If U.S. hikes taxes, high-income Californians might pay almost 52 percent

posted at 9:21 pm on December 5, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Whether it’s because we end up going over the fiscal cliff or because Republicans agree to President Obama’s plan of not extending the Bush tax cuts on America’s wealthiest earners, the possibility of an effective tax hike means that higher-income Californians may be in for a whopping aggregate marginal tax rate. The super-liberal state already succeeded in approving their own rate hike with Proposition 30 in the November election, and combined with the potential federal raises, they could be looking at a top bracket with a marginal income tax rate of just under 52 percent:

Gerald Prante, an economics professor at Lynchburg College in Virginia, and Austin John, a Lynchburg economics student, calculated marginal tax rates — the highest rates on the highest levels of income — for all 50 states. They combined state, federal and, where applicable, local income taxes, plus payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare and included the deductibility of some taxes.

Proposition 30 added three percentage points to the marginal state income tax rate for California’s highest-income taxpayers, bringing it to 13.3 percent. That action raised California over other high-tax jurisdictions to a marginal rate of 51.9 percent, slightly higher than New York City’s level. Hawaii was the only other place with a calculated rate above 50 percent.

…Ouch. We already knew that California was headed for a fall, but here’s yet another problem with top-down government and specifically with President Obama’s proposals to hike taxes across-the-board on those he deems wealthy, i.e. families making more than $250k/year. As Joel Kotkin writes for Forbes, it’s kind of odd that blue states voted so overwhelmingly against their own self-interest in reelecting Barack Obama, because the tax hikes he campaigned on will come down disproportionately hard on the economies of blue states. The demographics and costs of living in different geographic regions suggests that being rich means very different things to different regions:

Any move to raise taxes on the rich — defined as households making over $250,000 annually — strikes directly at the economies of these states, which depend heavily on the earnings of high-income professionals, entrepreneurs and technical workers. In fact, when you examine which states, and metropolitan areas, have the highest concentrations of such people, it turns out they are overwhelmingly located in the bluest states and regions. …

The people whose wallets will be drained in the new war on “the rich” are high-earning, but hardly plutocratic professionals like engineers, doctors, lawyers, small business owners and the like. …

What would a big tax increase on the “rich” mean to the poor and working classes in these areas? To be sure, they may gain via taxpayer-funded transfer payments, but it’s doubtful that higher taxes will make their prospects for escaping poverty much brighter. For the most part, the economies of the key blue regions are very dependent on the earnings of the mass affluent class, and their spending is critical to overall growth. Singling out the affluent may also reduce the discretionary spending that drives employment in the personal services sector, retail and in such key fields as construction.


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 3

In 1968 we moved to California when I was 13 years old. Other than 4 years in Lake Tahoe (Nevada side) I’ve spent my entire life here and truly love the state. But with the current situation on taxes, the possiblity with super majority dems will target Prop 13 and the fact San Diego residents moved to punish homeowners with another tax- I’m through.

When I started our business in 2007 I incorporated in Nevada where I have an office thinking this day would come based on the direction the loons were driving the state. This saddnes both my wife and I because we have a great hoe in San Diego.

The super rich won’t flee because they already have their incomes structured in a way these changes won’t effect them or they have so much money they don’t care.

We’ll probably establish residence in Tahoe with the purchase of a condo and keep our home in San Diego for visits.

The sad part is the idiots (to include my 3 stepdaughters who I do love dearly) who voted for all these tax increases fail to realize it isn’t just the income taxes the state will lose out on. The state in addition will lose out on all the money my wife and I put into the local economy that create jobs.. and we spend a lot.

theblacksheepwasright on December 5, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Don’t forget that the 1099 self employed folks who actually have a profit of over $250K, besides being taxed to the max in CA at 51.9% before property taxes, obamacare taxes, and sales taxes, will also have the social security and medicare taxes on top of the 51.9%.

AND don’t forget that Obamacare will tax you on the sale of your home a certain percentage, too. I am not sure if that hits in 2013 or 2014.

Riddick, check out the Hill Country (outlying areas near Austin) of Texas. I also hate humidity and it wasn’t too bad there when I was there from 2003 through 2005.

karenhasfreedom on December 5, 2012 at 10:34 PM

r keller on December 5, 2012 at 10:25 PM

Too bad our communist LSM cannot tell that “libyan rebels” and Al Qaeda are one and the same. As they are in Syria now. As much as hate Assad, the alternative is much worse as can be seen in Libya and Egypt.

