Republican
presidential nominee Mitt Romney proudly proclaimed from the front pages of the
New York Times his income tax rate for the last ten years was 13%. He and his campaign sought out
reporters to announce this important revelation. This was damage control. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid accused Romney of paying
no taxes in that 10-year period.
While continuing to refuse to release any more tax returns, Romney
assures America he has reviewed them and thus the 13% figure is a result of his
compilations. What is truly
mind-bending is Romney, and his advisors, believe this is a good news story and
will end the controversy once and for all. It is an example of how out of touch he is with the
realities of everyday life for most Americans.
In the last 10 years, if 2010 is any indication, Romney received as much
as $200 million in income. He is
in the top 1% of the top 1%. He
wants us to know that while the top tax rate for an average American receiving
that much income would be about 38%, he only paid an effective rate of 13% and
he is not ashamed to admit it.
Through the use of Swiss bank accounts and trusts set up in the Bahamas
and Grand Cayman Islands, and numerous other tricks of the accounting trade,
Romney denied the American treasury of millions of dollars. This lost revenue must be replaced by
either government borrowing (which Romney says he abhors) or by revenue
collected aggressively from working Americans taxed at higher rates and who
don't have access to the financial legerdemain Romney is able to perform. You should now vote for him because he
did pay some taxes. Yes, they are
at a rate lower than the income tax rates were in 1950, and yes, he denied the
government millions of dollars in revenue, and yes, other Americans have to
make up the shortfall with more out of their pockets, but no one can claim he
didn't pay "any" taxes during that 10 year span and he is proud to
announce that to the world.
One problem with all of this fiscal giddiness is we have nothing but
Romney's word he paid any taxes at all.
Without the actual returns, there is no proof he is telling the
truth. (Imagine if no official
Hawaiian birth certificate had been released for the President...would the
regressive media and pundits have accepted his word?) President Obama was asked why his campaign is spending so
much time on Romney's taxes.
Aren't there more important issues Mr. President? Obama responded with two concerns. First, anyone running for president is
expected to release their private medical records for the public to analyze
about their health and fitness for the office. Because of scandals, like the terrible health of President Kennedy,
which was kept from the public, they want to know the medical history of each
candidate. The same is true of tax
returns. Obama reminded the
reporters, running for president ain't beanbag. The American citizens expect a level of disclosure, which is
invasive, uncomfortable and leaves one fully exposed before they decide on how
they are going to vote. Second,
Obama pointed out the Swiss bank accounts and the corporations (false?) and
trusts set up in the Bahamas and Grand Caymans. We learned of all of this from one return. What else is there to know? What other loopholes was Romney able to
access? Many of these loopholes
were passed by Congress after intense lobbying by Romney and Wall Street and
the 1%. How much has Romney
benefitted from such legislative largesse? Where has Romney ever lobbied or advocated for similar
loopholes to benefit average working Americans? It is, according to Obama, a character issue.
Only regressive Republicans could want a New York Times headline
trumpeting the low tax rate paid by their standard bearer and think this is
politically good news. Only
someone who had never faced the gut-wrenching, stomach-dropping moment on April
15th when they discover they owe thousands of dollars in taxes and don't have
that kind of money lying around, would think announcing how well he has gamed
the system would boost his political fortunes. Only Romney would ask Americans to trust he only took
advantage of some of the escape routes the tax code makes available, but only
some of them, not all of them.
If you invented an app, or an Internet company or you struck gold under
the Bering Straight, and you made $200 million this year, you would pay taxes
at around the 38% rate because your windfall was "ordinary"
income. However, because Romney's
money comes from investments made by Bain Capital, his money is considered
"carried interest" and taxed at a 15% rate. There is no reason to distinguish between ordinary income
and carried interest. Numerous
studies have shown carried interest does not result in the creation of more
jobs. (The reason lobbyists
claimed for why it should be taxed at a lower rate...to reward risk takers like
Romney) This is a gigantic
give-away to the 1% which they pressured Congress to create. Obama tried to change the tax rate on
carried interest. Guess how much
success he had on that? Guess what
Romney and his regressive supporter's position was on that issue?
I
suspect the 13% figure is an average of some sort. I suspect Romney won't release his tax returns because there
were years he paid a lot less, if not zero, in taxes. I am amazed at how tone-deaf Romney and his campaign is to
the concerns of average Americans.
Tone-deaf enough to proudly announce what chumps the rest of us are and
how brilliant Romany and his accountant turned out to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment