Thread: New tax cut???
View Single Post
Old 05-12-2003, 10:14 AM   #4 (permalink)
Liquor Dealer
Super Agitator
 
Liquor Dealer's Avatar
 
Location: Just SW of Nowhere!!! In the good old US of A
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/te..._cut_5-07.html

As I understand it, and I am by no means an accountant, one section will do the following:

If Taxable income is $0-$6,000, you save: $0-$300
If Taxable income is $6,000 - $27,950, you save: $0 (no change in taxes)
If Taxable income is $27,950-$67,70, you save: $838.50-$2,031
If Taxable income is $67,700-$141,250, you save: $2031-$4,237.50
If Taxable income is $141,250-$307,050, you save: $4237.50-$9211.50
If Taxable income is $307,050 or higher, you save: $11,053.80 or higher


(I don't know where the quoted figure of $270 came from)
This from a teacher's guide explaining one section:
There are lots of sections.


The following makes interesting reading
http://www.ncpa.org/bothside/krt/krt010600b.html
Bush's Proposed Tax-Cut Will Remove Six-Million Americans From Tax Roles

ALEXANDRIA, VA.

In a town notorious for spectacles, it is something to behold.

Testimonies by the new found believers, the fire-and-brimstone sermons, and the brash choir belting out a high-flying refrain would have brought tears to the eyes of Jimmy Swaggart.

But the "congregation" isn't in church; they are in Washington railing against tax relief because it was "fiscally irresponsible."

Yet, opponents of tax cuts continue to demonstrate that they are still worshipping at the altar of big government, and their claim of having been "saved" is just a different verse from the old hymn book of government knows best.

Instead of donning false frocks of fiscal responsibility, these new acolytes ought to take a page from their predecessors' book.

In 1981, House Speaker Tip O'Neill proposed, in current dollars, a $1.3 trillion five-year tax cut to counter the $1.6 trillion tax cut offered by Ronald Reagan. At well over a trillion dollars, O'Neill's plan was billed as the "responsible" alternative.

In contrast, the Congressional plan President Clinton vetoed last year would return only $792 billion over the next ten years, and it included a mechanism to limit the cuts if the projected surpluses do not materialize.

Based on cautious economic assumptions, the plan currently proposed by Texas Governor George W. Bush would provide roughly $440 billion of tax relief over the next five years.

With stern warnings that a tax cut would fuel the flames of inflation and would overstimulate the economy, these new disciples of austerity argued for saving the money and paying down the debt.

Yet, they were willing to support President Clinton's plan that generated an additional $850 billion in new spending over the next ten years - on top of the $2.5 trillion increase called for under current budget projections.

The Clinton scheme would have raised taxes by almost $95 billion and soaked up $750 billion of the budget surplus over the next ten years. A similar proposal is expected to be submitted this year.

Research by National Taxpayers Union Foundation found that the legislative agendas of tax-cut opponents in the House of Representatives during the last Congress would increase federal spending, on average, by $115.9 billion per year.

While opponents of the tax-cut sing the praises of their new-found faith, they remain filled with joy when the choir belted out that old familiar standard: "only the rich benefit."

By definition, any plan to cut income taxes is likely to help those who do, in fact, have income. Even the IRS's own data show that the top tenth of income earners made 43 percent of the money in 1997 but paid 63 percent of the income taxes. I

Ironically, the income cut-off for this "rich" group of taxpayers began at $79,000 - hardly in league with Donald Trump.

Nonetheless, the Bush plan would still eliminate federal income taxes for a family of four making $35,000 per year, and it would remove over six million lower- and moderate-income families from the tax roll.

Far from being risky or reckless, plans to give money back to taxpayers are modest, measured moves. Unfortunately for these new pastors of the public purse, taxpayers can separate those who have real faith in them from those who are only mouthing the words.

Jeff Dircksen is Director of Congressional Analysis for the National Taxpayers Union, the nation's oldest and largest taxpayers' rights group.


__________________
Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

Last edited by Liquor Dealer; 05-12-2003 at 10:20 AM..
Liquor Dealer is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360