $160,000 per year would need to have their taxes roughly tripled to take care of just this year's deficit."
— Cesar Conda is a former policy advisor to Vice President Cheney and Mitt Romney's 2008 presidential campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment