Posted on 04/09/2005 9:32:49 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
Group of wealthy call for 'tax revolt'
Fri Apr 8,11:30 AM ET Offbeat - AFP
WASHINGTON (AFP) - As millions of Americans approach a deadline for income taxes, a group of wealthy taxpayers is calling for revolt -- against the tax cuts of recent years that benefited them disproportionately.
The group called Responsible Wealth, claiming to represent members of the richest five percent of Americans, launched a new campaign this month to draw attention to what they claims is an ill-advised series of tax cuts engineered by the administration of President George W. Bush.
The tax cuts delivered 69 billion dollars for 2004 to the top tier of Americans, with annual incomes over 200,000 dollars.
But the campaign urges the wealthy, instead of simply handing back the tax cuts to the US Treasury, to pledge the money to organizations campaigning for fairer taxes.
"We're asking them to set it aside to support work to have more fair and more adequate taxation," said Bob Keener, spokesman for Responsible Wealth, a group that has also campaigned to prevent the elimination of the estate tax.
"So far we have about 65 people who have done it, but we are just starting the campaign."
Responsible Wealth created an online calculator that can be used by individuals to calculate their personal 2004 tax break. It also provides the names of "grassroots" organizations fighting for tax reforms such as the Fund for Tax Fairness.
The campaign comes just ahead of the April 15 annual deadline for Americans to complete their income tax returns.
"It's obscene that Washington is handing out tax breaks to millionaires with one hand and shredding the safety net with the other," said Marta Drury, a Responsible Wealth member.
"I want it to stop, so I'm calculating my 2004 tax cut and donating it to organizations fighting for responsible, fair and adequate taxes. I don't believe that people like me with incomes over 200,000 dollars need 69 billion dollars in tax cuts."
According to a study cited by Responsible Wealth, taxpayers who made more than one million dollars received an average federal income tax break of 123,592 dollars in 2004.
This compares to 383 dollars, the average tax break in 2004 for the two-thirds of taxpayers who make less than 50,000 dollars annually.
"The next time a politician says we can't afford to fund something you care about, ask yourself if 69 billion dollars per year would help," said Scott Klinger, co-director of Responsible Wealth.
The Bush administration engineered tax cuts worth 1.35 trillion dollars over 10 years in 2001 and another 350 billion dollars over 10 years in 2003. All of the tax cuts expire by the end of 2010. Some expire earlier, such as a dividend tax cut, which is due to evaporate at the end of 2008.
But some critics of the tax code from the other side say taxes remain too high.
"The current tax code is too high and far too complicated," said Chris Kinnan, spokesman for Freedom Works, a group dedicated to "lower taxes, less government and more economic freedom."
As for the Responsible Wealth movement, Kinnan argued, "Those individuals are more than free to contribute additional money to the treasury, but it's ridiculous to argue that this should be imposed on all taxpayers."
Kinnan said high tax rates originally designed for the wealthy now apply to many small businesses and middle-class families with two incomes.
"A lot of the problems in our tax code started out with the notion of 'let's soak the rich,' but this is now affecting a lot of the middle class."
The US budget deficit is projected to hit a record 427 billion dollars in fiscal 2005, but Kinnan said, "Our view is the deficit is the result of too much spending, not because taxes aren't high enough."
There's nothing worse than a rich leftist.
Exactly. They want to pull up the ladder after them.
the "Trust Funders" are at it again.....sheesh....idiots.
Yeah. So they're giving back their tax cuts this year, right? They should go ahead and be an example to the rest of us.
After the first few million, the marginal utility of wealth tends to substantially degrade, unless one is a power tripper.
""It's obscene that Washington is handing out tax breaks to millionaires with one hand and shredding the safety net with the other," said Marta Drury, a Responsible Wealth member.
"I want it to stop, so I'm calculating my 2004 tax cut and donating it to organizations fighting for responsible, fair and adequate taxes. I don't believe that people like me with incomes over 200,000 dollars need 69 billion dollars in tax cuts.""
Will your Idiotness Drury if you spent your wealth properly as in giving to charity and employing people, maybe you would need those tax cuts!
There's nothing worse than a rich leftist.
===
As per usual, the old mantra, which ALWAYS LEAVES OUT THE FACT THE MONEY EARNERS OF THIS COUNTRY PAY ALL THE TAXES, the old, tired, worn-out rant of the left, about "TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY" continues to pander to the ignorant, and the stupid sector of our society, the votes so dear to these lying liberals.
The desperation of the left continues to try to REDISTRIBUTE OUR WEALTH FOR THEIR POWER AND CONTROL...Socialism 101, just keeps on rolling ---
How about endorsing a flat tax so these millionaires pay more than non millionaires. I'd love to see their tax returns. I promise you what keeps them from paying a lot of taxes isn't Bush's tax cuts but deductions (loopholes) that were put in place by Democrats to promote political and social agendas and earn themselves more votes. If they think they aren't paying enough taxes all they have to do is not take advantage of all the deductions.
In New York, we used to call them "Trustafarians."
Okay... Put another zero on your check to Uncle Sam, and STFU.
(These jerks never cease to amaze me).
(shaking head and rolling eyes). sorry
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
The really really wealthy don't have income. They pay little income tax. They put their money in such things as tax free municipal bonds. That is where Kerry's wife has most of her money. She is paid millions in interest that is not considered income. It is not taxed. But she pays a percentage on the small portion of the money she takes in.. The portion that is income and wages.
The filthy rich don't have a job.They don't work. they don't earn wages. That is for people who work. Who are starting small businesses and making large income.
But once one is very rich, working for wages is just stupid.
So the filthy rich always want the other guy to pay. To the filthy rich the other guy is the fellow still working for wages who is very successful.
The problem for them is when Bush cuts taxes he also cuts the loopholes for the rich who do not earn wages.
Democrats do two things with taxes .. raise them and create loopholes for the very rich.
Republicans do two things with taxes.. cut them and close loopholes for the very rich.
Quite obvious they didn't work for it.
The people that support higher taxes are always the ones that don't have to pay them. In the case of the rich they don't have jobs so they don't earn $200,000 per year. Instead they live entirely off capital gains, which are taxed at a much lower rate than working income. Most rich are in the 15% tax bracket or lower, a fraction of what a hard working doctor with student loans must pay.
Their Grand-Daddy's gave it to them (and MADE it for them) and probably are ROLLING in THEIR graves!
Exactly. Until they are ready to put their own money on the line FIRST, they should keep their grubby hands off mine.
That would be poor tax planning. Municipal bonds should only be bought by someone in the 28% bracket or higher as a general rule. And many of the modestly rich, say in the 5 to 15 million dollar range, do work for a living.
I'll bet John D. Rockefeller wishes he had had a vasectomy.
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.