

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
A special report out Tuesday from the New York Times shines a light on the so-called "income-defense industry," which exploits "a dizzying array of tax maneuvers" so that the uber-wealthy can shield their fortunes.
"Operating largely out of public view -- in tax court, through arcane legislative provisions, and in private negotiations with the Internal Revenue Service -- the wealthy have used their influence to steadily whittle away at the government's ability to tax them," write Times reporters Patricia Cohen and Noam Scheiber. "The effect has been to create a kind of private tax system, catering to only several thousand Americans."
That elite group, the Times points out, is also "providing much of the early cash for the 2016 presidential campaign," in the hopes of influencing tax policy and keeping large loopholes in place.
The income-shielding maneuvers, which range from organizing one's business as a partnership to capitalizing on "a range of esoteric and customized tax deductions that go far beyond writing off a home office or dinner with a client," are largely unavailable to the average taxpayer, due to cost and complexity.
The ultra-wealthy "literally pay millions of dollars for these services," Jeffrey A. Winters, a political scientist at Northwestern University who studies economic elites, told the Times. In return, he said, they "save in the tens or hundreds of millions in taxes."
Indeed, Victor Fleischer, a law professor at the University of San Diego who studies the intersection of tax policy and inequality, told the Times: "We do have two different tax systems, one for normal wage-earners and another for those who can afford sophisticated tax advice. At the very top of the income distribution, the effective rate of tax goes down, contrary to the principles of a progressive income tax system."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
A special report out Tuesday from the New York Times shines a light on the so-called "income-defense industry," which exploits "a dizzying array of tax maneuvers" so that the uber-wealthy can shield their fortunes.
"Operating largely out of public view -- in tax court, through arcane legislative provisions, and in private negotiations with the Internal Revenue Service -- the wealthy have used their influence to steadily whittle away at the government's ability to tax them," write Times reporters Patricia Cohen and Noam Scheiber. "The effect has been to create a kind of private tax system, catering to only several thousand Americans."
That elite group, the Times points out, is also "providing much of the early cash for the 2016 presidential campaign," in the hopes of influencing tax policy and keeping large loopholes in place.
The income-shielding maneuvers, which range from organizing one's business as a partnership to capitalizing on "a range of esoteric and customized tax deductions that go far beyond writing off a home office or dinner with a client," are largely unavailable to the average taxpayer, due to cost and complexity.
The ultra-wealthy "literally pay millions of dollars for these services," Jeffrey A. Winters, a political scientist at Northwestern University who studies economic elites, told the Times. In return, he said, they "save in the tens or hundreds of millions in taxes."
Indeed, Victor Fleischer, a law professor at the University of San Diego who studies the intersection of tax policy and inequality, told the Times: "We do have two different tax systems, one for normal wage-earners and another for those who can afford sophisticated tax advice. At the very top of the income distribution, the effective rate of tax goes down, contrary to the principles of a progressive income tax system."
A special report out Tuesday from the New York Times shines a light on the so-called "income-defense industry," which exploits "a dizzying array of tax maneuvers" so that the uber-wealthy can shield their fortunes.
"Operating largely out of public view -- in tax court, through arcane legislative provisions, and in private negotiations with the Internal Revenue Service -- the wealthy have used their influence to steadily whittle away at the government's ability to tax them," write Times reporters Patricia Cohen and Noam Scheiber. "The effect has been to create a kind of private tax system, catering to only several thousand Americans."
That elite group, the Times points out, is also "providing much of the early cash for the 2016 presidential campaign," in the hopes of influencing tax policy and keeping large loopholes in place.
The income-shielding maneuvers, which range from organizing one's business as a partnership to capitalizing on "a range of esoteric and customized tax deductions that go far beyond writing off a home office or dinner with a client," are largely unavailable to the average taxpayer, due to cost and complexity.
The ultra-wealthy "literally pay millions of dollars for these services," Jeffrey A. Winters, a political scientist at Northwestern University who studies economic elites, told the Times. In return, he said, they "save in the tens or hundreds of millions in taxes."
Indeed, Victor Fleischer, a law professor at the University of San Diego who studies the intersection of tax policy and inequality, told the Times: "We do have two different tax systems, one for normal wage-earners and another for those who can afford sophisticated tax advice. At the very top of the income distribution, the effective rate of tax goes down, contrary to the principles of a progressive income tax system."