Posted on 10/07/2011 12:58:21 PM PDT by Qbert
Senate Democrats proposed today a 5.0 5.6 percent surtax on the "rich," where they define rich as someone who makes a $1M or more. Senator Schumer was instrumental in moving the threshold from $250,000 to $1M, apparently because he recognizes the impact it would have on small business, since much of this income is taxed as personal income:
On Wednesday, Schumer said raising taxes on families earning more than $250,000 a year, as Obama has long supported, would affect small businesses, an argument that is more associated with Republicans than Democrats."It also would affect too many small businesses if you drew the line below a million dollars," he said. "There are businesses, small businesses, that struggle. So we believe the million dollars is the right line because in many parts of the country there are two-income households that earn that much. That doesn't make them rich."
However, the millionaire tax would still affect about 35 percent of business income, and at least 140,000 taxpayers that report this business income, according to the most recent IRS data. In 2009 there were 141,035 millionaires with income from partnerships or S-corporations, 39,662 with income from sole propietorships, and 1,840 with income from farms. The chart below shows that the income from these businesses represent about one third of total income for millionaires (those with adjusted gross income of $1M or more). [Click chart to enlarge.]
The key lesson is that taxing the "rich" through our personal income tax code neccesarily means taxing business, including small business, since the majority of business income is reported as personal income. That means a lot of businesses that were thinking of expanding and hiring are now thinking they'll get hit with a new tax. Does this seem fair to the 14 million Americans who are unemployed?
Since all federal taxes are an expense to a corporation, LLC, or “rich” individual, in the end they are paid by the consumer of the products and services they provide.
There is no free lunch here for the “poor” who clamor for increased taxes on the “rich”.
Raise taxes on the “rich” and watch prices of everything rise.
If your ran a casino and you kept talking about
changing how much you were going to rake out of
the winner’s pot, how many players would walk out
the door?
“Since all federal taxes are an expense to a corporation, LLC, or “rich” individual, in the end they are paid by the consumer of the products and services they provide.”
Isn’t it funny how the same sort of people driven mad by the legal fiction that grants free speech rights to corporations are fine with it when it means they can confiscate more money?
“the end they are paid by the consumer of the products and services they provide.”
Actually, this isn’t true. I hear all the time about corporations carrying the cost over to consumers, but that’s not how supply and demand works. Varying with elasticity, most of the cost goes back to the origin of production. Which means: 1) less income for everyone involved in production, and 2) a lower standard of living for consumers denied the product.
Funny how they want to protect those who have already become millionaires (mainly themselves) at the expense of those who actually earn income and create new wealth. Status quo, thy name is 'Democrat'.
Hollywood millionaires and CEOs donate to the party which must be ‘bought’ in order to avoid high taxes and regulations.
Up and coming entrepreneurs don’t have that leverage and cannot even be identified.
Note Steve Jobs and Bill Gates - who eventually needed political favors as soon as they began to make $millions - employing union workers and needing waivers from burdensome regulation. They are compromised into the Dem prison.
In a communist society, you can’t earn a living except for working for the communist party.
That’s what this bunch is working towards.
I suspect there is a racial edge to this as well, trying to net as many white people in their tax policy as possible.
“If you ever hear a Democrat proposing confiscation of already acquired wealth, let me know.”
http://www.breitbart.tv/roseanne-rich-should-be-beheaded-if-they-dont-give-up-wealth/
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.