Category Archives: Taxation

Hillary’s Trust Issue

Economy, Ethics, Hillary Clinton, Politics, Taxation

Not content with acquiring wealth through the dishonest, predatory process of politics (to contrast with the honest, productive, economic means of earning a living)—Hillary Clinton and husband have protected their ill-gotten gains from the taxman through trusts. These are “common among multimillionaires, and help shield some of their estate from the [inheritance] tax that now tops out at 40 percent of assets upon death.” BloombergBusiness:

Among the tax advantages of such trusts is that any appreciation in the [asset’s] value can happen outside their taxable estate. The move could save the Clintons hundreds of thousands of dollars in estate taxes …

The height of Hillary’s hypocrisy, however, is that, while she “shields her own wealth from it,” she recommended, during her last campaign, that estate taxes be further raised on Americans who’ve managed to amass more than $3.5 million.

… Clinton supported making wealthier people pay more estate tax by capping the per-person exemption at $3.5 million and setting the top rate at 45 percent, a policy Obama still supports. Congress decided to go in the other direction and Obama went along as part of a broader compromise. The per-person exemption is now $5.34 million..

Clinton has referred to estate tax as a “wealth tax.”

To say that she has a trust issue is to minimize how repulsive these people truly are.

Rubio’s Tax Plan To Redistribute Revenue

Republicans, Taxation

A tax cut is a reduction in tax rates. It means letting a poor sod (or serf) keep more of his rightful earnings. A tax credits is social tinkering or engineering such that certain politically desirable constituents benefit to the detriment of others. Not surprisingly, the latter is what Republican Marco Rubio proposes. Via the Wall Street Journal (ignore the WSJ’s praise for Rubio’s foreign policy belligerence; it ought to be obvious that I don’t care for the praise or the Rubio impetus):

… His recently announced tax-reform plan, introduced with Utah’s Senator Mike Lee, reflects the tensions inside the GOP. It proposes dropping the corporate rate to 25%, a consensus figure. But it proposes remarkably timid reductions in marginal tax rates for individuals, leaving the top rate at 35% on relatively modest incomes. Instead the plan’s centerpiece is a large, new tax credit—$2,500 per child.

With this proposal, Senator Rubio makes himself the party’s most visible ally of the “new” Republican idea that the Reagan tax-cutting agenda is a political dead end, and that the party now must redistribute revenue directly to middle-class families. It’s not clear how Candidate Rubio would hope to win a tax-credit bidding war with Hillary Clinton, who’d see and raise on the size of the credit and make it refundable to non-taxpayers. The Rubio tax credit looks like an obvious political gambit with no economic growth payoff. …

MORE.

UPDATED: By Mistake, Maureen Dowd Said Something True

Business, Economy, Hillary Clinton, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Taxation

To borrow from Camille Paglia (who was once interesting, but no longer), Maureen Dowd is a “catty, third-rate, wannabe sorority queen; empty vessel. One pleasure of reading online is that one never has to see anything written by people like Maureen Dowd [Kathleen Parker, Eugene Robinson, Thomas Friedman, Cynthia Tucker, on and on]. I ignore their hypertext like spam for penis extenders.”

Ditto.

However, I heard another sorority queen, the likeable, lovely but celebrity courting Megyn Kelly, mention that Dowd had penned an unfavorable piece on Hillary. So off I trundled to suffer through the tedium of “Grandmama Mia!” which is without one original or insightful idea.

By mistake, Dowd does say something true when commenting about “the ostensible and obscene $2.5 billion that [Hillary] is planning to spend to persuade us to make her grandmother of our country.”

She should give the kids some of the money, suggests Dowd. If Dowd liked Hillary she would, however, want Mrs. Clinton to keep the cash so that she could do all those “wonderful” things once elected.

Dowd is a dumb-dumb. She doesn’t understand that any politician makes the world a better place by giving money allotted for buying votes to privately run charities, instead of spending these billions on buying votes so as to get into office and pass programs, ostensibly for the poor, that ensconce bureaucracies that consume the lion’s share of the revenue stream coerced from taxpayers, in perpetuity.

UPDATE (4/15): Even better: Start a real business—as opposed to a foundation—with all those billions of dollars. Disinvest from politics. As Maimonides, I believe, instructed, it is better to give a poor person a job than a donation.

Have Social Security Will Travel

IMMIGRATION, libertarianism, Private Property, Taxation

Or, more precisely, have Social Security—will receive earned income credit (EIC) from the American taxpayer. The good fortune belongs to illegal aliens who, “under Obama’s new executive amnesty,” will receive Social Security numbers, enabling them to apply and qualify for the EIC.

Libertarians want individuals to keep all of their income because it properly belongs to the individual, not to government. To the extent the state returns income to any individual in the form of exemptions, deductions and credits—to that extent government is returning private property it stole. However, when given to a segment of the population, a tax credits, as part and parcel of tax policy, is usually stolen from other taxpayers. Government does not make do with less; it simply steals more from others.

Laurence M. Vance at LRC.com has a piece on libertarians and taxation:

… The libertarian view of taxes is not that taxes should be fair, adequate, sufficient, constitutional, uniform, flat, simple, efficient, apportioned equally, or low. It is not that the tax code should help the poor, benefit the middle class, and be business friendly, should not be used for social engineering purposes, income redistribution schemes, or have loopholes, and should ensure that everyone pays some arbitrary “fair share.” And neither is it that most Americans are not legally required to pay income tax, filing your taxes is voluntary, paying your taxes is voluntary, the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified, etc., etc., etc. My final reply to those arguments is simply two words: Irwin Schiff.

The libertarian view of taxes is simply that taxes should not exist in the first place. There should be no tax code because taxation is theft and violates the non-aggression principle. …

… If Congress—for whatever reason—decided to give a special tax deduction or credit to Americans named Bob, Americans who owed [sic] a horse, Americans with red hair, or Americans with green eyes it would be a good thing as long as Americans not named Bob, who didn’t own a horse, who didn’t have red hair, or didn’t have green eyes didn’t have to make up the difference. …

MORE.