We can’t even learn from history that is less than 2 years old…

riddick on December 5, 2012 at 10:35 PM

oops.. meant “home” not hoe—

theblacksheepwasright on December 5, 2012 at 10:39 PM

Riddick, check out the Hill Country (outlying areas near Austin) of Texas. I also hate humidity and it wasn’t too bad there when I was there from 2003 through 2005.

karenhasfreedom on December 5, 2012 at 10:34 PM

Isn’t Austin just CA Lite these days with all the high tech morons from CA moving there in the past 2 decades? That said, I am sure it has enclaves, as many other places do, Henderson here in NV is mostly conservative enclave than the rest of Clark County (Las Vegas), same as parts of SF East Bay are in CA.

Thanks for the heads up, will look online for any and all info I find on Hill County. TX would be preferable to AZ for a number of reasons.

riddick on December 5, 2012 at 10:41 PM

I for one, shall gladly benefit from the magnanimity of my smug superiors in California.

Exceptions such as “theblacksheepwasright”, above, noted.

L. I. B.

M240H on December 5, 2012 at 10:45 PM

52 percent before absurd property taxes is slavery.

Washington Fancy on December 5, 2012 at 10:52 PM

They elected Dear Leader by a large margin and they elected their state government. I have little sympathy for them. And, BTW, 52% is too low if you add in Obamacare taxes, sales taxes, local taxes, real estate taxes, and misc state, county, and muni fees. And just wait until the socialists manage to lift the salary cap on SS and Medicare payroll taxes.

Add all that up and we’re in the 60-70% range. Watch the Hollywood crowd start relocating their primary residence. They better do it soon, because rumor has it CA will start taxing your assets when you move out of the state.

farsighted on December 5, 2012 at 10:58 PM

So you just come here to b!tch? Talk about old women……

If you have a legitimate complaint, like wanting to see and read the article, why don’t you email Erika so she can either add it to the story or explain to you why it isn’t there?

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Cindy no bitching here or discussion about older women; there are many beautiful older women. The analogy with CA is that they are tryimg to relive their glory years of the past; come to TX, there are many beautiful older women who understand they aren’t the nubile 20 year olds they were when Dallas was No. 1 in the Neilson ratings.

Tater Salad on December 5, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Those Hollywood degenerates make millions, so they should be ready to give it up.

Ward Cleaver on December 5, 2012 at 11:00 PM

Just remember, TX voted 60-40 for Romney. It will take a lot of Californians to change that.

Tater Salad on December 5, 2012 at 11:01 PM

We just had a serious discussion today about moving our company out of CA and to TX because of taxes (prop 30 in particular).

besser tot als rot on December 5, 2012 at 9:29 PM

-
Would you by chance, work for a large oil company? :-)

diogenes on December 5, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Dude…!

Seven Percent Solution on December 5, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Now why did you have to go and do that?

Roderick Spode on December 5, 2012 at 11:07 PM

I already escaped to Austin. Austenites think they are liberal, heh. If Austin were moved to the Bay area San Franciscans would build a wall around it to keep in the fake liberals that carry guns. “You can’t fool me with your Subaru Bush lover!”

Oh and I voted for Prop 30 before I left enjoy it liberals

Theworldisnotenough on December 5, 2012 at 11:14 PM

Riddick, it is just the city of Austin itself that is very blue, votes blue, and thus shows Travis County as also voting blue. However, there are areas west of FM620 near Lake Travis that are out of the clutches of the city itself. And just north of there is Williamson County (round rock area) that is totally free of the lefty loons in Austin.

If you are truly retired, you could even locate a bit further into the hill country and find a nice area on the west shore of Lake Travis. It doesn’t take that long to drive into Austin if you want to go to some big city activities like a UT football game, or something similar. The airport is on the south side of the city.

The east side of the city is very flat and begins to get into the geography that attracts humidity. I recommend locating west or north of the city. You can also check out the hill country south of Travis County on towards San Antonio. A lot of retired military like to be closer to San Antonio because it apparently has a lot of military places for health care and shopping.

I only came back to MI for my elderly mom. Someday I won’t have this family duty and will be free to relocate again. MI is actually turning around. The state government is red now and the west side of the state votes very conservative. However, we still have 2 idiotic Senators that we send to DC. Hopefully we can unseat one of them in 2014. We tried in 2012 but our guy was outfunded and the incumbent lied in every ad. It was disappointing.

From a tax perspective, MI has an income tax, but the property taxes are lower than Texas, as well as the sales tax. So it is about a wash for me.

Again, I am working really hard at ramping my income back up (got hammered in this Obama economy, really badly), so I could relocate if I choose to.

karenhasfreedom on December 5, 2012 at 11:15 PM

“On second thought we don’t want it, you keep it.”

-La Raza

Bishop on December 5, 2012 at 9:51 PM

LMMFAO

Theworldisnotenough on December 5, 2012 at 11:20 PM

Ah, but it gets even better…

The AMT primarily hits dual income returns from states with high state and local taxes. Read: Bright Blue East and West Coast.

