Posted on 07/08/2006 10:20:32 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Curbs U.S. Deficit By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
WASHINGTON, July 8 An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the budget deficit this year, even though spending has climbed sharply because of the war in Iraq and the cost of hurricane relief.
On Tuesday, White House officials are expected to announce that the tax receipts will be about $250 billion above last year's levels and that the deficit will be about $100 billion less than what they projected six months ago. The rising tide in tax payments has been building for months, but the increased scale is surprising even seasoned budget analysts and making it easier for both the administration and Congress to finesse the big run-up in spending over the past year.
Tax revenues are climbing twice as fast as the administration predicted in February, so fast that the budget deficit could actually decline this year.
The main reason is a big spike in corporate tax receipts, which have nearly tripled since 2003, as well as what appears to be a big rise in individual taxes on stock market profits and executive bonuses.
On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office reported that corporate tax receipts for the nine months ending in June hit $250 billion nearly 26 percent higher than the same time last year and that overall revenues were $206 billion higher than at this point in 2005.
Congressional analysts say that the surprise windfall could shrink the deficit this year to $300 billion, from $318 billion in 2005 and an all-time high of $412 billion in 2004.
Republicans are already arguing that the revenue jump proves their argument that tax cuts, especially the 2003 tax cut on stock dividends,
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
This is an excerpt. Check out the On-Budget vs Off-Budget for 2002-2005. You're right. It is interesting. (and I REALLY hope that this formatting takes).
\
Table 1.1ÃÂÃÂSUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789ÃÂÃÂ2011 |
|||||||||
(in millions of dollars) |
|||||||||
Year |
Total |
On-Budget |
Off-Budget |
||||||
Receipts |
Outlays |
Surplus or Deficit(−) |
Receipts |
Outlays |
Surplus or Deficit(−) |
Receipts |
Outlays |
Surplus or Deficit(−) |
|
2000 |
2,025,457 |
1,789,216 |
236,241 |
1,544,873 |
1,458,451 |
86,422 |
480,584 |
330,765 |
149,819 |
2001 |
1,991,426 |
1,863,190 |
128,236 |
1,483,907 |
1,516,352 |
-32,445 |
507,519 |
346,838 |
160,681 |
2002 |
1,853,395 |
2,011,153 |
-157,758 |
1,338,074 |
1,655,491 |
-317,417 |
515,321 |
355,662 |
159,659 |
2003 |
1,782,532 |
2,160,117 |
-377,585 |
1,258,690 |
1,797,108 |
-538,418 |
523,842 |
363,009 |
160,833 |
2004 |
1,880,279 |
2,293,006 |
-412,727 |
1,345,534 |
1,913,495 |
-567,961 |
534,745 |
379,511 |
155,234 |
2005 |
2,153,859 |
2,472,205 |
-318,346 |
1,576,383 |
2,069,994 |
-493,611 |
577,476 |
402,211 |
175,265 |
2006 estimate |
2,285,491 |
2,708,677 |
-423,186 |
1,675,526 |
2,277,667 |
-602,141 |
609,965 |
431,010 |
178,955 |
2007 estimate |
2,415,852 |
2,770,097 |
-354,245 |
1,773,533 |
2,316,952 |
-543,419 |
642,319 |
453,145 |
189,174 |
2008 estimate |
2,590,258 |
2,813,592 |
-223,334 |
1,911,129 |
2,347,125 |
-435,996 |
679,129 |
466,467 |
212,662 |
2009 estimate |
2,714,207 |
2,921,760 |
-207,553 |
1,997,985 |
2,435,200 |
-437,215 |
716,222 |
486,560 |
229,662 |
2010 estimate |
2,878,167 |
3,060,875 |
-182,708 |
2,119,705 |
2,527,217 |
-407,512 |
758,462 |
533,658 |
224,804 |
2011 estimate |
3,034,861 |
3,239,769 |
-204,908 |
2,233,286 |
2,648,669 |
-415,383 |
801,575 |
591,100 |
210,475 |
Oh good. I was trying to figure out where you could have misconstrued what I was saying... ;-)
I am pleasantly surprised that the NYT printed this information prominently at their website.
Yesterday I was listening to Rush, then ABC News broke in. Bad News: job growth less than expected. Only 120,000 new jobs added last month - less than the 160,000 estimated by some. They can spin anything.
My state also. They have spent it all and are still in a budget crisis.
"Did you know that just over the past 11 quarters, dating back to the June 2003 Bush tax cuts, America has increased the size of its entire economy by 20 percent? In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy, and much larger than the total economic size of nations like India, Mexico, Ireland, and Belgium."
Amazing.
Expect more spending increses.
Technically, what TeMarius3188 said was true, but it's misleading.
The point is that Clinton's budgets slashed defense spending in favor of domestic programs, and GW Bush's priorities were to restore defense spending.
Agreed. I have heard normally sane people argue that they would rather not get raises, because then they'd have to pay more taxes. Nobody likes to pay more taxes, but if your total net income is higher even with increased taxes, then it's quite stupid to not want a pay raise. I suspect that most of the anti-raise people were joking or not thinking coherently at the time. I also suspect that they would actually jump for joy at a pay raise.
Quite right. Everybody is quick to calculate the costs of doing something, but it is a lot harder to tote up the costs of not doing the right thing. Pay me now, or pay me a lot more later. Clinton preferred that the dirty work of guaranteeing the country's safety be done after he left office.
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.