How about a minimum tax on the rich?
This outrage points to the necessity for more than a simple revision in upper-end tax rates, though that’s the place to start. I support President Obama’s proposal to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for high-income taxpayers. However, I prefer a cutoff point somewhat above $250,000 — maybe $500,000 or so.
Additionally, we need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that. A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours. Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy.
Above all, we should not postpone these changes in the name of “reforming” the tax code. True, changes are badly needed. We need to get rid of arrangements like “carried interest” that enable income from labor to be magically converted into capital gains. And it’s sickening that a Cayman Islands mail drop can be central to tax maneuvering by wealthy individuals and corporations.








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 Next »
How about shut the hell up and write a check, Warren?
Pay up, sucka!
CurtZHP on November 26, 2012 at 12:12 PM
I don’t get this guy, first he wants to pay more taxes but screams bloody murder about the corporate jet deduction going away. Actually I do understand but he needs to hush, pay more if he wants.
Cindy Munford on November 26, 2012 at 12:13 PM
How about flat tax for everyone. Say, 12,000 per man woman and child in the nation with no deductions or refunds payable in 12 $1000 payments per month.
astonerii on November 26, 2012 at 12:13 PM
I’ll settle for a minimum tax on billionaires who can’t seem to STFU about what taxes the rich should pay.
Kataklysmic on November 26, 2012 at 12:13 PM
How about we just tax you and Bill Gates at about 90% big boy!?
ChunkyLover on November 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM
How about principles? How about a minimum tax on utter stupidity?
How about a Buffet tax – 99% of all wealth to the Treasury.
platypus on November 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM
Why is this man putting his money in a charitable foundation? Given what he advocates, he should just give it to the Federal Government.
WashJeff on November 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM
hes a bottom feeder he makes most of his money by buying property from people who cant afford the death tax.
ChunkyLover on November 26, 2012 at 12:16 PM
Why not just walk around Beverly Hills, the Gold Coast and the Upper West side with a handgun and a ski mask and rob anyone with the nerve to be successful?
CrustyB on November 26, 2012 at 12:17 PM
How about a one time tax all all of your assets, say 25% of all people worth over a Billion dollars?
Let’s see how supportive you are of that one…you can dodge “income”, but you can’t dodge assets…So if you are worth $46 billion, you would only be worth $34.5 billion, still a livable base to live and invest with…
right2bright on November 26, 2012 at 12:17 PM
Say, Warren old buddy, old pal, why not just send all your cash to the federal government and let it figure out what you really need to get by on? How about that? 100% tax and an ‘entitlement’ all in one!
Wouldn’t you like that?
Why would you want to give less? Justify it, wouldya Warren? Because those on the Left won’t really tell what they want the top rate on the rich to be, so lets start at the other end, shall we?
ajacksonian on November 26, 2012 at 12:18 PM
All people should pay according to their ability to pay and take according to their need. That’s a sure fire winner!
Deafdog on November 26, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Agreed! Put your money where your mouth is, or STFU.
Droopy on November 26, 2012 at 12:18 PM
Buffet owns insurance companies that sell annuities.
Annuities are generally tax shelters.
The worse the tax environment gets, the more attractive his product are to the people being ravaged by the tax environment he hopes to make worse.
Akzed on November 26, 2012 at 12:19 PM
In fact, let’s just say, no one should have more than $5 billion dollars in income and assets…all the rest goes to the treasury…Buffet and others can live on that couldn’t they?
right2bright on November 26, 2012 at 12:19 PM
How about Buffet gives all his wealth to the gov’t, volens?
Schadenfreude on November 26, 2012 at 12:20 PM
How about everyone pays taxes?
portlandon on November 26, 2012 at 12:20 PM
Here’s hoping that Buffet and Soros end up in the same creche, in diapers/Depends, soon.
Schadenfreude on November 26, 2012 at 12:21 PM
10% across the board, for utter fairness.
If not, stfu.
Schadenfreude on November 26, 2012 at 12:21 PM
Here you go, Warren:
Pass the address around to your Democrat buddies and spread the word.
PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE.
Good Lt on November 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM
Real FAIRNESS would be each person paying the exact same dollar amount.
astonerii on November 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM
Warren Buffett is the Alfred Krupp of this generation.
Rixon on November 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM
What a great idea… we set up an Alternative tax structure to push a minimum tax; but only ever on the rich.
We have this “Alternative Minimum Tax” plan, but don’t worry; such a plan could NEVER crush the middle class.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/13/pf/taxes/fiscal-cliff-amt/index.html
Wait, we already HAVE such a plan, and it IS crushing the middle class? INCONCEIVABLE!
I’m confused… how can Buffet be a good investor if he’s willnig to push plans of the style “Lets do exactly what has failed dozens of times int eh past, as this time it MUST
gekkobear on November 26, 2012 at 12:25 PM
Increased taxes does not equal increased revenue.
Note how the left aways natters on about “fairness”, never about revenue?
These ultra-rich leftists just want to keep others from making a living, so they can feel richer and “better” than we the “dance of the low sloping foreheads”.
Rebar on November 26, 2012 at 12:25 PM
Buffett, how about you pay 100% in taxes and leave mine alone. No one is stopping you, azzwipe!
You dirtbag piece of cow snot, you make your fortune with inside political information, political favors, bailouts, etc.. then you further want to stick to us by giving your liberal pols cover.
It’s a fu*king game to you, but it’s our hard earned meager income to us.