For years the more progressive states have been happily raising their local rates knowing that it wouldn’t really hurt because their taxpayers could deduct those taxes from their federal returns. In effect, they shifted the cost of all their redistribution programs to the rest of the country.

No AMT fix, no tax shift. I can’t wait for those states to start paying the true cost of all those programs.

worldtvlr on December 5, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Wouldn’t it be cool if White people started leaving all the Blue states in droves?

ardenenoch on December 5, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Wouldn’t it be cool if White people started leaving all the Blue states in droves?

ardenenoch on December 5, 2012 at 11:42 PM

I really don’t think cool is the word you’re looking for when trying to describe the creation of the fault lines along which the country will be split when the crap finally hits the fan.

DFCtomm on December 6, 2012 at 12:19 AM

Man, I feel bad for the Hollywood libs getting their taxes hiked like that.

justltl on December 6, 2012 at 12:20 AM

Oh and I voted for Prop 30 before I left enjoy it liberals

Theworldisnotenough on December 5, 2012 at 11:14 PM

lol, nice :)

cptacek on December 6, 2012 at 12:27 AM

In fact, I haven’t felt this bad since the elimination of smallpox.

LIB

justltl on December 6, 2012 at 12:36 AM

From 1985 to 2005, California gained a net 10,000,000 residents. Of its 10,000,000 new residents, California gained a net increase in taxpayers of 150,000….. 1.5%.

Kungfoochimp on December 6, 2012 at 2:18 AM

Get ready, America: Somewhere over the pond

Shy Guy on December 6, 2012 at 4:06 AM

They voted for Obama so let them pay for him.

Screw California!

I am sick of the place.

Sherman1864 on December 6, 2012 at 5:10 AM

Kalifornians didn’t vote themselves a tax increase. They voted to to increase taxes on others.

Bevan on December 6, 2012 at 5:39 AM

no whining, you wanted him you got it….

OWN IT

cmsinaz on December 6, 2012 at 5:40 AM

farsighted on December 5, 2012 at 10:58 PM

There actually isn’t an income ceiling for Medicare taxes. There used to be. It was done away with in 1993 as part of Clinton’s tax increases. The SS tax has a ceiling around roughly $110,000 right now. I’m sure Dems would love to raise that into the stratosphere or get rid of it all together though.

gsherin on December 6, 2012 at 6:09 AM

Stop repeating dimwit Hannety’s BS.

riddick on December 5, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Astonerii makes a valid point. As a “businessman” I’m surprised you don’t understand it. All he’s saying is people raise the cost of their product or service to cover the increase in what they pay in tax revenues pay to the government.

hawkdriver on December 6, 2012 at 6:24 AM

We’re the “new kulaks”.

kingsjester on December 6, 2012 at 6:38 AM

Whether it’s because we end up going over the fiscal cliff or because Republicans agree to President Obama’s plan of not extending the Bush tax cuts on America’s wealthiest earners

ERika Johnsen

I see you’ve swallowed the Democrat talking points language completely.

Disgusting.

fossten on December 6, 2012 at 7:08 AM

There actually isn’t an income ceiling for Medicare taxes. There used to be. It was done away with in 1993 as part of Clinton’s tax increases. The SS tax has a ceiling around roughly $110,000 right now. I’m sure Dems would love to raise that into the stratosphere or get rid of it all together though.

gsherin on December 6, 2012 at 6:09 AM

Thanks. Forgot they already did away with the income ceiling on the Medicare payroll tax.

Next step, also apply it to investment income.

farsighted on December 6, 2012 at 7:27 AM

Californian’s want to be like France, give it to them.

75% tax hikes, please.

Make them earn it.

so-notbuyingit on December 6, 2012 at 8:01 AM

And now the news comes out in Cali that for every person earning in the private sector there are 1.36 people getting money from the state or working for the state. Death spiral.

jake49 on December 6, 2012 at 8:21 AM

Californians also pay high sales taxes or 9-10%.

Blake on December 6, 2012 at 8:22 AM

You own it now Cali.

jake49 on December 6, 2012 at 8:23 AM

My family vacationed in Carmel since 1982. Wanted to buy a place, but always just out of reach. Every year as we could have bought at the previous years price, the price had gone up another 10% or more.

Thank goodness it didn’t happen! Too many homes for sale and short sales now. Carmel is finally coming down to earth, but prices would have tp fall more 50% from peak to tempt me. Also would have to have Clint Eastwoid for guv.

