Merlin1047
Senior Member
Late this morning I heard a radio talk show host go on about an alleged income tax scheme attributed to Clinton. The alleged scheme was supposedly hatched in 1993 and involved "impugned income".
If true, this was part of Clinton's effort to tax the "rich". One problem was, that the "rich" according to Slick Willie, only needed to earn 75k in order to benefit from his tax hike. The "impugned income" fits into the scheme as an effort to get more people to fit into the "rich" category and therefore get socked with higher taxes.
The scheme is supposed to have gone something like this: Say you own a house and are paying $500 a month on your mortgage. The IRS comes along and estimates that your house would rent on the open market for $2000. You now have an "impugned income" of $1500 per month or 18k per year. So if you had an income of 60k, you now have a taxable income of 78k and you're suddenly "rich".
I Googled the stuffings out of this because I thought it would make a great expose of how devious libs truly are. So if this is true, it would certainly make for an interesting discussion.
Since I couldn't come up with anything, I'm going to throw this out to anyone who wants to take the time to try to chase this down.
Good luck.
If true, this was part of Clinton's effort to tax the "rich". One problem was, that the "rich" according to Slick Willie, only needed to earn 75k in order to benefit from his tax hike. The "impugned income" fits into the scheme as an effort to get more people to fit into the "rich" category and therefore get socked with higher taxes.
The scheme is supposed to have gone something like this: Say you own a house and are paying $500 a month on your mortgage. The IRS comes along and estimates that your house would rent on the open market for $2000. You now have an "impugned income" of $1500 per month or 18k per year. So if you had an income of 60k, you now have a taxable income of 78k and you're suddenly "rich".
I Googled the stuffings out of this because I thought it would make a great expose of how devious libs truly are. So if this is true, it would certainly make for an interesting discussion.
Since I couldn't come up with anything, I'm going to throw this out to anyone who wants to take the time to try to chase this down.
Good luck.
