John Kerry and his billionaire wife pay lower taxes than you do
YogsVR4
10-18-2004, 03:14 PM
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005769
Remember the classic 1970s comic routine from Steve Martin? You can make a million dollars and pay no taxes. First, get a million dollars. Then when the IRS comes knocking on your door demanding to know why you didn't pay your taxes, just remember two simple words: "I forgot."
Well, John Kerry has his own version. It goes like this: You can make a billion dollars and pay almost no taxes. First, marry a billionaire. Second, hire a gaggle of tax accountants and lawyers to bring your tax rate down to about half what many middle-income families pay. Except for John Kerry, this is no gag; it's reality.
According to the Kerrys' own tax records, and they have not released all of them, the couple had a combined income of $5.51 million last year and paid $704,227 in income taxes. That means their effective tax rate was a whopping 12.8%. And it was all (presumably) done legally. Now don't get me wrong: I'm not against people paying a 12.8% tax rate. Far from it. I just believe that all Americans--even those who can't afford to hire tax attorneys to set up complicated trusts and find legal ways to stash income in other tax-sheltered investments like municipal bonds--should have a shot at that kind of non-confiscatory tax rate.
Under the current tax system the middle class pays far more than the Kerry tax rate. In fact, the average federal tax rate--combined payroll and income tax--for a middle-class family is closer to 20% or more. George W. and Laura Bush, who had an income one-tenth of the Kerrys', paid a tax rate of 30%.
Of course, there is delicious irony in the Kerry family tax-return data. Here is the man who finds clever ways to reduce his own tax liability while voting for higher taxes on the middle class dozens of times in his Senate career. He even voted against the Bush tax cut that saves each middle-class family about $1,000.
The Kerrys have unwittingly made the case for what George W. Bush says he wants to do: radically simplify and flatten out the tax code. Dick Armey and Steve Forbes have persuasively argued over the years that America should have a flat tax with a rate of 17% to 19%.
John Kerry has consistently opposed a flat tax, because he says it would be a tax break for the rich. But the truth is with a 19% flat tax, some rich people with lavish tax shelters, like John Kerry, would pay more taxes. I calculate that the Kerrys would pay another $500,000 of taxes if we had a flat tax.
So before John Kerry is given the opportunity to raise taxes again on American workers, shouldn't he and Teresa at least pay their fair share?
------------------------------------------------------------
A perfect example of how the tax code is way to complex and should be trashed and reworked. I fall into that category, my tax rate was 28% last year and if Kerry gets his way it'll be back over 30%. I am not rich but I'd like to get there some day. A Kerry presidency will be another impediment to getting there.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
Remember the classic 1970s comic routine from Steve Martin? You can make a million dollars and pay no taxes. First, get a million dollars. Then when the IRS comes knocking on your door demanding to know why you didn't pay your taxes, just remember two simple words: "I forgot."
Well, John Kerry has his own version. It goes like this: You can make a billion dollars and pay almost no taxes. First, marry a billionaire. Second, hire a gaggle of tax accountants and lawyers to bring your tax rate down to about half what many middle-income families pay. Except for John Kerry, this is no gag; it's reality.
According to the Kerrys' own tax records, and they have not released all of them, the couple had a combined income of $5.51 million last year and paid $704,227 in income taxes. That means their effective tax rate was a whopping 12.8%. And it was all (presumably) done legally. Now don't get me wrong: I'm not against people paying a 12.8% tax rate. Far from it. I just believe that all Americans--even those who can't afford to hire tax attorneys to set up complicated trusts and find legal ways to stash income in other tax-sheltered investments like municipal bonds--should have a shot at that kind of non-confiscatory tax rate.
Under the current tax system the middle class pays far more than the Kerry tax rate. In fact, the average federal tax rate--combined payroll and income tax--for a middle-class family is closer to 20% or more. George W. and Laura Bush, who had an income one-tenth of the Kerrys', paid a tax rate of 30%.
Of course, there is delicious irony in the Kerry family tax-return data. Here is the man who finds clever ways to reduce his own tax liability while voting for higher taxes on the middle class dozens of times in his Senate career. He even voted against the Bush tax cut that saves each middle-class family about $1,000.
The Kerrys have unwittingly made the case for what George W. Bush says he wants to do: radically simplify and flatten out the tax code. Dick Armey and Steve Forbes have persuasively argued over the years that America should have a flat tax with a rate of 17% to 19%.
John Kerry has consistently opposed a flat tax, because he says it would be a tax break for the rich. But the truth is with a 19% flat tax, some rich people with lavish tax shelters, like John Kerry, would pay more taxes. I calculate that the Kerrys would pay another $500,000 of taxes if we had a flat tax.
So before John Kerry is given the opportunity to raise taxes again on American workers, shouldn't he and Teresa at least pay their fair share?
------------------------------------------------------------
A perfect example of how the tax code is way to complex and should be trashed and reworked. I fall into that category, my tax rate was 28% last year and if Kerry gets his way it'll be back over 30%. I am not rich but I'd like to get there some day. A Kerry presidency will be another impediment to getting there.
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
2strokebloke
10-18-2004, 03:41 PM
If Kerry is paying 12.8% legally, there's no reason anybody else can't do the same thing. You may not be able to hire personal accountants and lawers, but that doesn't mean you can't do for yourself what Kerry's cohorts do for him...
YogsVR4
10-18-2004, 03:54 PM
Sorry Bloke, but not everyone can do that. Its all about where you have to put your disposable income. If you can pop it into the same tax shelters then peachy, but the bulk of my income pays the bills which make them subject to the full tax rate. In this example, I'm sure he pays his bills and gets subject to the full tax rate but the other millions aren't.
So if 80% of my income is subject to the 33% tax (I realize its not that simple) to pay my bills and the other 20% goes into my retirement plans. My actual tax rate is around 28%.
I don't know the exact amount, but say Kerry uses 15% of his income to pay his bills and is subject to the 35% rate. The rest can be put into retirement plans, trusts or other tax shelters. That lowers his rate to 12$ across his income.
I don't begrudge him for getting the lower rate. Not one bit. I do however use it as an indictment of the overall tax structure. Its to complex and needs to be revamped so everyone pays the same rate on all income over 30K (or whatever amount case studies show).
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
So if 80% of my income is subject to the 33% tax (I realize its not that simple) to pay my bills and the other 20% goes into my retirement plans. My actual tax rate is around 28%.
I don't know the exact amount, but say Kerry uses 15% of his income to pay his bills and is subject to the 35% rate. The rest can be put into retirement plans, trusts or other tax shelters. That lowers his rate to 12$ across his income.
I don't begrudge him for getting the lower rate. Not one bit. I do however use it as an indictment of the overall tax structure. Its to complex and needs to be revamped so everyone pays the same rate on all income over 30K (or whatever amount case studies show).
Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)
2strokebloke
10-18-2004, 04:01 PM
So what are you waiting for? Go make some ketchup - so you have a few extra million to stash away for safe keeping.
I do however use it as an indictment of the overall tax structure. Its to complex and needs to be revamped so everyone pays the same rate on all income over 30K
True.
I do however use it as an indictment of the overall tax structure. Its to complex and needs to be revamped so everyone pays the same rate on all income over 30K
True.
Raz_Kaz
10-18-2004, 04:38 PM
I think that's stpid how he gets to pay less taxes. If he or his wife is making hundred of millions/billions, I think that they would have to pay more taxes. I mean they can afford it, plus it goes right back into their government, it's not like their giving it away to some other country
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025