Sigh, guess it won’t happen

Own Mexifornia you librards

txdoc on December 6, 2012 at 8:33 AM

You keep repeating same BS Hannety and others do. You just contradicted yourself above, do you realize that? There is something called “corporate tax”. I run a business, and yes, I collect SALES TAX on product sold and then pass it along to the state. I then PAY CORPORATE TAX on any earnings the business makes. Both state and fed, in various forms. In CA, for example, you pay at least $800 per year whether your business makes money or not.

Stop repeating dimwit Hannety’s BS.

riddick on December 5, 2012 at 10:32 PM

I do not see any contradiction. I said that if you want corporations to bring money they earned overseas to the United States of America, you should get rid of the taxes on it. In fact, you should get rid of all corporate taxes, since it is the customer who pays it.

astonerii on December 6, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Not to worry, they will sell the rights to low taxation to special interest companies to start up there. Passing the burden of funding the government onto the middle classes.
astonerii on December 5, 2012 at 9:41 PM

I am assuming this is going to result in elimination of a large middle class. Then the next step toward implementation of communism will be ready to start. ONce you have all those really angry low class workers, you’ve got ammo to steal everything from rich people.

Except that there will be an exodus of Californians to Red States to escape this.
Once they settle in Red States, they will vote for the same damn Democrats that put California in this mess, because it’s “intellectual” to do so.
sentinelrules on December 5, 2012 at 9:47 PM
Not necessarily so, it tends to be the consevatives who leave, creating the disparity between red and blue.
Tater Salad on December 5, 2012 at 9:49 PM

I’ve lived all over the US & spent a lot of time in SoCal & the Seattle area. These people ruined Western OR & WA & made them liberal $hitholes.
I finally fled to Wyoming. And am now in ND.
I am starting to see people from OR, WA, CA & MI etc. coming here.
Guess what? Parts of ND, NORTH DAKOTA for God’s sake! Are starting to have pockets of liberal $hittiness.
So your hypothesis does not pan out in results.

When I started our business in 2007 I incorporated in Nevada where I have an office thinking this day would come based on the direction the loons were driving the state. This saddnes both my wife and I because we have a great hoe in San Diego.
The super rich won’t flee because they already have their incomes structured in a way these changes won’t effect them or they have so much money they don’t care.
We’ll probably establish residence in Tahoe with the purchase of a condo and keep our home in San Diego for visits.
The sad part is the idiots (to include my 3 stepdaughters who I do love dearly) who voted for all these tax increases fail to realize it isn’t just the income taxes the state will lose out on. The state in addition will lose out on all the money my wife and I put into the local economy that create jobs.. and we spend a lot.
theblacksheepwasright on December 5, 2012 at 10:32 PM

My Uncle created an aerospace business years ago & had to do this. He went to Zephyr Cove.
I remember this bcs it pained him to do so, but he was not going to put up with those taxes.

TX would be preferable to AZ for a number of reasons.
riddick on December 5, 2012 at 10:41 PM

Well if you don’t like humidity & especially if you hate bugs, North Dakota is pretty awesome.
I wouldn’t mind having a conservative such as yourself here.

Badger40 on December 6, 2012 at 8:40 AM

I’m sorry if I feel a bit indifferent about it but that is exactly what these people voted for so let them eat it now.

Defenestratus on December 6, 2012 at 8:44 AM

I hear Carmel is beautiful txdoc

cmsinaz on December 6, 2012 at 8:47 AM

Son there will be no rich … everyone will be poor and equal. Except the wealthy socialists and politicians, who will be uber rich and powerful.

Every

darwin on December 6, 2012 at 8:54 AM

I say make it more painful. Do away with 1040 deductions for state and local taxes. You elect libs who hike up your state taxes? Then YOU pay for them without subsidies from more responsible states.

California votes for Hell? Let them have it!

WannabeAnglican on December 6, 2012 at 8:59 AM

We in Texas needs to start requiring a sanity test to be passed before we let more California refugees move here. It wouldn’t have to be very long; just 3-4 questions starting with “Did you vote for Obama in 2012?”

If you voted for Obama in 2008, we might let you move here, but you’ll have to live in Austin, where we keep all of our weird people.

michaelo on December 6, 2012 at 9:01 AM

How’s that whole San Joaquin thing working out BTW California?

I grew up in Fresno, bountiful produce was a given.

This is what good LIBERAL government gave the Valley -

No Water

roy_batty on December 6, 2012 at 9:01 AM

Obama got elected on class warfare (“tax the rich”) and government handouts. In a blue state like ca., most aren’t aware that by voting for this they ultimately will be hurt the most;

1) The “rich” will leave the state, corporations will relocate etc. costing jobs
2) The gravy train of handouts will some day end, then what

I blame the in the tank media for not educating people. Instead they act as Obama sickophants!

