Whats Fair When it Comes to Taxes?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by GMScud

In 2008, Obama was asked if he would still support a raise in the capital gains tax rate, even if it meant a decrease in government revenues. He said "yes," in the name of "fairness." Well that's just spreading it around for the hell of it. And isn't the intended effect of the Buffet Rule to raise the capital gains tax rate?

I think Mitch Daniels explained it pretty well in his State of The Union rebuttal. To get the rich to contribute more, you don't raise taxes- slowing economic growth. Gotta have tax reform. Close those loopholes from which the rich benefit so much, and means-test entitlements so the benefits of which are going to those who need it most. Makes sense I think.

Call it fairness or class warfare but no matter how you slice it it is a travesty that Buffet has a better effective tax rate than his secretary.

[mlmpetert]

^^ Sorry im just getting back to this. Okay so it sounds like your only beef with capital gain treatment is when it comes to the carried interest rule. I get both sides of carried interest rule but the thing to remember is that there are 2 sides to this complicated rule.

When you have partners of a private equity firm only taking income via selling long term capital gains of shares of the private companies they became vested during the course of their ownership, in the holding company their owners of, its important to remember that corporate income taxes have been, are being, or will be paid on the shares of those private companies they own. Its still a 15% tax on top of actual earnings and future earning valuations. And theres still risk in private equity, i think most would say private equity has more inherent risk then public companies, as the market is much less efficient and illiquid.

^ Warren Buffet's secretary needs to release her tax return if they want to keep this up. What they claim makes no sense.

How Rich Is Warren Buffett's Secretary? - Megan McArdle - Business - The Atlantic