In a New York Times op-ed piece, billionaire investor Warren Buffett says its ridiculous to think higher capital gains taxes will prevent the super wealthy from investing their money. He notes in the 1950s when the capital gains rate rose from 25 to 27.5 percent no one complained of not being able to find investment opportunities. He contends complaints from the super wealthy about paying taxes is especially absurd since the Forbes 400 wealthiest Americans made $1.7 trillion this year compared to $300 billion 20 years ago. Noting the 400 highest incomes paid a tax rate of 26.4 percent in 1992, he says that percentage fell to 19.4 percent in 2009, and nearly 25 percent of them paid less than 15 percent. A few paid nothing. In addition to eliminating the Bush-era tax cuts on the wealthy, and raising the cut-off for the minimum tax from the $250,000 that President Obama proposes to $500,000, Buffett suggests a 30 percent tax on incomes from $1 to $10 million, and 35 percent on anything above that. He states the government needs to achieve a better balance in its revenues and expenses, and needs more tax reform. As MHProNews has learned, the bottom line is the super rich will continue to invest regardless of higher taxes. Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway owns Clayton Homes, the largest producer of manufactured housing in North America.
(Photo credit: Business Insider)
2 thoughts on “Buffett: Wealthy Leaving Middle Class in the Dust”
Boe
No pithy comments from anyone about this socialists call for redistribution?
JamesC
Nope. I actually agree with this proposal when talking about ultra high income earners (those making more than 1 mil a year.)
I’m not against higher taxation on higher income brackets. I prefer for a full tax code overhaul eliminating writeoffs that offer no incentive whatsoever.
What I don’t like is the political left lumping high income earners together with sole proprietor businesses who are already cash and personnel strapped regardless of what the business makes on paper. If we can differentiate the source of income, then I am for raising taxes.
By the way, a well-known study shows a clear distinction between high income earners (stock brokers, CEOs, CFOs, specialized doctors, lawyers, and financial executives) and millionaires. The average millionaire only earns $120k a year, drives a used 2 year old Ford Explorer, lives in a house valued at less than $350,000, doesn’t own a suit that cost more than $400 and spends no more than $100 on a watch. The average millionaire is a hands-on business owner in a usually lack-luster industry and is pretty frugal in all her expenditures.
No pithy comments from anyone about this socialists call for redistribution?
Nope. I actually agree with this proposal when talking about ultra high income earners (those making more than 1 mil a year.)
I’m not against higher taxation on higher income brackets. I prefer for a full tax code overhaul eliminating writeoffs that offer no incentive whatsoever.
What I don’t like is the political left lumping high income earners together with sole proprietor businesses who are already cash and personnel strapped regardless of what the business makes on paper. If we can differentiate the source of income, then I am for raising taxes.
By the way, a well-known study shows a clear distinction between high income earners (stock brokers, CEOs, CFOs, specialized doctors, lawyers, and financial executives) and millionaires. The average millionaire only earns $120k a year, drives a used 2 year old Ford Explorer, lives in a house valued at less than $350,000, doesn’t own a suit that cost more than $400 and spends no more than $100 on a watch. The average millionaire is a hands-on business owner in a usually lack-luster industry and is pretty frugal in all her expenditures.
Just food for thought! 🙂