Danielvito on December 6, 2012 at 9:02 AM

Chickens voting for Col. Sanders, they deserve the government they voted for and I hope it goes up to 68% before it is over…

Merry Christmas :)

Tilly on December 6, 2012 at 9:10 AM

Tater Salad on December 5, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Sorry, I think I had a reading for comprehension lapse, I meant to tease Flat foot about the absence of the link he wanted.

Cindy Munford on December 6, 2012 at 9:17 AM

roy_batty on December 6, 2012 at 9:01 AM

But the Delta Smelt are good, right?

Cindy Munford on December 6, 2012 at 9:18 AM

I have only 3 words to say to this state that has voted for every Lib over the last 20 years.(LIVE WITH IT)

logman1 on December 6, 2012 at 9:35 AM

CA: my world and welcome to it…

If the Democrats (who have controlled both the State Assembly and the State Senate since the 1960 Census and subsequent gerrymander reapportionment) undo Prop 13 (property tax cap) all bets are off… The gradual exodus you see will turn into a flood…

Think “fire” in a crowded movie theater…

Khun Joe on December 6, 2012 at 9:49 AM

Best analogy of CA I’ve heard, “WAS like a 20 year old hot blonde with a perfect body and great tan who’s NOW 60 with bad skin, fat hips, over-bleached hair and still trying to wear a bikini”.

Tater Salad on December 5, 2012 at 9:47 PM

her?

Sekhmet on December 6, 2012 at 9:50 AM

Good think I’m not a high income Californian…and likely will never become one.

Bob's Kid on December 6, 2012 at 10:03 AM

theblacksheepwasright on December 5, 2012 at 10:32 PM

Every time I read a similar story as yours I feel saddened that so many in our country now think its’ okay to punish those who seek the opportunity to do better for themselves and their family.

What has happened to America?

I can only think it’s mainly due to kids growing up with no way to determine true evil in this world. They haven’t lived through a world war. They haven’t seen the impact of socialist policy on their nightly news. They have truly lived in a bubble in the last 10 years and they do not see the evils of the world. That’s the only thing I can guess.

ButterflyDragon on December 6, 2012 at 10:11 AM

What has happened to America?

ButterflyDragon on December 6, 2012 at 10:11 AM

It is infected with the disease known as leftism.

justltl on December 6, 2012 at 10:30 AM

I left L.A. almost 10 years ago. Looked good in the rear view mirror!

Scott P on December 6, 2012 at 10:32 AM

high-income Californians might pay almost 52 percent

Good. They think they’re in some democratic nirvana? Let them own it.

BacaDog on December 6, 2012 at 10:34 AM

All that’s going to be left in CA are the union members, government officials, enviromental whackos and the dependent class. They will eventually form a circular firing squad and and make it liveable for people to return.

Tater Salad on December 6, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Tater Salad on December 6, 2012 at 10:45 AM

Can’t happen fast enough and I hope I’m around to see it. The downside is that they will beg and be given a bailout from the Federal government, formally known as us.

Cindy Munford on December 6, 2012 at 10:52 AM

Obama got elected on class warfare (“tax the rich”) and government handouts. In a blue state like ca., most aren’t aware that by voting for this they ultimately will be hurt the most;

1) The “rich” will leave the state, corporations will relocate etc. costing jobs

Why don’t you look at a list of key supporters behind Prop 80- it’s among the most wealthy members of LA and silicon valley. Yes, California has its problems, especially related to inflated state employee union contracts and unsustainable pension plans, another union problem.

Yet the state continues to generate an incredible amount of wealth and trade that’s important for the health of the overall US economy by producing goods and services that are actually in high demand throughout the world. As the world’s fifth largest economy, its tax rates are high but primarily when compared to some US states (not to Europe). The cost of living is far lower than Hong Kong, Singapore, and other pacific rim states.

With a budget surplus of $1 bil forecasted in 2014 by fairly objective sources, no collapse is going to happen. Get over it.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 11:11 AM

I’m thinking of leaving next year when I retire, either to Reno area or Park City Utah. Love the winter activities. I want to move where my fiscal conservatism will do the most good. Suggestions?

I still think the tea party ought to suggest places for people to move, like swing states, where their vote would do the most goo.

PattyJ on December 6, 2012 at 11:20 AM

With a budget surplus of $1 bil forecasted in 2014 by fairly objective sources, no collapse is going to happen. Get over it.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Hahaha. I would guess they are the same people that initially projected the cost of the first segment of the high speed rail at $40B. What’s the new projection now? $60, $70, $100B? Ever heard of the Laffer curve? Look up UK and you would learn that the wealthy tend to move or shelter their income when taxes are increased. Forecast all you want, but I and my fellow conservatives live in reality.

toolnutz on December 6, 2012 at 11:36 AM

With a budget surplus of $1 bil forecasted in 2014 by fairly objective sources, no collapse is going to happen. Get over it.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Who put together that forecast ?
Based on what expectations ?

