A Minimum Tax for the Wealthy – NYTimes.com:
This outrage points to the necessity for more than a simple revision in upper-end tax rates, though that’s the place to start. I support President Obama’s proposal to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for high-income taxpayers. However, I prefer a cutoff point somewhat above $250,000 — maybe $500,000 or so.
Additionally, we need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that. A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours. Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy.
Above all, we should not postpone these changes in the name of “reforming” the tax code. True, changes are badly needed. We need to get rid of arrangements like “carried interest” that enable income from labor to be magically converted into capital gains. And it’s sickening that a Cayman Islands mail drop can be central to tax maneuvering by wealthy individuals and corporations.
But the reform of such complexities should not promote delay in our correcting simple and expensive inequities. We can’t let those who want to protect the privileged get away with insisting that we do nothing until we can do everything.
[I agree with everything he said in this piece.]
2 thoughts on “Buffet nails it”
I’d say this — the proposal is for the increase to be on the amount over $250k, not the first $250k. I think paying another 3% on that is minimal if you are making that kind of money. e.g., if you make $500k your additional tax would be about $15k. Big deal.
I didn’t know that… thanks. ( the proposal is for the increase to be on the amount over $250k, not the first $250k) but still I don’t think it would kill anything to nudge that number a bit higher as Buffet suggests.