Good news: 47% of U.S. households will pay no income tax this year

posted at 5:57 pm on April 7, 2010 by Allahpundit

I almost stuck this into the “free O-Care” post, but it really deserves its own item. Especially with Tax Freedom Day finally rolling around this Friday.

Read it quick and get back to work. Those “free” entitlements aren’t going to pay for themselves.

In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.

Tax cuts enacted in the past decade have been generous to wealthy taxpayers, too, making them a target for President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress. Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year.

The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners — households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 — paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.

The bottom 40 percent, on average, make a profit from the federal income tax, meaning they get more money in tax credits than they would otherwise owe in taxes. For those people, the government sends them a payment.

So generous have those tax cuts for the wealthy been, in fact, that a bunch of hyper-rich liberals who apparently can’t find more creative uses for their money held a conference call yesterday to complain that they’re not being taxed enough. According to Dana Milbank’s piece, based on a teeny tiny sample from a Quinnipiac poll taken earlier this year, as many as 64 percent of families earning more than $250,000 a year support tax hikes against their own demographic. I wonder if we can test those numbers a bit. Let’s see how things are faring so far this year in the deep blue, tax-lovin’ state of Massachusetts:

We have a two-tier income tax in this state, you know. You have the option of paying either at the standard rate of 5.3 percent, or at the old, higher 5.85 percent rate.

As of Wednesday, here are this years numbers, according to the state DOR:

Of 1,840,000 state tax filers, exactly 931 have opted to pay taxes at the higher rate. That works out to one-twentieth of one percent. Think of it this way: In 2000, only 60 percent of the Massachusetts electorate voted to cut the income tax, but a decade later 99.95 percent of the population has decided to take advantage of the tax cut a lot of them claimed they didn’t want or need…

As pitiful as those numbers are, they’re better than they were at this time last year, when 1.831 million taxpayers had filed, and only 731 ponied up.

Exit question: Time for a two-tiered experiment in federal income tax? You could tie it to benefits somehow, i.e. if you choose to pay at the lower rate, you forfeit your eligibility for unemployment insurance. Who’s in?

Update: Ross Douthat scolded me today for last night’s “alarmist” VAT post, so here’s my atonement: Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

I’M IN!

rob verdi on April 7, 2010 at 5:59 PM

Does this include…

criminals like Geithner, Daschle, & Sebelius???

tetriskid on April 7, 2010 at 5:59 PM

R0bin Ho0d

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 6:01 PM

the truly “Rich” get most of their income from Tax-Exempt Bonds and Cap. Gains. They would rather there be a higher income tax than to touch were their actual income comes from.

jp on April 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM

I guess America has gone back to taxation without representation. Because I feel more taxation and less representation every day from Washington.

William Amos on April 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM

R0bin Ho0d

OmahaConservative on April 7, 2010 at 6:01 PM

Prince of Thieves.

portlandon on April 7, 2010 at 6:02 PM

Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.

except we won’t be getting rid of the current Income tax at same time

jp on April 7, 2010 at 6:03 PM

Red? Check. Meat? Check.

lolol

most excellent AP:)

cmsinaz on April 7, 2010 at 6:03 PM

Proud to say I’m one of the 47%.

Go Galt

No to Looters and Moochers

huckleberryfriend on April 7, 2010 at 6:04 PM

reminds me of a T00L song where the lyrics go something like this..

“BLOOD! SUCKING! PARASITIC LIL SH*T!! – BLOOD! SUCKING! PARASITIC LIL SH*T!!…”

moonbatkiller on April 7, 2010 at 6:04 PM

Alternate Headline: 47% figure out how to personally abolish IRS Tax Code!

jp on April 7, 2010 at 6:05 PM

What about the FairTax plan?

Seven Percent Solution on April 7, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.

A VAT, if it replaced the income tax, would be a good thing; you’d be taxing consumption, not productive work. Good luck getting that arrangement through Congress, however.

irishspy on April 7, 2010 at 6:06 PM

Somebody has to pay their way and that’s why we’re going to be sucked dry. Isn’t this a wonderful country?

rplat on April 7, 2010 at 6:06 PM

The VAT will be in addition to the income tax, and even if you were able to get rid of the income tax, the VAT will be just as bloated and complicated as the income tax…because that is how Congress receives its power.

Conservative Voice on April 7, 2010 at 6:07 PM

Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.

Do you really think the are going to do away with the income tax. I don’t think so. We’ll get both if the dems aren’t booted out of the majority the next 2 election cycles.

