Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mitt Romney Would Pay 0.82 Percent in Taxes Under Paul Ryan's Plan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mitt Romney Would Pay 0.82 Percent in Taxes Under Paul Ryan's Plan

    This must be why he picked Ryan...
    Under Paul Ryan's plan, Mitt Romney wouldn't pay any taxes for the next ten years -- or any of the years after that. Now, do I know that that's true. Yes, I'm certain.

    Well, maybe not quite nothing. In 2010 -- the only year we have seen a full return from him -- Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82 percent under the Ryan plan, rather than the 13.9 percent he actually did. How would someone with more than $21 million in taxable income pay so little? Well, the vast majority of Romney's income came from capital gains, interest, and dividends. And Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends.

    Romney, of course, criticized this idea when Newt Gingrich proposed it back in January by pointing out that zeroing out taxes on savings and investment would mean zeroing out his own taxes.

    Under Paul Ryan's plan, Mitt Romney wouldn't pay any taxes for the next ten years -- or any of the years after that. Now, do I know that that's true. Yes, I'm certain.

    Well, maybe not quite nothing. In 2010 -- the only year we have seen a full return from him -- Romney would have paid an effective tax rate of around 0.82 percent under the Ryan plan, rather than the 13.9 percent he actually did. How would someone with more than $21 million in taxable income pay so little? Well, the vast majority of Romney's income came from capital gains, interest, and dividends. And Ryan wants to eliminate all taxes on capital gains, interest and dividends.

    Romney, of course, criticized this idea when Newt Gingrich proposed it back in January by pointing out that zeroing out taxes on savings and investment would mean zeroing out his own taxes.

    Almost. Romney did earn $593,996 in author and speaking fees in 2010 that would still be taxed under the Ryan plan. Just not much. Ryan would cut the top marginal tax rate from 35 to 25 percent and get rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax -- saving Romney another $292,389 or so on his 2010 tax bill. Now, Romney would still owe self-employment taxes on his author and speaking fees, but that only amounts to $29,151. Add it all up, and Romney would have paid $177,650 out of a taxable income of $21,661,344, for a cool effective rate of 0.82 percent.

    But what about corporate taxes? Aren't they a double tax on savings and investment, so Romney's "real" rate is higher than his headline rate? No. As Jared Bernstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has pointed out, Romney has structured his investments as "pass-throughs" that avoid corporate tax. In other words, the 0.82 percent tax rate is really a 0.82 percent tax rate.

    It might seem impossible to fund the government when the super-rich pay no taxes. That is accurate. Ryan would actually raise taxes on the bottom 30 percent of earners, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, but that hardly fills the revenue hole he would create. The solution? All but eliminate all government outside of Social Security and defense -- a point my colleague Derek Thompson has made in incredible chart form.

    Maybe Harry Reid's mysterious source that Romney didn't pay taxes for a decade was really a time-traveler from the future. If Romney wins, it could very well be true.


    Oh, and Romney's a hypocrite...

  • #2
    Gribbler's finally made the full transformation into an r/politics-level tool.
    If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
    ){ :|:& };:

    Comment


    • #3
      First of all, this is actually a good idea, even if it means he doesn't pay taxes that year. Just because he pays no taxes this year doesn't mean the income didn't have taxes paid on it at some point beforehand. Capital gains taxes are a "double tax", something we have discussed at length here and you even conceded to previously, as I recall.

      Second, what makes you think Mitt Romney is in total lockstep with the policy proposals of his VP? Do you think Obama agrees with every piece of legislation Biden ever proposed while in the Senate? I would seriously doubt it. For political reasons, I suspect Mitt Romney does not outwardly share the opinion that there should be no capital gains tax whatsoever.

      So what's next? Are you going to show us the debunked Richmonder article claiming that Paul Ryan is guilty of insider trading?
      If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
      ){ :|:& };:

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
        First of all, this is actually a good idea, even if it means he doesn't pay taxes that year. Just because he pays no taxes this year doesn't mean the income didn't have taxes paid on it at some point beforehand. Capital gains taxes are a "double tax", something we have discussed at length here and you even conceded to previously, as I recall.

        Second, what makes you think Mitt Romney is in total lockstep with the policy proposals of his VP? Do you think Obama agrees with every piece of legislation Biden ever proposed while in the Senate? I would seriously doubt it. For political reasons, I suspect Mitt Romney does not outwardly share the opinion that there should be no capital gains tax whatsoever.

        So what's next? Are you going to show us the debunked Richmonder article claiming that Paul Ryan is guilty of insider trading?
        Ah yes, the people that earn income by owning shares surely are onerously taxed for the hard work they put into purchasing shares. And then being protected from personal liability if the company does something illegal. The horrors of double taxation.