Jabberwock on December 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM

As long as Will Smith and Martin Sheen are paying 52% I’ll be happy.

DeathtotheSwiss on December 6, 2012 at 11:53 AM

With a budget surplus of $1 bil forecasted in 2014 by fairly objective sources, no collapse is going to happen. Get over it.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Who put together that forecast ?
Based on what expectations ?

Jabberwock on December 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Based on the higher tax revenue from Prop 30, lower unemployment as the state continues to grow, and the return of the home construction industry as home prices are already rebounding with tight supply in many parts of the state.

From a fairly conservative source:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/spending-378750-tax-year.html

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Who put together that forecast ?
Based on what expectations ?

Jabberwock on December 6, 2012 at 11:39 AM

Moveon.org

Heh, nobody legitimate is projecting budget surpluses. Especially if we were to accept the President’s plan.

Any tax increase is probably going to cause a recession, hell…keeping the rates the same might not prevent one with the new taxes from Obamacare coming and the regulatory increases that will slow our already glacial growth.

I have to wonder what economics classes people who think tax hikes will create growth went to. Raising taxes never contributes to growth and in a horrible economy like this will not increase the revenue that Democrats claim to be seeking. Only with bold ignorance are they able to ignore the fact that growth increases create revenue increases.

DeathtotheSwiss on December 6, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Ever heard of the Laffer curve? Look up UK and you would learn that the wealthy tend to move or shelter their income when taxes are increased. Forecast all you want, but I and my fellow conservatives live in reality.

toolnutz on December 6, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Yes, a fine theory for the economically ignorant and illiterate. For the wealthy supporters of Prop 30 in CA, a few higher percentage points is basically a rounding error.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/07/a-few-laughs-with-the-laffer-curve/

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 12:01 PM

I have to wonder what economics classes people who think tax hikes will create growth went to. Raising taxes never contributes to growth and in a horrible economy like this will not increase the revenue that Democrats claim to be seeking. Only with bold ignorance are they able to ignore the fact that growth increases create revenue increases.

DeathtotheSwiss on December 6, 2012 at 12:00 PM

Ah yes, one of the same economic wizards in the GOP who predicted that Clinton’s substantial tax increases would lead to a recession- when in fact the net result of eliminating the deficit had a net positive effect on the bond market and economic growth. A few higher points on the marginal tax rates of the highest earners isn’t going to lead to a recession.

No one is saying that tax increases are good for the economy but gross oversimplifications can’t be taken any more seriously than the predictions of doom rampant during the Clinton years.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 12:06 PM

OK America. You voted for socialism, now pay up! Passing the cost on to your children and grand children is the act of a coward! Half of my countrymen have become my mortal enemy, and it is time to treat them like that.

djtnt on December 6, 2012 at 12:26 PM

Yes, a fine theory for the economically ignorant and illiterate. For the wealthy supporters of Prop 30 in CA, a few higher percentage points is basically a rounding error.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 12:01 PM

The only economically ignorant and illiterate person here is you. You’ve shown yourself to be an idiot of the highest caliber and possess latent totalitarianism and a deep selfishness which shines through.

You’re nothing more than an accomplice to thievery.

darwin on December 6, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Ah yes, one of the same economic wizards in the GOP who predicted that Clinton’s substantial tax increases would lead to a recession- when in fact the net result of eliminating the deficit had a net positive effect on the bond market and economic growth. A few higher points on the marginal tax rates of the highest earners isn’t going to lead to a recession.

No one is saying that tax increases are good for the economy but gross oversimplifications can’t be taken any more seriously than the predictions of doom rampant during the Clinton years.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 12:06 PM

We’re spending trillions beyond what Clinton spent you imbecile.

darwin on December 6, 2012 at 12:39 PM

I really don’t give a damn what happens to the liberals in California. They voted for these idiots in the state and in the federal government. Live with it. You want to tip the tables on who gets the money you work for, so be it. Just stay out of Colorado because everywhere the Californians go, they screw it up. Already too many of them here now.

COgirl on December 6, 2012 at 12:41 PM

52% and that is NOT counting sales tax, Social Security tax, property tax, licensing taxes, utility taxes, municipal tax…. on and on, ad infinitum…

Axion on December 6, 2012 at 12:52 PM

I do not see any contradiction. I said that if you want corporations to bring money they earned overseas to the United States of America, you should get rid of the taxes on it. In fact, you should get rid of all corporate taxes, since it is the customer who pays it.

astonerii on December 6, 2012 at 8:36 AM

No, income should be taxed at same rates, whether made inside or outside of USA. Even though you and I live in different states of US we both pay SAME FEDERAL INCOME TAX if we make same money. Simple concept. The amount of such corporate income tax may be excessive, I’ll grant you that, but that’s all we seem to agree on.

