Posted on 09/22/2012 6:44:59 PM PDT by RandallFlagg
>> to his take-home pay
I didn’t review his tax returns, but I’m guessing he had no take-home pay per se — he received dividends subject to 15% tax previously taxed at the 35% corp tax. “Take-home pay” is expensed by the corp and not subject to the 35% corp tax.
Romney’s investment revenue is essentially subject to a 45% tax.
Six Reasons Why the Capital Gains Tax Should Be Abolished
This is a YouTube video from a guy at the Cato Institute. It's only about 6 minutes. I would have preferred a written article, but this is really informative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.