        Sometimes I wonder if you're really just a 72 year old plutocrat trapped in a 20 something body
        Last edited by MRT144; August 14, 2012, 00:28.
        "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
        'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
          Just because he pays no taxes this year doesn't mean the income didn't have taxes paid on it at some point beforehand. Capital gains taxes are a "double tax", something we have discussed at length here and you even conceded to
          This would normally be true, except for the monstrous treatment of carried interest.
          12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
          Stadtluft Macht Frei
          Killing it is the new killing it
          Ultima Ratio Regum

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by KrazyHorse View Post
            This would normally be true, except for the monstrous treatment of carried interest.
            Don't rankle the plutocrat's monocle.
            "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
            'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
              For political reasons, I suspect Mitt Romney does not outwardly share the opinion that there should be no capital gains tax whatsoever.
              Yeah...

              Comment


              • #8
                For dutch standards I'm quite right-wing politically....
                But ever again if I read up about the USA right-wing tax ideas......
                The rich guys are really far far undertaxed. And rich people should imho always be taxed more, both in relative and absolute numbers, then poorer people.

                In Holland the people who earn the most pay 52% tax and those who earn the least pay about 12% tax (and 20% social insurance as well).
                Well, that's way too much, but the USA could easily improve it's financial position by at least making all rich people pay 25% tax. That's not so bad, and the rich still don't have much countries to flee to where the taxing is better (and the circumstances not terrible).

                I mean, running a country is something you do together, everybody pays it's part.
                I'd wish we could let the USA marry The Netherlands so that our absurd high taxes would be lowered, and yours would be highered.

                Does that make me a left-wing politician if it concerns the USA?
                Formerly known as "CyberShy"
                Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori

                Comment


                • #9
                  You're a godless communist, Plomp.
                  Graffiti in a public toilet
                  Do not require skill or wit
                  Among the **** we all are poets
                  Among the poets we are ****.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Dividing one number by another is not a rigorous analysis of how someone's purchasing power is diminished through taxation. See, eg, here. By the poor metrics you're using, Romney's tax rate should be close to zero, because instead of selfishly consuming resources for himself, he rents them out to others so that they can use them to become more productive.
                    "You're the biggest user of hindsight that I've ever known. Your favorite team, in any sport, is the one that just won. If you were a woman, you'd likely be a slut." - Slowwhand, to Imran

                    Eschewing silly games since December 4, 2005

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                      Just because he pays no taxes this year doesn't mean the income didn't have taxes paid on it at some point beforehand.
                      It's income just like wages and should be taxed just like income from wages. It's irrelevant that someone paid taxes on their wages. They should have. And they should pay taxes on their nonwage income as well.
                      I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
                      - Justice Brett Kavanaugh

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Kidicious View Post
                        It's income just like wages and should be taxed just like income from wages.
                        Wage taxes reduce investment income by themselves, by reducing the principal. The correct tax rate on investment income is 0. Paul Ryan wants to treat investment and non-investment equally, just like you. The difference between him and you is that he understands math.
                        "You're the biggest user of hindsight that I've ever known. Your favorite team, in any sport, is the one that just won. If you were a woman, you'd likely be a slut." - Slowwhand, to Imran

                        Eschewing silly games since December 4, 2005

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MRT144 View Post
                          Don't rankle the plutocrat's monocle.
                          The problem arises because of the same accounting approach to taxation which causes us to view dividends interest and capital gains on the footing as wages
                          12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
                          Stadtluft Macht Frei
                          Killing it is the new killing it
                          Ultima Ratio Regum

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            That is gives me an interesting idea.

                            If I take the same person/skill/etc working in the same type of job, he will make more and be more productive in one area than another due to the capital or assets that one company has over the other company.

                            Isn't it the same, the difference between two professions or jobs/etc? The difference between the people also comes down to returns on capital. Just due to educational or social. Really the 'wages' are due to the return on the educational investment (which cost some large sum of money) and other similar investments. Actual wages are in general minimum wage or less.

                            This is also an obvious way to look at things when you consider two people working the same job but with different pay. The one who is payed more has had his vocational capital increase more than the one who has not. It is just a type of capital gain.

                            JM
                            Jon Miller-
                            I AM.CANADIAN
                            GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes.
                              "You're the biggest user of hindsight that I've ever known. Your favorite team, in any sport, is the one that just won. If you were a woman, you'd likely be a slut." - Slowwhand, to Imran

                              Eschewing silly games since December 4, 2005

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X