And I still believe you have no notion of what CORPORATE INCOME TAX means. INCOME is PROFIT, not just “taxes paid by customers”. Actual price paid for service/goods covers way more than just “taxes consumers pay”. PROFIT, primarily. Which, then, is taxed. As CORPORATE TAX.

In CA, for example, a company pays at least $800 per year to the state, as CORPORATE TAX, whether they make a penny or not. Or rather, whether they even conduct any business or not.

Hannety, of all people, should know more about this instead of spouting pure stupidity. I bet he is set up as a corp, what “consumer tax” is he passing on, exactly?

riddick on December 6, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Ah yes, one of the same economic wizards in the GOP who predicted that Clinton’s substantial tax increases would lead to a recession- when in fact the net result of eliminating the deficit had a net positive effect on the bond market and economic growth. A few higher points on the marginal tax rates of the highest earners isn’t going to lead to a recession.

No one is saying that tax increases are good for the economy but gross oversimplifications can’t be taken any more seriously than the predictions of doom rampant during the Clinton years.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Hey IDIOT! Name Newt Gingrich rings a bell for you, DOLT? All Clenis did was assault women. ALL MONEY RELATED moves were done by GOP, NEWT GINGRICH specifically.

And these morons call themselves the most educated part of society?

riddick on December 6, 2012 at 1:06 PM

and I care about this because? I think they should pay 55%, 1% for each of the electoral votes they gave Obama…

RedInMD on December 6, 2012 at 1:12 PM

I’m thinking of leaving next year when I retire, either to Reno area or Park City Utah. Love the winter activities. I want to move where my fiscal conservatism will do the most good. Suggestions?

I still think the tea party ought to suggest places for people to move, like swing states, where their vote would do the most goo.

PattyJ on December 6, 2012 at 11:20 AM

I’m leaving MD in a couple of years when I retire, we’re heading for southern Texas…MD can burn to the ground for all I care…

RedInMD on December 6, 2012 at 1:15 PM

That’s the best news I’ve heard all day. Reap what you sow, California.

dczombie on December 6, 2012 at 1:45 PM

While my thoughts echo much already said here, I have to push my preferred mix of ADDITIONAL taxation under the new post-Constitutional dispensation:

1) End the Federal deductability of state and local taxes. If you vote for high local taxes, you should not expect the rest of us to subsidize you. California [and the rest!] I’m looking at you.

2) Ease copyright laws. Shorten terms of copyrights, make copying for personal use [not commercial sales] explicitly legal. Hit the Media/Entertainment wing of the Left [which keeps California afloat] in the pocketbook. All in the name of freedom for information to flow. If higher taxes don’t hurt businesses, then “limiting the time that you can exploit everybody else” just because you financed, wrote, or performed something shouldn’t hurt the Media. I note that the conservatives in Congress just released a study calling for relaxing copyrights, and the Republican leadership just squashed it and sided with Hollywood and the Democrats in favor of making copyrights more rigorous and making ripping copies for personal use felonies.

3) A 10% surtax on media/entertainment production gross receipts. For all TV and movie productions a’ la Glenn Reynolds suggestions; a return to the pre-1950′s tax regime. If it is theft for all other employers to keep their own money to use for themselves or to expand their businesses, why is it not theft for the employers in media to do the same? And make media/entertainment follow the same Federal tax rules as any manufacturing company, instead of the current arcane provisions that make blockbuster movies count as tax losses when everybody connected with them gets rich.

Give them what they say they voted for, good and hard, repeatedly, without lubricant.

Subotai Bahadur on December 6, 2012 at 2:33 PM

No, income should be taxed at same rates, whether made inside or outside of USA. Even though you and I live in different states of US we both pay SAME FEDERAL INCOME TAX if we make same money. Simple concept. The amount of such corporate income tax may be excessive, I’ll grant you that, but that’s all we seem to agree on.

And I still believe you have no notion of what CORPORATE INCOME TAX means. INCOME is PROFIT, not just “taxes paid by customers”. Actual price paid for service/goods covers way more than just “taxes consumers pay”. PROFIT, primarily. Which, then, is taxed. As CORPORATE TAX.

In CA, for example, a company pays at least $800 per year to the state, as CORPORATE TAX, whether they make a penny or not. Or rather, whether they even conduct any business or not.

