Six Months to Go Until The Largest Tax Hikes in History

dvinman

VIP Member
Dec 14, 2009
456
69
78
In just six months, the largest tax hikes in the history of America will take effect. They will hit families and small businesses in three great waves on January 1, 2011:

(N.B. This version of the document contains even more tax hikes than the original version did)

First Wave: Expiration of 2001 and 2003 Tax Relief

In 2001 and 2003, the GOP Congress enacted several tax cuts for investors, small business owners, and families. These will all expire on January 1, 2011:

Personal income tax rates will rise. The top income tax rate will rise from 35 to 39.6 percent (this is also the rate at which two-thirds of small business profits are taxed). The lowest rate will rise from 10 to 15 percent. All the rates in between will also rise. Itemized deductions and personal exemptions will again phase out, which has the same mathematical effect as higher marginal tax rates. The full list of marginal rate hikes is below:

- The 10% bracket rises to an expanded 15%
- The 25% bracket rises to 28%
- The 28% bracket rises to 31%
- The 33% bracket rises to 36%
- The 35% bracket rises to 39.6%

Higher taxes on marriage and family. The “marriage penalty” (narrower tax brackets for married couples) will return from the first dollar of income. The child tax credit will be cut in half from $1000 to $500 per child. The standard deduction will no longer be doubled for married couples relative to the single level. The dependent care and adoption tax credits will be cut.

The return of the Death Tax. This year, there is no death tax. For those dying on or after January 1 2011, there is a 55 percent top death tax rate on estates over $1 million. A person leaving behind two homes and a retirement account could easily pass along a death tax bill to their loved ones.

Higher tax rates on savers and investors. The capital gains tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 20 percent in 2011. The dividends tax will rise from 15 percent this year to 39.6 percent in 2011. These rates will rise another 3.8 percent in 2013.

Second Wave: Obamacare

There are over twenty new or higher taxes in Obamacare. Several will first go into effect on January 1, 2011. They include:

The Tanning Tax. This went into effect on July 1st of this year. It imposes a new, 10% excise tax on getting a tan at a tanning salon. There is no exemption for tanners making less than $250,000 per year.

The “Medicine Cabinet Tax” Thanks to Obamacare, Americans will no longer be able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin).

The HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike. This provision of Obamacare increases the additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.

Brand Name Drug Tax. Starting next year, there will be a multi-billion dollar tax assessment imposed on name-brand drug manufacturers. This tax, like all excise taxes, will raise the price of medicine, hurting everyone.

Economic Substance Doctrine. The IRS is now empowered to disallow perfectly-legal tax deductions and maneuvers merely because it judges that the deduction or action lacks “economic substance.” This is obviously an arbitrary empowerment of IRS agents.

Employer Reporting of Health Insurance Costs on a W-2. This will start for W-2s in the 2011 tax year. While not a tax increase in itself, it makes it very easy for Congress to tax employer-provided healthcare benefits later.

Third Wave: The Alternative Minimum Tax and Employer Tax Hikes

When Americans prepare to file their tax returns in January of 2011, they’ll be in for a nasty surprise—the AMT won’t be held harmless, and many tax relief provisions will have expired. These major items include:

The AMT will ensnare over 28 million families, up from 4 million last year. According to the left-leaning Tax Policy Center, Congress’ failure to index the AMT will lead to an explosion of AMT taxpaying families—rising from 4 million last year to 28.5 million. These families will have to calculate their tax burdens twice, and pay taxes at the higher level. The AMT was created in 1969 to ensnare a handful of taxpayers.

Small business expensing will be slashed and 50% expensing will disappear. Small businesses can normally expense (rather than slowly-deduct, or “depreciate”) equipment purchases up to $250,000. This will be cut all the way down to $25,000. Larger businesses can expense half of their purchases of equipment. In January of 2011, all of it will have to be “depreciated.”

Taxes will be raised on all types of businesses. There are literally scores of tax hikes on business that will take place. The biggest is the loss of the “research and experimentation tax credit,” but there are many, many others. Combining high marginal tax rates with the loss of this tax relief will cost jobs.

Tax Benefits for Education and Teaching Reduced. The deduction for tuition and fees will not be available. Tax credits for education will be limited. Teachers will no longer be able to deduct classroom expenses. Coverdell Education Savings Accounts will be cut. Employer-provided educational assistance is curtailed. The student loan interest deduction will be disallowed for hundreds of thousands of families.

Charitable Contributions from IRAs no longer allowed. Under current law, a retired person with an IRA can contribute up to $100,000 per year directly to a charity from their IRA. This contribution also counts toward an annual “required minimum distribution.” This ability will no longer be there.

Six Months to Go Until<br> The Largest Tax Hikes in History
 
Welcome to " Great" Britain.
You fools lost that " war" too.
The media told you different.

Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws. Mayer Amschel Rothschild
 
In just six months, the largest tax hikes in the history of America will take effect.
That's what they called it, the last-time-around.....and, it was bullshit, THEN, as WELL.

