Politico: Still higher taxes coming online in 2014

posted at 12:41 pm on January 10, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

In announcing their kind of bizarre and severely hackneyed plan to foster “promise zones” in specially selected locales as a means toward economic growth this week, the Obama administration at least seemed to acknowledge — if perhaps in a sort of weirdly implicit, cart-before-the-horse way — that lower taxes are a very viable method to spur wealth- and job-creation. Part of the “new” initiative includes tax credits for hiring workers as well as tax write-offs for capital investment within the zones, which would suggest that the Obama administration understands that when businesses and investors get to keep more of their own money, they often put that money toward growing their businesses, hiring more workers, and more subsequent capital investment.

The question, then, is why the Obama administration thinks that a small spot-treatment approach to growing the economy thusly will be at all effective while the rest of the country is still operating under the tax structure from which they plan to slightly relieve a handful of cities — especially considering that they just posted their most pathetic jobs report in three years, with people still dropping out of the labor force right and left.

But why apply that lower-tax logic to everyone when you can instead defy intellectual consistency and wage class-warfare while continuing to shave earnings out of the private sector in order to pay for your massive and redistributive social programs? Because that’s what a whole host of new ObamaCare taxes, as well as new taxes coming online for higher earners, are meant for, via Politico:

Democrats are pushing to make income inequality a major election-year issue with high-profile bids to extend jobless benefits and raise the minimum wage. But they’ve already had some victories moving the tax burden up the income ladder, reversing Bush-era policies that had slashed levies on the rich, especially on investment income.

Taxes on capital gains, for example, top out at 25 percent, once various surcharges are included, a sharp increase from 2012. …

The newest taxes, designed to help defray the cost of Obama’s 2010 health care law, didn’t begin taking effect until the 2013 tax year. One requires individuals earning more than $200,000 and couples above $250,000 to pay an additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax, in addition to the program’s 2.9 percent payroll tax. That’s projected to raise $87 billion over a decade, according to Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation. …

The deal also included other, stealthier increases on high earners. One provision, known in the tax world as “Pease,” reduces the itemized deductions they may take by 3 percent of every dollar for individuals who earn above $250,000. That adds about 1.2 percentage points to the top rate, Kautter said.

And etcetera, because yes, I’m sure that this time, all of these new taxes that still come nowhere remotely close to covering our level of federal spending will help to spur the job market. Or something.


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

In announcing their kind of bizarre and severely hackneyed plan to foster “promise zones” in specially selected locales as a means toward economic growth (in an effort to embarrass the likes of McConnell in KY) this week

This is more correct. He picked the zones not to help the poor…the thuggish pajama-preezie that he is.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2014 at 12:53 PM

Keeeeeep ‘em comin, boy.

Lanceman on January 10, 2014 at 12:53 PM

F— YES! We’re not paying enough as it is.

Chuck Schick on January 10, 2014 at 12:55 PM

Americans have no yet even fathomed the amount of tax increases coming as part of ObamaGlitch.

They have no clue what’s going to hit them in the next 2 years.

Meople on January 10, 2014 at 12:55 PM

I’m in that uber wealthy category which is obvious by the Bentley I have parked out there by the helicopter pad.

I’m already on a “Not Buying Jack-Shiite” program, now they’re going to hit me even harder? Well guess what, retards, I just extended that personal contract with myself.

Get yourself a skill and barter wherever you can, I have freezers full of fresh beef and pork courtesy of my ability to weld.

Bishop on January 10, 2014 at 12:56 PM

25. What happens if I do not have minimum essential coverage or an exemption, and I cannot afford to make the payment with my tax return?

The IRS routinely works with taxpayers who owe amounts they cannot afford to pay. The law prohibits the IRS from using liens or levies to collect any payment you owe related to the individual responsibility provision, if you, your spouse or a dependent included on your tax return does not have minimum essential coverage. However, if you owe a shared responsibility payment, the IRS may offset that liability against any tax refund you may be due.

Also, see item #6, on how all the muzzies get out. Find a way too, or see #25.

DO NOT comply, but don’t go on TV. If you do, the IRS will get you, one way or another.

Make sure you owe them taxes and not the reverse. If they owe you a refund they’ll keep the “tax”. Thank Roberts and curse him to Hell.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2014 at 1:00 PM

I’m really tired of our government pushing ENVY has public policy.

A society where there was equality of OUTCOME would be an inherently unfair society. As we all (should) know, people don’t put the same effort into their lives, nor to they strive equally to make sound decisions. To end up relative equal economically would point to an unfair system

However, a society where everyone has opportunity to succeed, if they will try, is a generally more fair society.

LilyBart on January 10, 2014 at 1:01 PM

It’s never made any sense. It never was meant to.
Call them whatever you want, urban economic zones, enterprise zones, empowerment zones, yada yada yada. It’s like arguing with a two year old. So if reducing taxes and increasing a business owner’s incentive to do more business is good in one city, why five feet away does another business owner have to collect twice as much sales tax? It’s ridiculous.
Flat tax it all and be done with it. Saves hundreds of billions of dollars in compliance costs, in peoples’ time wasted, and could do away with much of the IRS. But I guess progs would never let that happen.

smfic on January 10, 2014 at 1:02 PM

“Oh New Taxes!”

Tsar of Earth on January 10, 2014 at 1:04 PM

But I guess progs (and RINOs) would never let that happen.

smfic on January 10, 2014 at 1:02 PM

Must be exact and blame the RINOs more than the Ds. The latter are Utopian thugs. The former enable the latter.

Both do this.

Schadenfreude on January 10, 2014 at 1:05 PM

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-10/its-official-us-created-less-jobs-2013-2012

And the DOTUS keeps on giving his economic gifts.

Rock on Destroyer of the United States.

PappyD61 on January 10, 2014 at 1:05 PM

I’m in that uber wealthy category which is obvious by the Bentley I have parked out there by the helicopter pad.

Bishop on January 10, 2014 at 12:56 PM

I don’t have the Bentley nor the helicopter pad. I only make a couple hundred thou a year. So I guess I’m poor and should be railing at the dastardly income inequality and demand that rogue Bishop Share The Wealth.

NOMOBO on January 10, 2014 at 1:07 PM

Democrats are pushing to make income inequality a major election-year issue

And they’re hard at work making us, the rabble, more equal every day.

my ability to weld.

Bishop on January 10, 2014 at 12:56 PM

Funny. You don’t look it.

Lanceman on January 10, 2014 at 1:07 PM

……and the Smaller government Conservative has what political home to call his or her own?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eqYdr2iEhM

As government expands, liberty contracts.
A quote from President Ronald Reagan’s farewell address to the nation which he gave January 11, 1989.

PappyD61 on January 10, 2014 at 1:08 PM

The question, then, is why the Obama administration thinks that a small spot-treatment approach to growing the economy thusly will be at all effective while the rest of the country is still operating under the tax structure from which they plan to slightly relieve a handful of cities

Easy. They can then claim, “Hey, we tried it the GOP way, with lower taxes and nothing much happened. Now we really need to spend and borrow more to stimulate the oconomy.

rightside on January 10, 2014 at 1:13 PM

This is what “progressives” do every time. They can not create laws that directly penalize certain individuals or businesses but what they CAN do is create laws that are generally toxic to business activity and then exempt their chosen few from those laws. For example: in San Francisco the city instituted its own additional payroll tax for employers but exempt certain desired businesses such as Twitter.

This is how they curry favor with groups that support them. They create high taxes and onerous regulations and then exempt the groups who are more likely to vote for them from those taxes and regulations.

It should be illegal to exempt specific regions or companies from taxes.

crosspatch on January 10, 2014 at 1:16 PM

eat your damn peas!

DanMan on January 10, 2014 at 1:16 PM

I thought everyone understood that by taking money with increased taxation from the Evil Rich people who actually provide jobs in their companies, that makes them create even more jobs in those companies. Duh! It’s simple math.

Johnnyreb on January 10, 2014 at 1:18 PM

That’s projected to raise $87 billion over a decade

Pffft, what hasn’t already been spent on the website will be going to the insurance companies.

antipc on January 10, 2014 at 1:31 PM

Higher taxes means less money in the economy, fewer jobs and lower incomes.

In our fifth year of this hot mess, even Democrats have to hate these things by now.

I hope.

MTF on January 10, 2014 at 2:03 PM

Capital gains tax raising? Well it’s about time.

I moved my money the year before last into long term investments so I can avoid cashing anything out for 20+ years thinking they’d do this last year. I’ll cash out after I retire when I need that money.

I’ll make a little less in my investments; but given the lower taxes I’ll pay (when I’m earning $0.00 before paying on that income) I’ll do better overall financially.

Hey, they decided they’d rather have less money from me later and nothing now rather than a steady income stream from me moving my investments every year or two so I could make more money for me.

If you want me to stop moving money I’ll stop moving money. And I’m sure many others will as well. Clearly the economy was doing too well and we had to slow it by limiting investments.

If your plan involves a requirement that “the rich” be bad with money management; don’t expect that plan to do well.

gekkobear on January 10, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Yes, comrades, all good strong countries have always taxed their way to prosperity and wealth! This is well known to anyone who has studied history. (>/sarc)

Almost any plan at all will look good by comparison, and certainty would do the capitalist planners (like my plumber) wonders in planning hires. Dang, this administration really sucks, doesn’t it? As Geo. Will recently said, a good dose of liberalism is conservatism’s best friend. By the time 8 years of this stupidity passes, the people who have been paying attention will be ready for some Repub ideas (yes, that applies to “independents” as well).

DublOh7 on January 10, 2014 at 2:47 PM

One requires individuals earning more than $200,000 and couples above $250,000 to pay an additional 0.9 percent Medicare tax…

Another surreptitious attack on marriage, aka the marriage penalty.

sadatoni on January 10, 2014 at 3:14 PM

Politico: Still higher taxes increased levels of racketeering coming online in 2014

Dr. ZhivBlago on January 10, 2014 at 4:16 PM