Julian Castro cites 90 percent tax on rich in defending Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on tax hikes

Washington Examiner ^ | January 06, 2019 06:56 PM | Naomi Lim

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Likely 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro agrees with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez that tax rates on some of the wealthiest Americans should skyrocket.

"Oh, I can support folks at the top paying their fair share," Castro told ABC News' "This Week" on Sunday when asked directly whether he could endorse the high-profile New York Democrat's idea.

The Obama-era Housing and Urban Development secretary, who is expected to officially announce he's running for the White House this week, made the comments after Ocasio-Cortez caught flak for suggesting people earning more than $10 million could be taxed between "60 or 70 percent."

In offering support to Ocasio-Cortez, Castro provided historical context given the current highest marginal income tax bracket is 37 percent for those receiving more than $500,000 a year.

"There was a time in this country where the top marginal tax rate was over 90 percent, even during Reagan's era in the 1980s it was around 50 percent" the former mayor of San Antonio, Texas, said.

Castro also floated "that we get more serious about making sure the corporations pay their fair share," so the country can fund policy programs like "Medicare-for-All," as well as universal pre-kindergarten and higher education.

[central_va]

A tariff plus the NRST would be the best replacement for the income tax.

[Windflier]

The Fair Tax is fine, EXCEPT for one part: the Prebate. The Prebate is a “negative tax” (i.e., a welfare payment) that Congress gets to set.

I tend to agree. I understand why the authors of the Fair Tax put the prebate in there, but it sort of muddies the whole 'fairness' aspect of the plan.

If you look to statewide sales taxes as a model, they affect everyone in those states equally. There are no concessions or exemptions for any income class, besides the fact that basic foodstuffs are non-taxable. That obviously benefits the poor and lower classes in a very direct say. Not so much for the wealthy.

Still, it's a better means of funding a government than taxing (penalizing) wages, production, and investment.

Sadly, most states also levy an income tax on their residents, which is just wrong.

[Windflier]

A tariff plus the NRST would be the best replacement for the income tax.

I think the Framers would vote a hearty "Aye" on that.