Tue Nov 13, 2012, 12:11 PM
Roland99 (37,118 posts)
Romney adviser Hubbard says to increase taxes on the rich
In an op-ed in the Financial Times (registration may be required), Hubbard suggested raising average tax rates, though not marginal tax rates, as President Obama has advocated. “There are ways to raise revenue without increasing marginal rates. Tax deductions should be scaled back, especially in the areas of mortgage interest, charitable giving and employer-provided health insurance,” Hubbard wrote.
It’s not a clear departure from Romney’s stance in fact, as the former Massachusetts governor also advocating limiting deductions, though he never specified a clear level for capping deductions, or for that matter which deductions would be capped.
Hubbard advocated three positions to solving the fiscal cliff — one, limiting deductions on upper-income taxpayers; second, agreeing a package of spending reductions over the n ext 10 years; and third, gradually reducing “benefit expenditure over time for the non-poor.”
Meanwhile, anti-tax campaigner Grover Norquist said in an interview with the National Journal that a “carbon tax swap” would not violate his pledge that many Republicans have taken with his group not to raise taxes. A carbon tax swap, which Norquist says “would infuriate” taxpayers, would work by marrying an income tax cut with taxes caused by burning coal, oil and natural gas.
Read more: http://blogs.marketwatch.com/election/2012/11/13/romney-adviser-hubbard-says-to-increase-taxes-on-the-rich/
Not sure how removing tax deductions that benefit the middle class so much equates to raising taxes on the rich. Raising the marginal tax rates, esp. on corporations, can only result in an incentive to invest or donate "excess" income to avoid taxation. The large reduction in top marginal rates has reduced corporate incentive to invest in capital and/or increase wages for employees.
5 replies, 1658 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Romney adviser Hubbard says to increase taxes on the rich (Original post)
Response to LoisB (Reply #1)
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 07:06 PM
HuskiesHowls (685 posts)
4. Would it really??
I hear this a lot, almost all the time. I am middle class, I've owned 3 homes in my adult life, and, interestingly enough....have NEVER been able to use it!!! I've never had enough overall deductions to make it worthwhile to itemize, which is necessary to use the mortgage interest deduction. I know that my situation may not be typical, but it would be interesting to know what percentage of middle income homeowners use that deduction.
Also, mortgage interest on more than one home can be used. I rather imagine that not a lot of middle class earners own more than 1 home, while we know for certain that certain wealthy former presidential candidates (not just Romney) own (and use this deduction) for more than 1 home. That can be modified, so that interest for the mortgage for the principal residence ONLY can be used.
And, if the cap for the amount borrowed is lowered, it would affect more of the wealthy than middle class people.
It may not be the best idea, but it is not something that should be rejected out-of-hand.
To learn anything, you must put aside the safety of your ignorance. Messiah's Handbook
Response to HuskiesHowls (Reply #4)
Tue Nov 13, 2012, 09:34 PM
Celebration (15,625 posts)
5. depends on where you live
high cost of homes vs. low cost of homes.................
I say raise taxes on the upper 1%, the upper 1% want to raise taxes on the upper 20%, but leave their taxes the same.........
That is the difference!
http://fotofiler.smugmug.com/ As the waves pass the rock, their shape is changed. There is a hologram of the rock within the wave that comes forward and crashes on the beach, then there's a reflected wave back. Ralph Abraham