EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Rich Are Different from You and Me – They Pay Less Taxes
Benjamin Franklin, who used his many talents to become a wealthy man, famously said that the only things certain in life are death and taxes. But if you’re a corporate CEO in America today, even they can be put on the back burner – death held at bay by the best medical care money can buy and the latest in surgical and life extension techniques, taxes conveniently shunted aside courtesy of loopholes, overseas investment and governments that conveniently look the other way.
In a story headlined, “For Big Companies, Life Is Good,” The Wall Street Journal reports that big American companies have emerged from the deepest recession since World War II more profitable than ever: flush with cash, less burdened by debt, and with a greater share of the country’s income. But, the paper notes, “Many of the 1.1 million jobs the big companies added since 2007 were outside the U.S. So, too, was much of the $1.2 trillion added to corporate treasuries.”
To add to this embarrassment of riches, the consumer group Citizens for Tax Justice reports that more than two dozen major corporations – including GE, Boeing, Mattel and Verizon -- paid no federal taxes between 2008 and 2011. They got a corporate tax break that was broadly supported by Republicans and Democrats alike.
Corporate taxes today are at a 40-year-low -- even as the executive suites at big corporations have become throne rooms where the crown jewels wind up in the personal vault of the CEO.
Then look at this report in The New York Times: Last year, among the 100 best-paid CEOs, the median income was more than $14 million, compared with the average annual American salary of $45,230. Combined, this happy hundred executives pulled down more than two billion dollars.
What’s more, according to the Times “… these CEO’s might seem like pikers. Top hedge fund managers collectively earned $14.4 billion last year.” No wonder some of them are fighting to kill a provision in the recent Dodd-Frank reform law that would require disclosing the ratio of CEO pay to the median pay of their employees. One never wishes to upset the help, you know. It can lead to unrest.
That’s Wall Street -- the metaphorical bestiary of the financial universe. But there’s nothing metaphorical about the earnings of hedge fund tigers, private equity lions, and the top dogs at those big banks that were bailed out by tax dollars after they helped chase our economy off a cliff.
So what do these big moneyed nabobs have to complain about? Why are they whining about reform? And why are they funneling cash to super PACs aimed at bringing down Barack Obama, who many of them supported four years ago?
Because, writes Alec MacGillis in The New Republic -- the President wants to raise their taxes. That’s right -- while ordinary Americans are taxed at a top rate of 35% on their income, Congress allows hedge fund and private equity tycoons to pay only pay 15% of their compensation. The President wants them to pay more; still at a rate below what you might pay, and for that he’s being accused of – hold onto your combat helmets -- “class warfare.” One Wall Street Midas, once an Obama fan, now his foe, told MacGillis that by making the rich a primary target, Obama is “[expletive deleted] on people who are successful.”
And can you believe this? Two years ago, when President Obama first tried to close that gaping loophole in our tax code, Stephen Schwarzman, who runs the Blackstone Group, the world’s largest private equity fund, compared the President’s action to Hitler’s invasion of Poland.
That’s the same Stephen Schwarzman whose agents in 2006 launched a predatory raid on a travel company in Colorado. His fund bought it, laid off 841 employees, and recouped its entire investment in just seven months – one of the quickest returns on capital ever for such a deal.
"Two dozen major corporations – including GE, Boeing, Mattel and Verizon -- paid no federal taxes between 2008 and 2011. They got a corporate tax break that was broadly supported by Republicans and Democrats alike."
To celebrate his 60th birthday Mr. Schwarzman rented the Park Avenue Armory here in New York at a cost of $3 million, including a gospel choir led by Patti LaBelle that serenaded him with “He’s Got the Whole World in His Hands.” Does he ever -- his net worth is estimated at nearly $5 billion. Last year alone Schwarzman took home over $213 million in pay and dividends, a third more than 2010. Now he’s fundraising for Mitt Romney, who, like him, made his bundle on leveraged buyouts that left many American workers up the creek.
To add insult to injury, average taxpayers even help subsidize the private jet travel of the rich. On the Times’ DealBook blog, mergers and acquisitions expert Steven Davidoff writes, “If an outside security consultant determines that executives need a private jet and other services for their safety, the Internal Revenue Service cuts corporate chieftains a break. In such cases, the chief executive will pay a reduced tax bill or sometimes no tax at all.”
Are the CEOs really in danger? No, says Davidoff, “It’s a common corporate tax trick.”