Brat4life on April 7, 2010 at 6:07 PM

talking about VAT right now on special report

cmsinaz on April 7, 2010 at 6:07 PM

The only thing worth looking at is shrinking the government and making the tax flatter. How the tax is collected is a red herring.

Conservative Voice on April 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM

I’m all for a two-tiered system. If people home school their kids, don’t take any welfare or payouts from the fed in any way, like maybe they’re Amish and can opt out of ObamaCare, then they should be allowed to pay a tiny tax that would go toward military and infrastructure.

Those who want to be taken care of from cradle to grave by the federal government can live in communities where their income is just taken and used to cover the costs of their goodies. Kinda like jail, only the “natural slaves” (as Aristotle describes them) would have to produce enough to maintain the good of the herd.

That’s what I don’t understand from the entitlement society- why don’t they just go to jail if they want the government to do everything for them???

NTWR on April 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM

No income, no tax….except for sales tax, property tax, gasoline tax, excise tax, permits, fees, registration, VAT all of which are regressive. All proposed by the democrats who care so much for poor people.

Skandia Recluse on April 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship.
-Alexander Fraser Tyler, “The Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic”

Rebar on April 7, 2010 at 6:09 PM

I’m not talking “revenue neutral” fiddling with the tax code, the usual game in Washington that pretends to cut some taxes while raising others. And I’m not talking about fiddling around the “margins” cutting taxes that only help the well-to-do.

I am talking about across-the-board tax cuts that are deep and wide and permanent, that reach down to all Americans and get the suffocating weight of the IRS off their backs.

Start by scrapping the tax code. Don’t fiddle with it. Junk it. Throw it out. Bury it. Replace it with a pro-growth, pro-family tax cut that lowers tax rates to 17% across the board and expands exemptions for individuals and children so that a family of four would pay no taxes on the first $36,000 of income.

Not one cent to the IRS on the first $36,000. Anything over that would be taxed at a flat, fair 17%.

The flat tax would be simple. You could fill it out on a postcard. It would be honest. It would eliminate the principal source of political corruption in Washington. It would be fair. Millions of people would be off the federal income tax rolls.

There would be no tax on Social Security. No tax on pensions. No tax on personal savings. It would zero out capital gains taxes. It would set off a boom by letting people keep more of what they earn and by lowering barriers to risk taking.

Steve Forbes flat tax.

fourdeucer on April 7, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Skandia Recluse on April 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM

The poor doesn’t see it this way. Now the poor get vouchers for everything now. Now the get free cell phone, food stamps, wic, free lunches. So what little they do pay in taxes they get that money back from the government. That’s how the dems sell it. Many poor people live in subsidize housing who shouldn’t be living there because they know how to skate the system.

Brat4life on April 7, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I have no problem with 47% not paying taxes. I have an enormous problem with our leaders in Washington who continue to blow the budget way beyond our revenue sources. Balance the budget, biotches.

Mallard T. Drake on April 7, 2010 at 6:15 PM

VAT in place of the income tax, yes. But what are the odds of Congress doing away with the income tax. It will be used as a second club to finally kill the baby seal that is the economy.

Daveyardbird on April 7, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Oh yeah – VAT sounds grrrreeeaaat.
Just on Fox News that Finland has a teeny 25% VAT.

Add that to your income tax…. peachy.

tru2tx on April 7, 2010 at 6:15 PM

The problem with this, is basically everybody gets it and stops funding the economy, then it all collapses.

The permanent underclass never works, everything dries up. Then — You need to start killing people, that’s the only way forward, threats and violence. Ask Mao, Stalin, and now Chavez. A couple of hundred people died for the knowledge.

tarpon on April 7, 2010 at 6:16 PM

For the first time in my life I owed the IRS money this year.

So here’s a big FU to all you layabouts and EIC takers.

brak on April 7, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.

Except they will never give up the current tax. They wish to add it in addition. NO NO NO!!!

Drudge headline, center, big “Rob thy Neighbor” – how appropriate.

How I despise, with the utmost hatred possible, the moochers and their eilitist enablers. Anyone who tells anyone to not hate the liberals is nuts and should pay for all of them.

Schadenfreude on April 7, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Adjust your records to have the least deducted. If they owe you, you’ll never see it again, with the new health ‘care’ bill.

Schadenfreude on April 7, 2010 at 6:18 PM

complain that they’re not being taxed enough. According to Dana Milbank’s piece, based on a teeny tiny sample from a Quinnipiac poll taken earlier this year, as many as 64 percent of families earning more than $250,000 a year support tax hikes against their own demographic.

Allah,

How about we change the tax code to tax these self-identified slackers at the greater of their income or their net worth. I’ll be you my next years pay they will change their response to the next poll.

belad on April 7, 2010 at 6:20 PM

We should tax the very first penny somebody earns. One flat tax, no deductions, no exceptions. It would take all the fun out of generational poverty.

Mojave Mark on April 7, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Gee, you would almost think some people want you to believe that a full on half of the population of the USA, our fellow Americans do not contribute to the economic wealth of our nation. I wonder how well our nation would do if all these people suddenly stopped buying, selling, and moving around in any way. Maybe that upper tax pop would suddenly find a use for them. Also notice the subtle sneaky little way it is implied that tax payers don’t receive entitlements.

Observation on April 7, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Steve Forbes flat tax.

fourdeucer on April 7, 2010 at 6:11 PM

I love it! It will NEVER happen. Look how many IRS workers would be out of work. More importantly:

It would eliminate the principal source of political corruption in Washington.

Then what would they do?

Plus, it just makes too much sense.

tru2tx on April 7, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Can we still consider a family of 4 on $50,000 middle class?

ernesto on April 7, 2010 at 6:21 PM

When a family of five can go into a Houston grocery store and buy over $80 worth of groceries on a LoneStar card without speaking a word of english during the entire transaction while the dumb guy behind them pays for his groceries in cash in the full amount…

DanMan on April 7, 2010 at 6:21 PM

Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.

Allah, do you want to kiss your IPad goodbye?

VAT Itsn’t Fair. Fair can’t exist. And We All are being taxed more so then any of use should be.

upinak on April 7, 2010 at 6:24 PM

tru2tx on April 7, 2010 at 6:20 PM

Plus turbo-tax Timmy would have no excuse for cheating on his taxes.

fourdeucer on April 7, 2010 at 6:25 PM

A VAT tax might work, but it would take a constitutional amendment first to repeal the XVI amendment. (Power to tax income)

Dasher on April 7, 2010 at 6:25 PM

Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.

Well, the problem with that argument is that Obama will get you both: the same income tax levels that you’re enjoying right now, PLUS the VAT.

So, effectively, the tax system as a whole will become just as deformed as the income tax is right now.

Niko on April 7, 2010 at 6:25 PM

When a family of five can go into a Houston grocery store and buy over $80 worth of groceries on a LoneStar card without speaking a word of english during the entire transaction…

…and then pay for the case of Tecate and copy of Lowrider magazine in cash.

brak on April 7, 2010 at 6:25 PM

a bunch of hyper-rich liberals who apparently can’t find more creative uses for their money held a conference call yesterday to complain that they’re not being taxed enough.

Problem solved.

calbear on April 7, 2010 at 6:32 PM

It ends when foreign lenders stop loaning us money that we waste and can’t pay back.

Vashta.Nerada on April 7, 2010 at 6:32 PM

He didn’t mean it this way, but it fits: “And when you ask them ‘how much should we give?’, the only answer’s ‘more, more more’”

Splunge on April 7, 2010 at 6:34 PM

to complain that they’re not being taxed enough.

There was some guy on Neil Cavuto today saying he should be paying more in taxes for being wealthy.

What I don’t get is that if they feel so guilty, why don’t they just write checks to Uncle Sam instead of trying to get the government raise taxes on everyone else?

Don’t make me pay for your damn guilty conscious.

modnar on April 7, 2010 at 6:34 PM

Good luck with a VAT.
When the GST was brought in here in 1990, the underground economy just exploded. It was crazy, everybody was doing everything for cash. 20 years and a bunch of simplification later and now it doesn’t seem so bad. But the first 10 or 15 years were a nightmare.

G-man on April 7, 2010 at 6:35 PM

Can we still consider a family of 4 on $50,000 middle class?

ernesto on April 7, 2010 at 6:21 PM

It depends on where they live, but I would think they would still be lower middle class.

thomasaur on April 7, 2010 at 6:35 PM

jp on April 7, 2010 at 6:03 PM

Bingo.

batter on April 7, 2010 at 6:37 PM

Yeah.

People on unemployment generally live at or below the poverty line.

Just so happens that there’s a few more of those around these days.

Folks at that level generally don’t pay taxes.

Besides, the Bush tax cuts end next year.

I suspect the news-line a year from now will be entirely different.

One way or another.

CPT. Charles on April 7, 2010 at 6:39 PM

Hard to pay an income tax when you have no income.

lavell12 on April 7, 2010 at 6:40 PM

Anyone who wants to pay more taxes I believe are crazy. My husband and I had to pay in this year, we’re definitely middle class, and I wasn’t too pleased.

deidre on April 7, 2010 at 6:44 PM

Ya know it’s funny, we are going to get back a whopping $348 from IRS…..unfortunately we owe CA $363…..all of our fed tax return PLUS $15 to pay our state tax…..hmmmmm…….

Vntnrse on April 7, 2010 at 6:48 PM

I suspect they will try and sell the VAT by starting it out at the low low low price of 3% or so. This would be in addition to all the other taxes in place. Then that leaves them plenty of room to mission creep the rate up every couple of years.

Don’t fall for this turd blossom.

GnuBreed on April 7, 2010 at 6:48 PM

I firmly believe we should ALL pay, using the preferred formula followed by the Secretary of the Treasury. If it’s good enough for the highest ranking federal tax official, it’s good enough for me!

GoldenEagle4444 on April 7, 2010 at 6:49 PM

This is a larger question:

It’s seems like Obama knows he can’t win in 2012 with the passage with the health care. So now he’s pushing terrorist lanuage PC stuff, VAT, federal income tax increases, anmesty, and a few other stuff. Which is unpopular with the American, because pushes his agenda to the extreme left…Anti-America.

Or does he think the American people will forget, if the ecnomoy improves 2010? Please note: with these taxes the economy will not improve.

Oil Can on April 7, 2010 at 6:54 PM

founding fathers wanted to only tax imported goods. No other federal taxes. Free trade sucks.

PrezHussein on April 7, 2010 at 6:55 PM

Besides, the Bush tax cuts end next year.

I suspect the news-line a year from now will be entirely different.

One way or another.

CPT. Charles on April 7, 2010 at 6:39 PM

Oh man that is gonna hurt. We’re trying to prepare. That’s going to do wonders for the economic “recovery” we’ve got going on.

NTWR on April 7, 2010 at 7:02 PM

Ross Douthat scolded me today for last night’s “alarmist” VAT post, so here’s my atonement: Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax? The VAT’s as close to a flat tax as we’re ever likely to get.

If you can charge for water entering the stream, you’ll get no more than what you charge for water leaving the stream, but if you can charge for both water entering and leaving the stream, then you’ve got twice as much income.

I doubt the Government will trade an income tax for a VAT tax — I suspect they’ll want both, like the British have.

VAT also has the disadvantage in giving the government a “float” using private funds — all entities charging VAT must remit to the government the tax, regardless of whether the consumer is an end-user or not. At the end of the year, the non end-user paying the VAT must request a tax credit from the government equivalent to the VAT it paid for its raw materials. It’s like overpaying substantially on your income tax every year — the Government gives you back the overage, but they keep the “float” interest.

unclesmrgol on April 7, 2010 at 7:04 PM

Fair Tax would be the best system.

Flat tax a distant second. F%^&K Beck on that one. he is off base re: the Fair Tax.

Sorry Glenn

BierManVA on April 7, 2010 at 7:08 PM

My husband and I are among the 47 percent. We are retired and until the stock market tanked, taking our retirement accounts with it, we paid a pretty hefty income tax. In 2008 and 2009 we made less than we paid out in income tax each year before 2008.

The present administration is clueless on how to get this economy back on track, healthy, and growing. (Or, doesn’t want to.) My mother used to tell me not to wish my life away. But 2010… and 2012 cannot come soon enough!

winfield on April 7, 2010 at 7:12 PM

well duh of course 2010 is already here. I meant November. But you all knew that

winfield on April 7, 2010 at 7:13 PM

In Canada, tax freedom day doesn’t arrive until some time in July. How long do you think it will take you to catch up to us? Or should that be sink down to our level?

ProfessorMiao on April 7, 2010 at 7:13 PM

If the government gave me a choice(which with this peculiar President, it won’t)I’d welcome the VAT if it eliminated the income tax or limited it to very special circumstances.

jeanie on April 7, 2010 at 7:15 PM

Yeah.

People on unemployment generally live at or below the poverty line.

Just so happens that there’s a few more of those around these days.

Folks at that level generally don’t pay taxes.

Besides, the Bush tax cuts end next year.

I suspect the news-line a year from now will be entirely different.

One way or another.

CPT. Charles on April 7, 2010 at 6:39 PM

I’m unemployed for two years in MA and I owe 2k to the state for the unemployment I collected last year which 100% of went to pay for the mandatory health care insurance. I kind of wish I didn’t have to pay the taxes. It would at least let me get a month and a half of health insurance.

RagTag on April 7, 2010 at 7:16 PM

Don’t worry, the Political class has a VAT for you that will tax everyone and their dog by the time their done.

chickasaw42 on April 7, 2010 at 7:22 PM

Woo Hoo !!
Sock it to those ‘rich’ guys and give me my free stuff.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on April 7, 2010 at 7:23 PM

Not all people vote for there best financial interest. Some vote for what is best for the country.

I am also one who did not pay taxes this year. I took advantage of a credit for college tuition paid. Amazingly my total federal taxes for 2009 was a negative number.

But I don’t support progressive taxation or high spending by the government, and have never voted for and will never vote for a Democrat.

Dasher on April 7, 2010 at 7:26 PM

I’m a single, middle-income renter and walk to work.

Yeah. I’m screwed. I get to deduct balls all. I hate it.

lansing quaker on April 7, 2010 at 7:28 PM

….obama money….from his stash….

HornetSting on April 7, 2010 at 7:30 PM

The math is very simple. We get roughly 20% of GDP from income et al. taxes, add another 7% from VAT which is 27%.

Increase here and there a little to boost to 30%. States are about 10%. So the total is 40%. Not a bad start..in 10 to 15 years I’m sure we can get that up to 45% to 50% and then we’ll be able to hold our heads up when our royals go to Europe.

r keller on April 7, 2010 at 7:31 PM

Obama’s “tax credits” are largely welfare payments to people who don’t pay taxes, and the media obediently report them as “tax cuts”. Spending and welfare transfer payments are now “tax cuts” according to State Media. Unreal. It doesn’t occur to anyone to ask why they need to spend money to “pay for” their “tax cuts”.

forest on April 7, 2010 at 7:38 PM

This isn’t news folks. We’ve been steadily approaching the 50% threshold for the past 10 years.

angryed on April 7, 2010 at 7:40 PM

re: 64% of people who want higher taxes

Anyone can send the IRS more money than they owe with a note saying keep the change. There is even a form where you can just sent the IRS money for no reason if you are so inclined.
You can even donate to the IRS online if you want.

Total donations in 2009: $3M. So just like in MA, liberals talk the talk but 99.99% of the time do not walk the walk.

angryed on April 7, 2010 at 7:46 PM

I’ll take a tax VAT ONLY if they repeal the income tax.

paraff on April 7, 2010 at 7:51 PM

Isn’t the inequity of the income tax a good argument for a consumption tax?

There already is a consumption tax, unless you don’t think that businesses pass along most of their taxes in the price of their products.

MB4 on April 7, 2010 at 7:53 PM

founding fathers wanted to only tax imported goods. No other federal taxes. Free trade sucks.

PrezHussein on April 7, 2010 at 6:55 PM

SOME founding fathers wanted only import tariffs. Im sure Hamilton had no problem with the idea.

ernesto on April 7, 2010 at 7:55 PM

An income tax and a VAT is not a choice between being hung and being shot. It would mean being both hung and shot.

MB4 on April 7, 2010 at 7:57 PM

Total donations in 2009: $3M. So just like in MA, liberals talk the talk but 99.99% of the time do not walk the walk.

angryed on April 7, 2010 at 7:46 PM

What you’re asking for is akin to unilateral disarmament. They won’t donate till they make everyone donate ;-)

ernesto on April 7, 2010 at 7:58 PM

founding fathers wanted to only tax imported goods. No other federal taxes. Free trade sucks.

PrezHussein on April 7, 2010 at 6:55 PM

+1. ‘Free’ trade is as expensive as ‘free’ healthcare.

Dark-Star on April 7, 2010 at 8:05 PM

At 51% they win.

Just in case you need to be told…

Akzed on April 7, 2010 at 8:11 PM

ernesto on April 7, 2010 at 7:55 PM

Wow, you said something true!

In fact, were the fed govt limited to its proper constitutional role, this would be enough to fund the fed govt.

Akzed on April 7, 2010 at 8:12 PM

“Income redistribution” is just a fancy phrase for theft.

