Favorite

Worried about Bush 

If you can believe a New York Times/CBS News poll, most Americans are just a little worried about what President Bush has in store for the country and their pocketbooks the next four years. They have plenty to worry about, according to an administration leak to the Washington Post about Bush’s tax plans. But worried ought not to be equated with surprised because what Bush plans is pretty much what the country got in the first Bush term. The rich are going to get much, much richer with the government’s help. But here’s a peculiar little difference. If you’re not in that worthy group, your taxes will probably go up and you may lose your employer-sponsored health insurance and have to pay much higher premiums. Right after the election, the president said he intended to use his new political capital to push through “tax reform” and “Social Security reform.” Bush said that, unlike his first term, his tax plans from now on would be “revenue neutral,” meaning that they would not raise or lower the aggregate income to the U.S. treasury. Tax cuts will be offset by tax increases, although the administration does not use the latter phrase. “Revenue adjustments” is better. Bush will try again to eliminate income taxes altogether on investment income. The president will appoint a commission soon that will recommend these and perhaps other steps to produce what the president called a “pro-growth tax system.” In the four rounds of tax cuts for well-to-do Americans and corporations, Bush tried to eliminate taxes on income from capital gains, stock dividends and interest so that the only taxes would be on worker wages and salaries. But the Senate would not go along and he had to settle for cutting those tax rates roughly in half. Now, with a bigger Republican majority in the Senate and the House, he hopes to finish the job. As he did in 2001 and 2003, Bush will insist that these tax cuts benefit all Americans and that most of the beneficiaries will be people of modest incomes. And it’s true that, numerically, more low- and moderate-income families than rich people will see some benefit. That is because there are thousands times more of them than there are rich people. But here’s how it would affect our little state. Of the $902 million in income from stock dividends received by Arkansans in 2002 — the latest figures the IRS publishes — 65 percent went to only 9,161 Arkansans who reported adjusted gross incomes of more than $200,000. Probably 80 percent of that income went to some 700 people earning more than $1 million a year, but you can no longer be sure because the Treasury Department has stopped breaking it down to show the earnings and tax benefits of people earning more than a million a year. It was getting embarrassing. Capital gains present the same picture. Sixty-seven percent of all the profits from capital sales reported by Arkansans went to 8,639 people making more than $200,000. They are roughly the same people reporting the huge incomes from dividends. No one can be surprised that the president will try again. Voters thought his most admirable characteristic was consistency. The tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations were supposed to leave more money in the pockets of the investor class, who would use it to create millions of jobs. It never happened, but Bush knows that if you let Paris Hilton keep even more of her vast family investment income some day she will hire another maid. To offset the huge treasury losses from these tax cuts and to prevent the deficits from swelling larger, Bush will propose the elimination of a few individual and business deductions. Administration officials suggested two: the deduction people claim for their state and local taxes when they file itemized returns, and the business deduction for employer-sponsored group health insurance. That is where you get to help out with deficit reduction and to do your part to see that Paris Hilton enjoys a better life. Removal of the deduction for state and local taxes would shift much of the tax burden to blue states like New York, California, Massachusetts and Connecticut, which have substantial state and local income taxes to support a high level of services. The federal tax increases on those states would be mammoth. But Arkansans would not escape lightly. Owing to the loss of the deduction for state and local taxes, even the poorest Arkies — those earning less than $20,000 a year — would face a hefty tax increase. They would be taxed on the $35 million they now claim as deductions, perhaps much more if the IRS also lowered the standard deduction as well. Those earning less than $50,000 would be taxed on another $200 million. Here’s the real shocker. With 45 million Americans without health insurance, Bush would remove the incentive for businesses to offer health benefits to employees. More than half of Americans who are insured are covered through employment-based plans. Presumably, many companies that phased out their group plans would pass the money along to employees in the form of higher wages, but it would not come near matching the much higher premiums they would have to pay for individual policies. Just think. Before long, even the Walton billionaires will be using the short form because they won’t have deductions to claim or income to report. Will that be a great tax system or what?
Favorite

From the ArkTimes store

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

More by Ernest Dumas

  • Tax tales

    The easiest task in the world may be to persuade people that they are paying higher taxes than folks in other communities, states and countries, but there is never a shortage of people taking on the task.
    • Oct 5, 2017
  • Stifling dissent

    Whenever Donald Trump in his serial bouts with failure decides he must re-energize his base of white nationalists by doing things like demonizing black athletes who protest discrimination, the mainstream press falls for it and gives him maximum space and time. We're addicted.
    • Sep 28, 2017
  • Bad health care bill, again

    Wait! Postpone tax reform and everything else for a while longer because the Senate is going to try to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act one more time before September ends and while it can do it with the votes of only 50 senators.
    • Sep 21, 2017
  • More »

Readers also liked…

  • No tax help for Trump

    The big conundrum is supposed to be why Donald Trump does so well among white working-class people, particularly men, who do not have a college education.
    • Aug 11, 2016
  • Dollars and degrees

    Governor Hutchinson says a high graduation rate (ours is about the lowest) and a larger quotient of college graduates in the population are critical to economic development. Every few months there is another, but old, key to unlocking growth.
    • Aug 25, 2016

Most Shared

Latest in Ernest Dumas

  • Tax tales

    The easiest task in the world may be to persuade people that they are paying higher taxes than folks in other communities, states and countries, but there is never a shortage of people taking on the task.
    • Oct 5, 2017
  • Stifling dissent

    Whenever Donald Trump in his serial bouts with failure decides he must re-energize his base of white nationalists by doing things like demonizing black athletes who protest discrimination, the mainstream press falls for it and gives him maximum space and time. We're addicted.
    • Sep 28, 2017
  • Bad health care bill, again

    Wait! Postpone tax reform and everything else for a while longer because the Senate is going to try to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act one more time before September ends and while it can do it with the votes of only 50 senators.
    • Sep 21, 2017
  • More »

Event Calendar

« »

October

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31  

Most Viewed

  • Cotton to CIA?

    Political junkies without a real election to overanalyze fill the void with "what if?" scenarios. With the State Fair underway, consider this column a helping of cotton candy for such readers.
  • The casting couch

    Long ago and far away, I had an academic superior who enjoyed sexually humiliating younger men. There was unwanted touching — always in social situations — but mainly it was about making suggestive remarks, hinting that being a "hunk" was how I'd got hired.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: The casting couch

    • sigh............ I would argue that the idea of 'freedom from fear' is part of the…

    • on October 19, 2017
  • Re: Caution: government at work

    • As to the AR Chamber of Commerce-DO NOT FORGET it supports passage of SJR8, which…

    • on October 19, 2017
  • Re: The casting couch

    • Freedom from fear is a human right.

    • on October 19, 2017
 

© 2017 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation