posted August 15, 2011 09:50 AM            

A billionaire is the one in-the-know, yes?

BANGALORE (Reuters) - Billionaire Warren Buffett urged U.S. lawmakers to raise taxes on the country's super-rich to help cut the budget deficit, saying such a move will not hurt investments.

"My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It's time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice," The 80-year-old "Oracle of Omaha" wrote in an opinion article in The New York Times.

Buffett, one of the world's richest men and chairman of conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway Inc , said his federal tax bill last year was $6,938,744.

"That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income - and that's actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent," he said.
http://news.yahoo.com/stop-coddling-super-rich-buffett-084140678.html

------------------
Submit to Love without thinking, as the sun rose this morning recklessly, extinguishing our star-candled minds.

posted August 15, 2011 01:25 PM            

If Buffett would sit down at his desk and simply write a check to Uncle Sam, his could consider that his taxes had gone UP!

Now, as for me, I'm happy I've been able to offer a way forward for Buffett to salve his guilty liberal conscience over paying a lower rate of taxes than his secretary.

Actually, two, (2) ways forward for the guilt ridden Buffett.

posted August 15, 2011 03:27 PM            

Tis hard for this aquarius to admit someone knows more than I do but I`ll give it to Buffet, he knows a heckofa lot more about taxes, wealth and congress than I do.

------------------
Submit to Love without thinking, as the sun rose this morning recklessly, extinguishing our star-candled minds.

posted August 15, 2011 07:21 PM            

Omaha

Editorial: The Truth About Taxes (August 7, 2011) OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.

The taxes I refer to here include only federal income tax, but you can be sure that any payroll tax for the 400 was inconsequential compared to income. In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)

I know well many of the mega-rich and, by and large, they are very decent people. They love America and appreciate the opportunity this country has given them. Many have joined the Giving Pledge, promising to give most of their wealth to philanthropy. Most wouldn’t mind being told to pay more in taxes as well, particularly when so many of their fellow citizens are truly suffering.

Twelve members of Congress will soon take on the crucial job of rearranging our country’s finances. They’ve been instructed to devise a plan that reduces the 10-year deficit by at least $1.5 trillion. It’s vital, however, that they achieve far more than that. Americans are rapidly losing faith in the ability of Congress to deal with our country’s fiscal problems. Only action that is immediate, real and very substantial will prevent that doubt from morphing into hopelessness. That feeling can create its own reality.

Job one for the 12 is to pare down some future promises that even a rich America can’t fulfill. Big money must be saved here. The 12 should then turn to the issue of revenues. I would leave rates for 99.7 percent of taxpayers unchanged and continue the current 2-percentage-point reduction in the employee contribution to the payroll tax. This cut helps the poor and the middle class, who need every break they can get.

But for those making more than $1 million — there were 236,883 such households in 2009 — I would raise rates immediately on taxable income in excess of $1 million, including, of course, dividends and capital gains. And for those who make $10 million or more — there were 8,274 in 2009 — I would suggest an additional increase in rate.

My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice.

posted August 15, 2011 07:30 PM            

------------------
Submit to Love without thinking, as the sun rose this morning recklessly, extinguishing our star-candled minds.

posted August 16, 2011 04:05 AM            

Buffet is highlighting what every economist has told us for 20 years. Buffet is telling us in the first person what he and his cronies are capable of doing with the current tax codes. And who amongst us knows how many deductions are filed on his sheet anyway? One of the reasons the Clinton admin successfully created a surplus was the tax code.

With so much of the rhetoric misinforming the public about the so called "job creators" it is great for a high profile person to get the reverse talking point going.

Buffet knows this story has legs, with a 77% disapproval rating for congress the tax code revisionists need to get cranking.

posted August 16, 2011 08:58 AM            

quote:

---

that is the fact that if he wanted to pay more in taxes, he could use less aggressive avoidance. We know by the percentage he paid that he is doing so.

---

Exactly!! The loopholes for aggressive avoidance are wide open for the uber rich because congress has created them that way.

quote:

---

Gee, if Buffett were to tell his accountants and tax attorneys to stop aggressively pursuing all the tax breaks built into the tax code by Congress, then he most definitely would be paying more in taxes.

---

Everyone here seems to agree the loopholes for the uber rich exist!

no problem there.

Rich can practice aggressive avoidance and pay less tax.

No problem there.