Talk about your friendly skies. No wonder the people with money and influence don’t feel connected to the rest of the population. It’s as if they live in a foreign country at the top of the world, like their own private Switzerland, at heights so rarified they can’t imagine life down below.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



91 Comments so far
Show AllIn a social contract, people may allow for the "ownership" (an abstract relationship created by modern humans) of parts of the common space by individuals in hopes it may result in the greater good, as those with a strong relationship to land or goods will likely be motivated to use them effectively in producing outcomes that may benefit all. However, a clear and obvious downside is that the ownership of property has a snowball effect, with those who own more having a great advantage in obtaining even more. Add to that the problem recognized by Upton Sinclair, 'It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it," and you have a danger of those accumulating great amounts of property asserting rights to continue accumulating property and having the power to enforce those rights, as they are caught in a positive feedback loop that empowers them as it disconnects them from the rest of the population.
As the wealth and power is accumulated and the disconnect from the population of commoners becomes more complete, the position of the plutocrats becomes more secure and more hardened and can only be overcome with powerful and hardened resistance.
Since Obama extended the Bush Tax cuts on 12/31/10 and will certainly extend the Bush/Obama tax cuts on 12/31/12, why are we discussing this issue when there is zero political will to really tax the rich?
Blah, blah all you want about Obama, but these are republican tax cuts, pushed 100% by them and their corporate backed tea party types who make sure to keep all in line or lose in their next primary election. The other side is organized in the class war. We, most clearly, are not.
"The other side is organized in the class war."
Yes, yes they are... and that includes both republicans and democrats.
Ray, thanks for bringing this up. It just goes to show that everytime an economically destructive policy is about to expire, some puppet or other will resuscitate it. I've heard one too many die hard Obama supporters promise that he'll let it go this time at the end of the year but I doubt it. Lame duck or in the middle of his transition to his second term, his governing mentality proves that he will go all out and extend the tax cuts for the wealthy.
By the way, I must thank you again for reminding us about Elena Kagan and Monsanto and it connects very well to Obama's other Monsanto appoints especially on the FDA. Online or in the real world, there's nothing wrong with pounding away at Big O's pro-corporatist caving in no matter how desperately his die hard supporters try to scare us on SCOTUS, SS, Medicare, Iran, and all. Obama or Romney in office, the 1% will get their undeserved protection from the WH and Congress who will in turn send paid pr hacks to disrupt and try to psych those of us who know better out while us 99% are still left to foot their bills.
While recognizing the social benefit of the exclusive use of portions of the commons for economic benefit, Thomas Paine foresaw the inevitable concentration of wealth and the consequent impoverishment of the landless and dispossessed.
So, in his last revolutionary pamphlet, Agrarian Justice, Paine proposed an inheritance tax that would fund a social security program, offering a one-time dividend to each young man turning 21, and an annual dividend to the elderly, the blind and the lame (the Social Security Administration credits Paine for the idea).
This would have at least redressed the wealth imbalance once every generation, something like a Jubilee year, and prevented it from getting excessive.
Thomas Paine wrote in that pamphlet, "I care not how affluent some may be, provided that none be miserable in consequence of it.”
Similarly, the most read man in 19th century America, Henry George (Progress and Poverty was second to the bible in readership), proposed a single tax on land as expropriated commons, in order to recompense the rest of society for exclusive use.
If only we had practiced what they preached.
A Banksters defeatism nightmare, Being forced to Return to Real Money=United States Note=Lawful Money. The real reason you pay an income tax, is for the privilege of using a private currency. Also known As A: Federal Reserve Note, Demand from your bank or brokerage, lawful money and the tax goes away, with a tax exemption on lawful money, all of your money is yours. Use the Remedy within the Federal Reserve Act. http://savingtosuitorsclub.net/ Stop being a Slave!!!!!!
http://www.21silver.com/?show=merrill&read=federal_reserve_act_remedy
Tax Exemption: http://stormthunder.com/federal-reserve-act/ Web search these four different phrases: Redeemed in Lawful Money or United States Note or Redeemed in Lawful Money Pursuant to Title 12 USC §411 or deposited for credit on account or exchanged for non-negotiable federal reserve notes of face value
So if corporations are people, then are people corporations? why doesn't everyone use the same tax advantages corporations do?
If corporations are people, then WTF are their employees?
Mostly in debt or out of work or both.
Especially if Romney's company bought your employer out.
These tax breaks helped create jobs, in China and India.
I like the verse from TOm Paxton's song "Daily News"
Don't try to change my mind with facts,
to hell with the graduated income tax.
A peaceful protest: If we all stopped paying taxes, where would the government get its money? how would the police and military be paid?
