This thread points out some of the misleading, disingenuous nonsense peddled by both political parties.
For instance, just consider this statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLouie
Just 2 percent of people with any business income, large or small, would be affected by this tax increase.
|
That gets widely parroted by members of the media who are biased, clueless, or both. But anyone who takes just a second to think about it will notice the fatuousness of the claim. Of course only a tiny percentage of small businesses are owned by those in the top 0.2% of the income strata, since the vast majority of "small businesses" are one-or-two-person operations which produce little income and create few jobs outside the immediate household. If someone makes a few thousand bucks selling stuff on eBay, for instance, and files a "schedule C", that is counted as a small business.
Equally disingenuous statements are made by those on the other side of the issue.
For instance, there's this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigLouie
“It’s just intuitive that, you know, if you’re somebody who’s in business and you get hit with a tax increase, it’s going to be that much harder, I think, to make investments that are going to lead to job creation,” said Sen. John Thune (R-SD).
|
In the first place, in this era of high levels of income disparity it seems to me that it must be very bad politics for Republicans to block
any tax increase on the affluent, even a relatively small one, at all costs. It just looks like political suicide.
But Thune, apparently in a simple attempt to repeat a partisan talking point, seems to completely misunderstand the issue. The proposed tax increase would make little or no difference in employers' job-creation and capital formation capabilities because they wouldn't have to pay it!
The reason is really very simple. Now it just so happens that the top-bracket corporate income tax rate (35%) and the top-bracket rate on individual income are the same. Therefore, many owners of fairly lucrative small businesses take "pass-through" income from LLCs or Subchapter S corporations, since in either case the income stream is taxed at the same rate.
Now some politicians want to push the top bracket individual income tax rate as high as possible, perhaps back to 39.6% with a surcharge stacked on top of that. But
no one is discussing raising the top
corporate rate, especially since the OECD average rate has dropped to around 25% in recent years. In fact, there's pressure to
lower the corporate rate, while getting rid of various loopholes and exclusions, in order to make U.S. businesses operating in the international arena more competitive.
The obvious effect of these changes would be to incentivize business owners to refrain from taking any more salary income than necessary, while leaving as much as possible taxed at somewhat lower corporate rates.
That's the
real reason the proposed tax surcharges won't affect capital formation or job creation. But you should not expect anyone in the media to point it out, which will probably surprise no one. Why let facts get in the way when there are political points to be scored and axes to be ground?
And that's also part of the reason that the surtax on "millionaires and billionaires" will only raise a fraction of the revenue predicted by its supporters.
Of course, some politicians continually fantasize about massive new vote-buying schemes finaced by a gusher of revenue from taxing the wealthy. But it isn't going to materialize.