All
we`re saying, is close the darn loopholes, take away the aggressive avoidance and pay more tax. Put your money where your mouth is Warren and ALL uber riche.

Kick Congress`s arse into gear and explain that to them

------------------
Submit to Love without thinking, as the sun rose this morning recklessly, extinguishing our star-candled minds.

posted August 16, 2011 11:11 AM            

the POINT really is that there are any number of ways to AVOID TOP rates, but one doesn't even need to do so if one is making money on capital gains.

the OTHER POINT is that he points out that NO ONE WILL STOP INVESTING either in the market or in their business because they have to pay taxes on their EXTRA INCOME. the money MADE far exceeds the money PAID.

this is patently true since back in the big expansion days the top tax rate was 91%...so people put more back into the economy EITHER by creating more jobs and products or by paying taxes on their profits.

THE OTHER POINT IS THAT LOWERING TAXES HAS CREATED NO MORE JOBS. in fact it has done the opposite because investing in one's company is not as necessary to AVOID taxes when there are next to none to pay!

posted August 16, 2011 04:19 PM            

The article wasn't just about capital gains; nor was I referring to it except as directly referenced in my statement. Do I really have to explain the above quote to you, Kat? Really?

posted August 16, 2011 07:33 PM            

he is saying it is about time congress (and fox news, who DID call him a socialist!) stopped acting as if a few more taxes would send the rich scurrying off to kuwait. who wants to live in kuwait???

"17.4 percent of my taxable income" ... d'you think his taxable income was $20K? $40K? no you don't! even after "agressive legal avoidance".

he is also saying that IN PRINCIPLE the rich should be EXPECTED to pay their fair share, and sorry, but 17% of 30 million is not a fair share. he is ALSO saying that it is time for congress and conservatives, who talk about this ALL THE TIME, to realize that pandering to the rich is not what the USA is about. and pandering is exactly what they are doing.

the reason why he doesn't just "write a check" to the IRS? because while he might just be willing to do that, there are the OTHER super rich who have no such generosity toward the country they live in, that helped them make their billions, whose roads they drive on and whose firemen come when they call (and police when the burglar calls)...

if the top tax bracket were higher, then more money would be re-invested in those companies you keep talking about, and more jobs created too. and that is the main point as far as i am concerned.

when you let the superwealthy sit around and play with their money and pay no taxes on their profits, they have no motive for reinvesting in american business. plain and simple.

of course there are some like the lady i have mentioned more than once who are so allergic to paying taxes for "somebody else" that they will shoot their company dead rather than do it. but they are seldom among the very rich because you don't get the big bucks for destroying your business (in general)! someone else's, maybe...

posted August 17, 2011 12:11 PM            

However, there's the smell of hypocrisy coming off Warren Buffett.

On the one hand, Buffett bloviates about paying a higher tax rate than his secretary WHILE taking every tax break written into the IRS Code.

Buffett subsists on "Capital Gains" but Buffet could pay himself a salary and pay the tax rate on individual income from his salary. Buffet refuses to do so.

Additionally, there are two (2) varieties of "Capital Gains" taxes.

Short term "Capital Gains" on non inventory items bought and sold for a profit in less than one (1) year are taxed at the "ordinary income" tax rate.

"Long term "Capital Gains" on non inventory items bought and sold for a profit after being held for more than one (1) year are taxed at 15%.

Guess which kind of "Capital Gains" Warren Buffet takes advantage of!

When one takes every tax break in the IRS code to avoid taxes, when one rejects paying himself a salary which would be taxed as "ordinary income", when one buys stocks for appreciation and holds those stocks for more than one (1) year to avoid paying ordinary income taxes on profits from the sale; that person is doing all the tax avoidance prossible.

So, while Warren Buffet "talks the talk" of higher taxes for the very wealthy, Warren Buffet doesn't "walk the walk" and actually pay higher taxes. Instead, Warren Buffet opts out in every way he possibly can.

Therein lies a steaming pile of hypocrisy.

Understand, Buffett is not being dinged for avoiding taxes. Avoiding taxes is as American as apple pie.

Warren Buffet is being ripped for his colossal hypocrisy. Just another elitist from the "do as I say, not as I do crowd".

posted August 17, 2011 06:17 PM            

I just DID call Warren Buffet a hypocrite. Perhaps you missed it acoustic?

Let me add to that. Warren Buffett is a busybody who should mind his own business.