Hannety, of all people, should know more about this instead of spouting pure stupidity. I bet he is set up as a corp, what “consumer tax” is he passing on, exactly?

riddick on December 6, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Profit is the goal of business. Taxing profit means that those who run the businesses will increase prices until they make the necessary amount of money to make up for the risk of putting there money and time out there.

As an example, if I need $30,000 to live on, and I earn $40,000 from my work and the government chooses to tax me at $12,000 then I cannot live. I have to either get a raise to get back to my needed income or get a second job and if I can do neither, then I go bankrupt.

If you are a business, you cannot get a second job and you have to demand more money for your product. If that makes people no longer use your services, you go out of business. The customer pays for corporate taxes. When I say get rid of corporate taxes, I mean ALL corporate taxes everywhere.

astonerii on December 6, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Clinton lowered Capital Gains Tax. His income tax hike took longer to do damage because of the Tech Boom but by the end of his second term the economy was contracting and just after Bush was sworn in a recession became official

Dennis D on December 6, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Clinton lowered Capital Gains Tax. His income tax hike took longer to do damage because of the Tech Boom but by the end of his second term the economy was contracting and just after Bush was sworn in a recession became official

Dennis D on December 6, 2012 at 7:43 PM

That may be, but his midnitght basketball program, school uniform mandate, and z-chip initiative should carry his rapey butt over the “winning™” democrat preezy finish line.

tom daschle concerned on December 6, 2012 at 8:46 PM

astonerii on December 6, 2012 at 4:48 PM

You keep skirting the main point.

As I pointed out above, if you’re a corp in CA, whether you do any business or not, you owe at least $800 per year in CORPORATE TAX. Now, given a corp is not doing any business in a fiscal year, for whatever reasons, tell me which customer exactly “The customer pays for corporate taxes.”

Stop repeating stupidity from Hannety.

We do agree on business tax reforms, but as of now, the way taxation works, corporations pay TAXES on PROFITS. Whether you understand this or not. And seemingly you do not.

Had there be no CORPORATE TAX to discuss we would see almost a TRILLION worth of capital brought back to USA. The point is not what you and I think tax laws should be, the point is what they ARE. TODAY. CORPORATE TAXES are a real thing.

I feel like I am talking with a OWS-er here…

riddick on December 6, 2012 at 10:32 PM

No one is saying that tax increases are good for the economy but gross oversimplifications can’t be taken any more seriously than the predictions of doom rampant during the Clinton years.

bayam on December 6, 2012 at 12:06 PM

I was to understand that THAT is basically the Democratic Party’s platform for fixing everything.

Badger40 on December 7, 2012 at 9:24 AM

If U.S. hikes taxes, high-income Californians might pay almost 52 percent

Good for them! Couldn’t happen to a more deserving people.

Old Country Boy on December 7, 2012 at 11:50 AM

I do not see any contradiction. I said that if you want corporations to bring money they earned overseas to the United States of America, you should get rid of the taxes on it. In fact, you should get rid of all corporate taxes, since it is the customer who pays it.

astonerii on December 6, 2012 at 8:36 AM

Your argument is just as specious as the argument advanced by librul renters who wanted to vote on property taxes. They avered that the property tax the landlord pays is embedded in the rent, so the renter also pays the tax and thus should be able to vote on things that would increase the property tax. The librul retarded political judges agreed with this and now, everywhere, the non property owners participate in setting the taxes on the property owners (as is socialistically correct). Of course, who do the tax collectors come after if the renters don’t pay their rent or the businesses have no income? There is also a corollary to this by those same socialist fools – “paying taxes should have nothing to do with voting.” What fools these mortals be!

Old Country Boy on December 7, 2012 at 12:09 PM

I can’t think of a State that deserves a confiscatory tax rate more than the State of California. Will the last working Californian leaving the state please turn off the lights.

paulus1 on December 7, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Of course, who do the tax collectors come after if the renters don’t pay their rent or the businesses have no income? There is also a corollary to this by those same socialist fools – “paying taxes should have nothing to do with voting.” What fools these mortals be!

Old Country Boy on December 7, 2012 at 12:09 PM

It’s exactly why I voted on North Dakota’s property tax abolishment measure.
But it seems North Dakotans like being slaves to the state.
No one in this country owns their property. Not at all. We are renting it from the state.
Here in Hettinger county our property taxes just went up 30%.
We can hardly pay the taxes on what we have already.
Our pastureland (no farm ground at all) is really highly taxed.
We’re choking on this.
And the pittance $500/year the Gov’s been kicking back to us is nothing.
And our state has BILLIONS sitting in accounts like our Legacy fund.
Meanwhile, the Republican majority, along with their Democrat pets, are GROWING state govt even more.
I hate all of these people.

Badger40 on December 8, 2012 at 9:03 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3