"The fundamental political question is why do people obey a government. The answer is that they tend to enslave themselves, to let themselves be governed by tyrants. Freedom from servitude comes not from violent action, but from the refusal to serve. Tyrants fall when the people withdraw their support." - Étienne de La Boétie (1530-1563)
There is ethical and likely political value in refusing to pay for the organized theft of our national wealth and the organized rape and pillage of foreign lands (I have refused to pay federal income taxes for 33 years). But it wouldn't necessarily shut the government machine down, since they can print and coin money ex nihilo to fund all their expenditures.
In fact, coinage was created by imperial adventurers who needed a currency with intrinsic value that would be accepted anywhere in the world. Prior to that, most economic activity was based on local debt relationships (bookkeeping entries and promises to pay).
So it's ironic that the Medieval debt-based economies that sustained local community relationships have now morphed into a global debt-based currency system, while the coinage that allowed imperial expansion seems now more amenable to local (and under the table) trade.
Ever wonder why the top tax rate on the wealthy used to be 91%? Because the wealthy have always sheltered their income. A ridiculously high rate of 91% was needed because the wealthy were not reporting all their income. Nothing has changed. Too much emphasis is put on tax rates because the people do not understand tax. The real issue is that the wealthy are not declaring all their income. They are sheltering their income in places like the Cayman Islands, Swiss banks and offshore manufacturing.
Follow this argument:
Warren Buffett was the worlds second richest man in 2009 with a net worth of $37 billion USD. The following year, Warren Buffet was the worlds third richest man (2010) with a net worth of $47 billion USD. Warren Buffet's net worth increased by $10 billion dollars in 2010, yet he paid only $6.9 million dollars in federal income tax.
Warren Buffett is an investor. His $47 billion is his investment portfolio. The $10 billion dollar increase in 2010 is a capital gain. What percent is $6.9 million of $10 billion? That is Warren's tax rate.
Warren's portfolio is churning all the time, yet he never shows his gains as income. In 2010 he reported $63 million USD as income on his capital increase of $10 billion. His gains magically morphed into capital that was never taxed. Warren and friends do this magic trick year after year and their friends in government make it all legal or turn a blind eye
The Buffett Rule is about tax rates and is a smoke screen to hide the real theft going on. The real theft is that the wealthy shelter their income. The wealthy don't get a W-2. The wealthy don't declare all their gains. That is why top tax rates used to be 91%. The high rate was used to counter all the sheltering going on.
"The Buffett Rule is about tax rates and is a smoke screen to hide the real theft going on. The real theft is that the wealthy shelter their income. The wealthy don't get a W-2. The wealthy don't declare all their gains. That is why to tax rates used to be 91%. The high rate was used to counter all the sheltering going on."
Yep!
In fact, the highest marginal tax rate was 94% in 1944-45 to fund the war effort, and taken off the top of exorbitant war profits (on income over $200,000 or the equivalent today of $2.6 million). It was not designed to compensate for tax sheltering, as you allege. It was still 69% in 1981 before Reagan took out his axe, and everything's been on a downhill slide since.
The rich are NOT different from you and me--they THINK they are different, hence their sense of entitlement and unbridled greed and egotism.
True. And many of the rich are petrified of the truth,spending enormous amounts to suppress it. Because continued revelations de-throne naked emperors.
Yup. That's the one thing that the Right is right about: we live in an entitlement culture. But it's the super-rich, not the poor, who have an entitlement mentality. And that's always been the case for the aristocracy.
And if they were smart, they'd support gun control laws to the level we see in Japan. You will note that after Gabby Giffords was shot there in Arizona, the Republicans immediately denounced any mention of passing any sort of a "gun control" law. Would they have reacted the same if Gabby Giffords had been a Republican instead of a Democrat?
They shot Lincoln, didn't they?
Hmmm.... Abe Lincoln (R), James A. Garfield (R), William McKinley (R), John F. Kennedy (D)
Seems like the Repubs have been getting the worst of it, at least at the presidential level.
Reagan (R) shot, G. Ford (R) shot at
Could this mean that Democrats actually have better aim than Republicans?
Ford- to install Nelson Rockefeller as President
Reagan- to install George HW Bush as President
And all that that implies. Next?
I am opposed to capital punishment, but I now better understand the French Revolution and the invention of the Guillotine.
You mean for slicing cheese and cutting the nips off of Cuban cigars?
Apparently you just can't help yourself.
Looks serious to me. But where's the tipping point? What will it take to change the system? Is peaceful protest, as Tacky suggests (quoting La Boetie) the answer? Or what's to stop us as individuals from, as Tacky again suggests, taking advantage of corporate tax loopholes? (Probably not going to fly.) Politicians are owned by the plutocrats, so there is little to be gained by asking them for help. Is there anything we don't know about the sociopaths that run things? Like caged animals, we've lost our fight and take the rich and their greed for granted--a fact of life. I know I'm wrong at some level: People are angry, frustrated, and out occupying everything. Peaceful? For how long? And then what?
