Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
Thu Jan 19, 2012, 11:00 AM Jan 2012

NYT editorial: The 1% and That 15%

Editorial

The 1% and That 15%

<...>

Let’s be clear: despite Mr. Romney’s claim that “people will want to see the most recent year,” his 2011 taxes would not be enough. Voters have a right to know how presidential aspirants made their money — not just in the year before the election. That is especially true in Mr. Romney’s case because he says his business success qualifies him to be president.

As for that 15 percent rate, it’s all completely legal. Mr. Romney didn’t even need a sharp accountant. If Mr. Romney has done one good thing with his partial disclosure — although it clearly wasn’t his goal — he has reminded Americans of the fundamental unfairness of the current tax code and of how determined Mr. Romney and his party are to keep it that way.

<...>

Worse, an egregious loophole in the law lets private equity partners pay the lower 15 percent rate on much of their income — known as “carried interest” — even though those earnings are not typically gains from investing their own money, but rather a share of profits from investing someone else’s money.

<...>

President Obama has repeatedly, and correctly, called for ending the carried interest loophole. It is morally indefensible because it asserts that the efforts and risks of private equity partners are worthier than those of workers who pay regular tax rates. It also makes no sense. The rationale for keeping the capital gains rate lower than the rate on wages and salaries is to encourage and reward investors for taking risks with their own money. Private equity partners are, by and large, managing other people’s money risk.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/19/opinion/the-1-and-that-15.html


Flashback: Mitt Romney defends top 1%
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/1002185625

2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT editorial: The 1% and That 15% (Original Post) ProSense Jan 2012 OP
And Newt's 'tax plan' would lower Romney's taxes to almost zero. He'd only pay on his sinkingfeeling Jan 2012 #1
Good point. ProSense Jan 2012 #2

sinkingfeeling

(51,274 posts)
1. And Newt's 'tax plan' would lower Romney's taxes to almost zero. He'd only pay on his
Thu Jan 19, 2012, 11:08 AM
Jan 2012

speaker fees. All investment, captial gains, and carried interest would not be taxed at all.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NYT editorial: The 1% and...