Danielvito on November 26, 2012 at 12:27 PM
FIRST cut government spending to less than 10% of GDP. Then you could ONLY tax the rich, and I’d have no problem with it.
Until and unless that happens, it’s idiotic to talk about anyone paying a “fair share” of a system run by the government, for the government, and of the government.
logis on November 26, 2012 at 12:30 PM
Let all of the rich who favor an increase pay 90% on everything above their basic quarter-million.
Make them happy, I say.
profitsbeard on November 26, 2012 at 12:30 PM
Yep. Then Everybody has skin in the game.
portlandon on November 26, 2012 at 12:31 PM
How about we tax charitable foundations with over $500,000 in endowments? I would suggest 30 percent of the endowment between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that. That outta do it.
Afterall, don’t Democrats believe government spends money better than individuals?
Fallon on November 26, 2012 at 12:31 PM
Hey Warren, either stop taking exemptions and deductions on your tax return or shut up.
NoFanofLibs on November 26, 2012 at 12:35 PM
How about a 95% income tax on billionaire ****s trying to kneecap the competition under the guise of fairness?
Darth Executor on November 26, 2012 at 12:39 PM
How about a 90% tax on all the money you take in?
That will cover a lot more than ‘income’ and it would destroy the economy faster than just an income tax.
The Rogue Tomato on November 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM
From another thread:
Galt2009 on November 26, 2012 at 12:47 PM
Just remember….Warren makes more money in a day, than some of you make in a lifetime.
“who are you going to trust?” A job creator, or a mere blogger!?!?!
LMAO. Com’on, you have to admit, this is pretty entertaining! Why you say? Because I could NOT CARE LESS about what the US Government does. My family’s wealth/income is not tied to it. I’m not big enough to rely to rely on lobbyist to get me more welfare, I’m not small enough to rely on Pelosi to save my medicaid.
Hint: There is a whole world outside of the US…and it’s full of wealth opportunities. Call it diversifying your sources of income.
Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM
Your hatred has blinded you from reality.
tom daschle concerned on November 26, 2012 at 12:51 PM
And, when the hyperinflation that is the natural result of us simply printing money has moved the middle class into the $1 million a year income bracket (because the dollar is worth what 5 cents is today.) , EVERYBODY can be massively overtaxed
michaelo on November 26, 2012 at 12:54 PM
You can’t compare both eras. Why is the left so regressive?
In the late 40′s, the 50′s; you had industrialization. Lots of modernization, building, growth. We had no competitors.
Fast forward to today, global competition is very high, and we need to compete.
Oh, and let’s recall how back in his hay day, electronic records didn’t exist. Money was a lot easier to hide, so if this buffoon thinks the wealthy were truly paying 91 percent, he’s kidding himself. You know that by the time they got done hiding and storing their assets, they were only paying around 20-30 percent of their income.
blatantblue on November 26, 2012 at 1:01 PM
This sayeth one of the biggest crony capitalists.
gwelf on November 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM
Funny coming from a guy who has tons of his assets stored tax free from the government.
blatantblue on November 26, 2012 at 1:03 PM
Because we have a revenue problem right?
Because giving a drunk more whiskey is going to solve the problem.
gwelf on November 26, 2012 at 1:12 PM
I don’t know why this story did not get more attention. The top 0.1% pay more income tax than the bottom 80%.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/top-01-percent-pays-more-income-tax-bottom-80-percent_594000.html
Hey Warren, explain that.
Jasper61 on November 26, 2012 at 1:12 PM
Buffett is playing everyone for chumps, he pushes for income taxes because he doesn’t want a wealth tax, income tax won’t affect him much but a wealth tax could destroy him. So he pushes for higher income taxes and hopes no one notices that those income taxes won’t affect him or any other person who’s already wealthy, the people it will affect are those who are still working hard and trying to become wealthy.
clearbluesky on November 26, 2012 at 1:13 PM
How about you start by paying the taxes that you ALREADY owe, Warren?
Resist We Much on November 26, 2012 at 1:15 PM
Buffett believes that by parroting the current administration’s meme, he will be “given a break” on the taxes he STILL owes. Hey Warren, there’s a lot of room left under that bus.
Clink on November 26, 2012 at 1:19 PM
This is what I get for coming here and sharing how I rely on my own abilities to create my wealth, instead of the government…I’m sorry if I offended your takerass.
Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM
If people have to pay higher income taxes, they have less ability to accumulate estates and are more likely to buy larger life insurance policies so that they can protect their spouses and children. Life insurance proceeds are not subject to estate/inheritance taxes.
Warren Buffett made a lot of his money from selling life insurance policies. Higher income tax rates lead to bigger life insurance policies, which mean people pay more in insurance premiums to people like Warren Buffett.
Resist We Much on November 26, 2012 at 1:26 PM
+1 for the billionaires wealth tax idea. Democrats would never let it pass, but it would be funny to hear all of these preachy liberal billionaires find religion on taxation.
The Count on November 26, 2012 at 1:27 PM
Beat me to it. Now if only there were a prominent Republican who would make this point every time this Warren Buffet nonsense comes up.
xblade on November 26, 2012 at 1:27 PM
You did nothing of the sort. You made an incoherent statement full of non sequitors and red herrings in an attempt to boast while demonstrating contempt.
Pity you.
tom daschle concerned on November 26, 2012 at 1:27 PM
The AMT was set up to address 155 high-income households in 1969. It will impact 30 million Americans this year.
Resist We Much on November 26, 2012 at 1:29 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »