So Odummer is saying "no deal" no matter what without raising the top rates. Is he so stupid as to not consider it would actually be better to remove loop holes than raise rates? Removing loopholes will still raise the effective rate "the rich" pay. If they raise the rates, the "rich" will just use the loopholes to avoid paying more.
Another reason this clown is not capable of leadership or thinking outside the box to resolve problems. Fine job America for picking a loser.
I still say go over the cliff...let EVERYONE pay for Oblunder's mistakes, not just the rich.
The President clearly understands that this election was a referendum on raising rates on the top 2% of non-corporate taxpayers and he won that argument handily, even among self-identified Republicans. (He won, incidentally, with a larger popular vote majority than George W. Bush did when he claimed he had a "mandate" from the electorate.) He is holding a full house and the GOP has a busted flush, so don't expect him to fold.
As for what constitutes a "loophole", well, one man's loophole is another man's good government policy. I prefer the term "tax preference" because it doesn't carry the negative implication of "loophole". Tax preferences almost always enter the Code in the guise of creating an incentive for people to engage in a targeted activity that the government has decided to encourage. Thus, the mortgage interest deduction is in the Code to encourage home ownership, the oil depletion allowance to encourage oil drilling, etc. On this issue, I'm with VT. Let's wipe the slate clean and make the proponents of any new tax preference justify it as a stand-alone policy. Most of them wouldn't past that test.
As I've posted repeatedly over the years in this forum, I favor eliminating all tax preference items and replacing the current complex tax code with a flat rate coupled with a generous personal exemption.
Bush said he had a "mandate" and the democraps in congress told him to take a leap...so the same goes for Obama.
I bet your "generous" personal excemption would be enough to get over 50% of the people paying nothing as opposed to the 40+ percent now to guarantee future elections. I am all for the flat tax but let's make everyone put a little in the game. Lets make it a consumption tax. Everyone pay X percent of everything they purchase. We could even throw in a "rich" tax so that if an heir is given money the giver is considered to have spent that money and pays the same flat tax.
That would encourage people to invest money and eventually when they died then the "estate" flat tax portion would tax the money gained from investment. Of course, the government would screw it all up and put out regulation after regulation and not make it a simple flat tax. The 3.8% surcharge "tax" now has 159 pages of regulation / interpretation. The idiots in the government forgot about rental income and will now have to add another 20 pages.
I don't have all the answers but Oblunder definitely does not have the answers. He can't even put together a good team to come up with new ideas.
Loop holes will hurt the middle class more than the rich. The charity or housing industries will also be hurt. Also, it won't stop the Romneys to move assets to Bermuda. Take a look at all the business cash positions, nearly all hiding overseas from Uncle Sam. But when the businesses got in trouble, their executives shamelessly want our military, SEC, State Department, FTC etc for help.
...and you think raising the "rates" will keep them from moving the money? What about closing the "moving" loophole by saying anything moved offshore pays a special tax? You can't after it is moved, but you can definitely tax the amount be moved. This is what I mean by Odummer not thinking outside the box instead of "we must raise the income rate to 39.5%". That still won't catch the "rich" like Mitt because he still does not earn "income". Is Odummer that stupid?
Define loop hole...are you talking about valid...legal...deductions? If you are...would it not depend on what deductions are no longer allowed? You should seek help for your hate disorder.
Removing tax loopholes would be good to simplify taxes, but that would also raise taxes much more for the middle class than for the very wealthy. Deductions for "loopholes" like kids, home mortgages, and health care help the middle class tax payer much more than they help a millionaire. With deductions such as these a middle calls tax payer can often reduce the amount of taxes owed by a considerable, often double digit, percentage.
And you saw how these sorts of deductions affect the taxes of the wealthy. Romney paid taxes at the effective rate of about 14.5% (from memory). His taxes were reduced by very little with those sorts of deductions from his maximum rate of 15% for his interest, dividends, and cap. gains income.
If you want to change the amount that people like Romney pay, you must change the loophole that he uses - the 15% rate on cap. gains and dividends. But it appears that the Republicans have so far defined that as a :"rate" and not a "loophole". If all loopholes, including the 15% cap. gains and interest loophole would be removed, then I could accept a simple removal of loopholes.
I find it funny how you can only point out what 'rich' republicans pay while never mentioning your 'rich' democrats like Kerry, Rice, Kennedy, Pelosi...etc....etc. I notice that you never suggest that since all those folks desire to raise taxes to pay for more intrusive government that they pay in extra on taxes of their own accord....why raise the rates when you can just send in some extra?