:rolleyes:
"Recently released data from the Census Department reveal an amazing fact. In 1995, total taxes as a share of gross domestic product were the highest in U.S. historyhttp://www.cbpp.org/archiveSite/HITX85.HTM...Virtually all of the growth in the total tax burden [federal, state, and local revenues, from 1992 to 1995] is accounted for by the rise in federal receipts, which reached 20.4 percent of GDP in 1995. This is the second highest level in history...The growth in federal taxes since Mr. Clinton took office is remarkable...there has been a rise of 1.2 percentage points in the federal tax burden just during Mr. Clinton's first three years... Federal income taxes could be cut 15 percent across the board and total federal receipts as a share of GDP would be only about the same as they were in 1992." - Bruce Bartlett, August 5, 1996

****

Note: The vast majority of taxpayers saw no change in their income taxes as a result of the 1993 law. CBO estimates that most households paid only $38 more per year, as a result of the 4.3 cent per gallon increase in the gas tax.

>>Fast-forward>> to......​

July 07, 2004

"I had an interesting experience last week. I wrote an article for the New York Times on Bill Clinton’s economic record. I concluded that looking only at this aspect of his presidency, he wasn’t so bad. In many respects, he was better than George W. Bush has been. Reading this, a number of commentators mistakenly thought that I now think Clinton was a good president. This is a misreading of the point I was trying to make.

I simply recited the facts. The budget went from deficit to surplus on Clinton’s watch and lower spending played a key role.

Where Clinton ultimately failed economically, in my opinion, was not so much in what he did as what he didn’t do. When cyclical and other factors led to the emergence of large budget surpluses in the late 1990s, he chose to sit on them rather than use them to fundamentally restructure Social Security. This would have benefited both him and the Democratic party by giving them a monumental achievement and by taking away the money that Republicans later used to cut taxes far more than Democrats would have liked.

We all know why this happened. In 1998, when the surplus first emerged, Clinton was completely absorbed by the Lewinsky scandal. I tried at the time to persuade some of Clinton’s people that Social Security reform would change the subject and give Republicans something else to focus on — but to no avail. Thus, a historic opportunity was lost due to a tawdry indiscretion. Future generations will suffer as a result.

It was then that I started looking more fondly at the Clinton experience. Like disco music, it seemed awful compared to what came before. But compared to what came after, it looks a lot better."

Sorry, dvinman....we're merely dropping-back to Bill Clinton's tax-rate$.
*
*
*
*
*
(You remember THO$E......DON'T YOU??!!!!!! :lol: )
 
there will be a deal that looks something like.
Clinton rates on top 5%, they will scale back or eliminate the cap gains increase on the rich.
thus the market goes up, progressives get to look like they are socking it to the rich.
 
Welcome to " Great" Britain.
You fools lost that " war" too.
The media told you different.

Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws. Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Welcome to THE GREATEST ECONOMY THE U.S. EVER EXPERIENCED!!!....Dougie.

106.gif

"Like our Olympic athletes in Sydney, the American people are breaking all kinds of records these days. This is the first year we've balanced the budget without using the Medicare trust fund since Medicare was created in 1965. I think we should follow Al Gore's advice and lock those trust funds away for the future." - Bill Clinton
 
there will be a deal that looks something like.
Clinton rates on top 5%, they will scale back or eliminate the cap gains increase on the rich.
thus the market goes up, progressives get to look like they are socking it to the rich.
I don't see any need to complicate things....politically. There's no need to tweak things.

We KNOW Clinton's tax-rate$ WORKED!

We merely need to drop-back, and punt over the remnants of the BUSHCO-economy.....

emoticon_turd.gif
 
didn't the republican congress that passed those tax cuts purposely design them to expire in 2011? methinks the anger here is misplaced.
 
Yes, the republicans putting in those tax cuts DID MAKE THEM EXPIRE in 2011....wonder why? To mask their tremendous projected deficit spending....

they played games with the budget...that's a FACT.

Will the republicans allow the Democrats to fix their mess by continuing the tax breaks on the middle class while allowing the ones at the top expire....only ones hairdresser knows!? ;)
 
Yes, the republicans putting in those tax cuts DID MAKE THEM EXPIRE in 2011....wonder why? To mask their tremendous projected deficit spending....

they played games with the budget...that's a FACT.

Will the republicans allow the Democrats to fix their mess by continuing the tax breaks on the middle class while allowing the ones at the top expire....only ones hairdresser knows!? ;)

Why would you ask that Care, the dems can pass anything they want right now w/o any help from the republicans at all? And does it really matter when they were set to expire, the current democrat-majority congress could choose to continue them if they wanted without any changes at all. Are people going to seriously blame the republicans from years ago for their taxes going up next year? :lol:
 
didn't the republican congress that passed those tax cuts purposely design them to expire in 2011? methinks the anger here is misplaced.
BUSHCO-fans have short-memories....conveniently-so.

(....Or, they're 'Baggers.....and have never had-a-clue about much of anything, political. :rolleyes: )

:rolleyes:

"The answer is that President Bush and a complicit Congress didn&#8217;t want to show the magnitude of the deficits that would result from their tax cuts. To hide those deficits as they were pushing them through they used a variety of accounting tricks. One of those tricks was attaching expiration dates so that, on paper, there wouldn&#8217;t be any long-term costs."
 
Last edited:
Raising taxes in this economy looks like a truly bad idea to me.

Not that our system doesn't need reform, but right now?

Bad idea.
 
Yes, the republicans putting in those tax cuts DID MAKE THEM EXPIRE in 2011....wonder why? To mask their tremendous projected deficit spending....

they played games with the budget...that's a FACT.

Will the republicans allow the Democrats to fix their mess by continuing the tax breaks on the middle class while allowing the ones at the top expire....only ones hairdresser knows!? ;)

Why would you ask that Care, the dems can pass anything they want right now w/o any help from the republicans at all? And does it really matter when they were set to expire, the current democrat-majority congress could choose to continue them if they wanted without any changes at all. Are people going to seriously blame the republicans from years ago for their taxes going up next year? :lol:

Are you certain on that? It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass anything now a days, due to the filibuster....and the Dems do not have 60 votes in the Senate?
 
So we should keep the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy? Really? Fuck that. They will end and 95% of this country will not be affected.

If you make over 250k a year, its time to pay back. Period.
 
Yes, the republicans putting in those tax cuts DID MAKE THEM EXPIRE in 2011....wonder why? To mask their tremendous projected deficit spending....

they played games with the budget...that's a FACT.
Old-habits are hard-to-break......

bushsuckerpunch.gif


....especially for PUNKS!!!!!!!!!!
 
Yes, the republicans putting in those tax cuts DID MAKE THEM EXPIRE in 2011....wonder why? To mask their tremendous projected deficit spending....

they played games with the budget...that's a FACT.

Will the republicans allow the Democrats to fix their mess by continuing the tax breaks on the middle class while allowing the ones at the top expire....only ones hairdresser knows!? ;)

Why would you ask that Care, the dems can pass anything they want right now w/o any help from the republicans at all? And does it really matter when they were set to expire, the current democrat-majority congress could choose to continue them if they wanted without any changes at all. Are people going to seriously blame the republicans from years ago for their taxes going up next year? :lol:


Are you certain on that? It takes 60 votes in the Senate to pass anything now a days, due to the filibuster....and the Dems do not have 60 votes in the Senate?

So you think the republicans are stupid enough to filabuster a bill keeping the tax brackets where they're at now instead of allowing them to increase dramatically in January? I know people that are putting money away right now in order to pay their tax bill next April, a lot of people are going to be in for a very unpleasant surprise in April.

And your theory holds that they wouldn't get one republican to side with them? I wish that were the case.
 
Raising taxes in this economy looks like a truly bad idea to me.

Not that our system doesn't need reform, but right now?

Bad idea.

I thought the same way as you....but I'm not so certain anymore....not after hearing that those at the very top are NOT spending the huge tax breaks they got, on creating jobs or expanding businesses and are only pocketing their tax breaks.

If they were using their humongous tax breaks given to them on "creating jobs" then it would be a bad idea to kill them, but SINCE THEY ARE NOT, I don't see it as much of a problem as I once did....

I see it more beneficial to reduce our deficits.

And yes, congress needs to stop increasing the deficit through their over spending as well....

People thought the Clinton tax hikes on the highest income earners was going to absolutely kill the economy, but they did not....they showed fiscal responsibility....

those tax cuts to the upper echelon out there now, came from the working man's social security surpluses....and we no longer have those surpluses, we are going in the deficit on social security payments now....something HAS TO GIVE.
 
Raising taxes in this economy looks like a truly bad idea to me.

Not that our system doesn't need reform, but right now?

Bad idea.

I thought the same way as you....but I'm not so certain anymore....not after hearing that those at the very top are NOT spending the huge tax breaks they got on creating jobs or expanding businesses and are only pocketing their tax breaks.

If they were using their humongous tax breaks given to them on "creating jobs" then it would be a bad idea to kill them, but SINCE THEY ARE NOT, I don't see it as much of a problem as I once did....

I see it more beneficial to reduce our deficits.

And yes, congress needs to stop increasing the deficit through their over spending as well....

People thought the Clinton tax hikes on the highest income earners was going to absolutely kill the economy, but they did not....they showed fiscal responsibility....

those tax cuts to the upper echelon out there now, came from the working man's social security surpluses....and we no longer have those surpluses, we are going in the deficit on social security payments now....something HAS TO GIVE.

Where did you hear that?
 
Yes, the republicans putting in those tax cuts DID MAKE THEM EXPIRE in 2011....wonder why? To mask their tremendous projected deficit spending....

they played games with the budget...that's a FACT.

Will the republicans allow the Democrats to fix their mess by continuing the tax breaks on the middle class while allowing the ones at the top expire....only ones hairdresser knows!? ;)

Why would you ask that Care, the dems can pass anything they want right now w/o any help from the republicans at all?
Kinda new to politics, are you?

:eusa_eh:
 

Forum List

Back
Top