One of America's richest men says rich taxed too lightly

[quote]Speaking to several hundred supporters of the U.S. Senator from New York, Buffett revealed his puzzlement that he was taxed at a lower rate than many of the lesser-paid individuals working for his company.

Buffett said he makes $46 million a year in income and is only taxed at a 17.7 percent rate on his federal income taxes. By contrast, those who work for him, and make considerably less, pay on average about 32.9 percent in taxes - with the highest rate being 39.7 percent.

To emphasize his point, Buffett offered $1 million to the audience member who could show that one of the nation’s wealthiest individuals pays a higher tax rate than one of their subordinates.

“I’m willing to bet anyone in this room $1 million that those rates are less than the secretary has to pay,” said Buffett.[/quote]

Buffett talks tax reform with Sen. Clinton

That’s a tasty chunk o’ cash. Too bad it’s not going to happen.

Title of thread is a sad agenda driven misstatement of Buffets intended message.

He is, once again, calling attention to the inefficient and unwieldy tax system in the USA.

This has been a subject of comment by Mr. Buffet on numerous occasions.

I just read the article, TC, and I’d say that the title of the thread is a fair statement for what’s in the article. It may not be accurate in regard to Buffet’s comments at other times, but it does represent the article well.

And it’s reported by CNN - not exactly liberal media.

Republicans believe that all media sources but Fox News and worldnetdaily.com are liberal.

I find it very irritating that a guy who makes $46 million a year pays a lower percentage in taxes than I do. What a bunch of bull.

Let’s have a flat tax then…

Basically, the very rich will always have an army of tax accountants and lawyers and offshore accounts. Let’s make this simple and save everyone a ton in bureaucratic nonsense. The flat tax could still involve payouts to people who fall below certain levels as is currently present in this tax code.

[quote=“gao_bo_han”][quote=“cfimages”]And it’s reported by CNN - not exactly liberal media.[/quote]Republicans believe that all media sources but Fox News and worldnetdaily.com are liberal.[/quote]GBH -
Are you quoting that from DUmmiesunderground or is that the daily talking point from the koskidz?


I have favored a Federal flat tax for many years. 10% and no exemptions.
One of the reasons I left California was because of their penalizing tax rates. Also moved a company to Nevada for the same reason.

Yeah, I’d be on board with taxes that grant an overall lower rate, but apply to everything, whether it be via flat tax or consumption tax or whatever. However, I think it will always sound good to tell your constituents how you’re providing tax breaks for working familes or small business or whoever…even if that really just turns out whoever can afford really good tax advice.

[quote=“Vay”]
“I’m willing to bet anyone in this room $1 million that those rates are less than the secretary has to pay,” said Buffett.[/quote]

Show off. :raspberry: He’s too cheap to bet with a buck,huh? Or is that million a gambling write-off?

The problem with a flat tax of 10% is that it may be too low to guarantee sufficient revenue for the government, unless the government finds other sources of taxation. Considering that income tax revenue is the largest source of revenue for the federal government, a flat tax of 10% would need a drastic reduction in spending to prevent massive deficits.

[quote=“fred smith”]Let’s have a flat tax then…

Basically, the very rich will always have an army of tax accountants and lawyers and offshore accounts. Let’s make this simple and save everyone a ton in bureaucratic nonsense. The flat tax could still involve payouts to people who fall below certain levels as is currently present in this tax code.[/quote]

That would be a great first step in reforming the US tax system, although unemployment might jump significantly with all the accountants out of work. (But didn’t the IRS outsource its accounting to India anyway?)

Do you have any idea of the cost for recovery of taxes in the US? I tried googling, but couldn’t find it.

Well I’m not sure as to the actual rate, but with a flat tax, you should be able to give everyone a tax break whilst the government takes more revenue, from the amount of $$ saved on reducing the inefficiencies.

I did here about another system proposed too that simply charges a small fee on every financial transaction which would collect enough in revenue to pay the tax system.

It’s my own creation. And I don’t know what “DUmmiesunderground” or “koskidz” are.

But you did refer to CNN as part of the liberal media, right?

And I stand by my statement. Republicans refer to all media sources other than clearly right-wing sources as “liberal.”

[quote=“fred smith”]Let’s have a flat tax then…

Basically, the very rich will always have an army of tax accountants and lawyers and offshore accounts. Let’s make this simple and save everyone a ton in bureaucratic nonsense. The flat tax could still involve payouts to people who fall below certain levels as is currently present in this tax code.[/quote]

Sounds good to me.

[quote=“cfimages”]I just read the article, TC, and I’d say that the title of the thread is a fair statement for what’s in the article. It may not be accurate in regard to Buffet’s comments at other times, but it does represent the article well.

And it’s reported by CNN - not exactly liberal media.[/quote]
I’m going to have to agree with TC.

Thread title “One of America’s richest men says rich taxed too lightly” is pretty far off from what he says in the article. Unless I’m misreading what he said or there is another America’s Richest quoted in the article and I missed it.

The only thing I see that comes close is “The [private equity firm power brokers] that earn their living doing that should be subject to taxes that reflect their labors.” Private equity firm power brokers do not equal the nation’s rich.

That is all.