How could a person get rich without screwing a bunch of other humans? Or nature? Think of all those immoral decisions made by the rich one. Definitely not in the image of Jesus.
The question to me is why haven't Obama and his idiots been using a slogan of "All we ask is that they pay as much as we do" instead of the ignorant "fair share" mantra that leaves open the question of what is a fair share.
"As much as we do" is easily understood, would result in more tax revenue and be hard to refute.
WE are all aware that the rich pay less in taxes than the average American, but it is hard for the average American to know that the stated rate is not what they are paying.
Because Obama the Prostitute of the Plutocracy doesn't really want to lower taxes on the rich, he wants to fool "progressives" (a synonym for "gullible fools") to vote for him one more time so he can abolish social security and medicare, raise taxes on the middle class, privatize all of the commons, and join the 1% like Bill Clinton.
You are quite correct of course. Everything he has done confirms he is a tool.
How many lunatics does it take to turn CD into an asylum?
1
LOL
During the past year Obama has repeated his desire for "tax reform" which in Obamaspeak means increasing workers' taxes while reducing corporate taxes for companies like Boeing and GE that already book billions in profits yet pay no taxes and get tax credits. Obama always mentions Ronny Raygun when he talks about "tax reform" despite Raygun's 1986 "tax reform" being the most regressive "tax reform" in US history.
You can safely bet your last nickle that Obama WILL get his "tax reform" as soon as he is re-elected in November.
So Greg. You honestly believe Obama is a man of the people? Honestly?
Wow, that was a mouthful. Doesn't pulling all that shit out of your ass kinda leave a bad taste in your mouth? You are truly a know it all loon. There are not all that many right-wingers that can come up with such fantastical tomfoolery.
Golly Greg. I thought watching what someone did rather than what they said wasn't right wing Tomfoolery. I thought watching what someone actually did was the intelligent thing to do. Tomfoolery to me would be believing what someone said rather than what they actually did.
But perhaps we ignoramuses are mired in the truth and just can't adjust to the new reality of rhetoric is real and actions don't mean anything.
I have never found falsehood tasty nor liars admirable.
Obamabots have proven to be at least as faith-based and no more evidence-based (in voting against their best interests) than Dubyabots were.
If Missouri was really the "show me state" Ralph Nader would have carried the state in the past four presidential elections.
What's with your last sentence? Nader has never come within a light year of winning a state and he never will. Dream on with your 3rd party silliness.
Do you work for, or have a vested interest in the Democratic Party Greg? I'm asking in the name of full disclosure.
No, but anyone who truly thinks the republicans are equally as evil as democrats is a fool.
Ah those Republicans.
The Republican Lincolnesque vision for America (and the reason for the Civil War) was this:
His (and their) vision was of a nation of unlimited economic opportunity and upward social mobility – "free labor", or what would later be known as the American Dream - and his goal was to halt further expansion of slavery into the Western territories (what we now call the Midwest) so that the white people could build a better life for themselves through their own efforts. The Republican Party was united by the idea that free (entrepreneurial) labor was socially and economically superior to slave labor and that "the distinctive quality of Northern society was the opportunity it offered wage earners to rise to property-owning independence". Their political pitch throughout the 1850s was that freedom meant prosperity, progress, and upward social mobility, while slavery was an obstacle to all those things. The Republicans held that today's laborers would be tomorrow's capitalists, and that if a man failed to rise above his status he had only himself to blame.
So, clearly (and as Reagan so vociferously regurgitated) there's a hell of a lot of us who have nobody but ourselves to blame for no jobs, no homes, and no hope. The ladder was always there to climb (or so claimed Horatio Alger, who was driven from his ministry for sexual relations with two boys).
Obama is once again asking Romney to release several years of his taxes. This is a critical issue and hopefully Obama will stay with it. If Romney released but one year with his 13.9% tax rate, it must be assumed that other years were truly ridiculously low. The coming months could be a very teachable moment for the average American.
I think there is little doubt that Romney like Buffet and all the elite pay a far lower tax rate than the guy that builds kitchen cabinets.
And wouldn't it be nice if the average person could establish a trust with Before tax money for their kids like Mr. Romney? Why of course anyone can is the answer, till they tell you the cost of setting it up, which the average person can't afford.
What was Obama's rate? What is his net worth?
Where did his "fortune" come from?
$400,000 for occupying the Oval Office, and $390,000 from book sales.
Which proves that selling books is almost as important a job as president.