I don’t mind a VAT (a consumption tax) as a substitute for income tax (wealth creation tax) with the following:

A Constitutional Amendment that
1) explicitly retracts the 16th Amendment
2) explicitly declares that Congress has no power to levy a tax on incomes for any entity (persons, corporations, nonprofits, etc.)
3) levies it on goods & services with the following exceptions: 1) food, clothing, medical care, primary residential real estate.
4) sets the base rate low — say 5% (broaden the tax to services as well as goods, but keep the rate low).
5) A specific Congress can raise the rate, but only for as long as that Congress is constituted. In other words, a raise would last at most 2 years — if Congress passed it on day 1.

As for people going Galt & bartering goods & services that aren’t declared, well only a small % will do it to a great extent — and I have no problem with that. If you live outside of Babylon, that’s fine, I’ll live inside Babylon & pay the tax.

rbj on April 7, 2010 at 8:18 PM

I have no problem with 47% not paying taxes. I have an enormous problem with our leaders in Washington who continue to blow the budget way beyond our revenue sources. Balance the budget, biotches.

Mallard T. Drake on April 7, 2010 at 6:15 PM

Everyone that earns money should pay something. If they would they would naturally gain more ownership and become more responsible. It is simple. I do understand your frustration with Washington but as long as we vote to get free stuff for our selves our for our own cities and states Washington will always try to oblige.

CWforFreedom on April 7, 2010 at 8:28 PM

A VAT is a sneaky tax, literally. It’s hidden in the price of goods, so nobody ever sees the tax. What will happen is we’ll start with a 1% VAT. Most people won’t even notice the increase in tax. Then a year later it will be 1.5%. Then 2%. Every year it will go up a little bit. Enough to take a big bite in a macro sense but not enough to make people notice.

And one day we wake up and find a TV that once cost $800 costs $950 and ask how did this happen? The answer will be a 20% VAT that nobody ever saw coming.

angryed on April 7, 2010 at 8:44 PM

democrat paradise!

daesleeper on April 7, 2010 at 9:25 PM

This is how Hugo Chavez built his permanent dependent majority.

Oops, I mean Obama.

PattyJ on April 7, 2010 at 9:42 PM

I suggest eliminating the middleman and just help yourself to your neighbor’s stuff. Democrats rule!

daesleeper on April 7, 2010 at 9:51 PM

a family of four making as much as $50,000

How and where can a family of 4 survive on that kind of income?

Alden Pyle on April 7, 2010 at 10:01 PM

My late father used to tell me that the Democrats’ goal is to have more citizens who vote for a living than work for a living. Add a few illegals to the population, add their “extended families”, they’re going to be very near that goal. Please make sure everyone you know is registered to vote in November, please get them to the polls.

oldoldbabs on April 7, 2010 at 10:14 PM

I am tired of paying for other peoples kids.

jdkchem on April 7, 2010 at 11:42 PM

Ross is an idiot. They talked about VAT in Brett Baier’s round table and Juan said he’s all for lots of taxes. AllahPundit, you are either dumb or agree with Juan that European style taxes are good for Americans. They aren’t talking about pure consumption tax. This is an add-on to income taxes which government will not let you take from their cold dead hands!

Sultry Beauty on April 8, 2010 at 6:03 AM

This fact is a little distorted. I paid large(for me) quarterly payments last year, but ended up with a refund because of a long term loss on some stock I sold. It’s not that I didn’t pay taxes, they had my money for a year. There are probably a lot of people in this same situation.

Kissmygrits on April 8, 2010 at 9:07 AM

I am tired of paying for other peoples kids.

jdkchem on April 7, 2010 at 11:42 PM

I am tired of childless parasites thinking they are somehow morally superior to those of us who do the job of maintaining civilization.

I could live without the child tax credits — but I think they’re quite reasonable, and very helpful. I pay far more in insurance, food, gas, housing and utilities than I’ll ever recoup from tax reductions of $500 a year per child. :)

Not to mention that I’ll be their burden in my old age — because all that FICA I pay will be LONG gone by that time. No gov’t help needed, then, ’cause I’m raising them right. They’ll be the ones pulling the load.

Quit whining. Nothing’s fair — but child tax credits are not the acme of redistribution.

Prufrock on April 8, 2010 at 11:35 AM

That’s what I don’t understand from the entitlement society- why don’t they just go to jail if they want the government to do everything for them???

NTWR on April 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM

oh many do…

max1 on April 8, 2010 at 1:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2