Obama's Dividend Assault President Obama's 2013 budget is the gift that keeps on givingto government. One buried surprise is his proposal to triple the tax rate on corporate dividends, which believe it or not is higher than in his previous budgets. Mr. Obama is proposing to raise the dividend tax rate to the higher personal income tax rate of 39.6% that will kick in next year. Add in the planned phase-out of deductions and exemptions, and the rate hits 41%. Then add the 3.8% investment tax surcharge in ObamaCare, and the new dividend tax rate in 2013 would be 44.8%nearly three times today's 15% rate. Keep in mind that dividends are paid to shareholders only after the corporation pays taxes on its profits. So assuming a maximum 35% corporate tax rate and a 44.8% dividend tax, the total tax on corporate earnings passed through as dividends would be 64.1%. More... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...25493025537660.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories
Once again we have protectors of the wealthy telling outrageous lies and brandishing the retired and their pensions as human shields for their unconscionable greed. Dividends would be taxed as ordinary income, only someone in the top tax bracket would pay the top rate. Dividends paid into retirement savings would not be taxed at all depending on what sort of savings plan the investment was in. btw, the corporate tax rate may be 35% but the rate that corporations actually pay is closer to 14%.
Nothing like envy to drive anger. I would guess you think you are the bottom 80%. I am not the top 2% but the middle class and cannot agree with you. I know for statists like you that taxes are the end all and be all because government to you, is the only viable entity for success.
I know about 5 people with federal government jobs. A number of them have retired with about a 70k pension and another takes books to work for something to do.
so why do you want to target those making a few hundred grand ? They aren't the bankers and CEO's that you speak of.
You mean Obama is trying to get rid of the special low privileged rate loopholes that billionaires, trust fund babies, hedge fund managers, and Mitt Romney use to pay tax rates that are less than half the marginal rate working people pay? Good for him. That was they way Reagan had it.
Plus the individuals only pay tax on the money they receive. The corporation pays the corporate tax. The individuals who receive the dividend are not paying a double tax.
That is true, the lower-income people have a huge loophole that allows them to avoid even the 15% tax that the rich people pay on the same type of income. The rich pay 15%, the average investors pay 0%, yet people clam it is the rich who have a big loophole and are avoiding paying the tax?
Why shouldn't someone who makes all or most of their money through investing pay at a rate at least as much as someone working who makes less?
I think we should have a truly progressive tax. That way we don't screw over those who for what ever reason don't make a lot of money, and we still bring enough in revenue to run the country.
Actually, you don't. You pay a lower income tax rate than the rich. What you are complaining about is that you have not been successful enough to create jobs with investment income. Here is the rub. If you make enough to invest, you get a break from government because that investment increases the chance of wealth overall. As Kennedy once said, a rising tide floats all boats. A true trickle down Democrat. Increased chances of increasing wealth overall usually means that you also increase the the number of jobs available for people like you. Those that will never rise above their station because the do not understand how the world works. I can understand the bitterness of the envious but envy is a sin best avoided.
Uh, we already have a truly progressive tax, so progressive that almost 50% of the working public now do not have any federal tax liability.
Ha, you can't really call it progressive when we have some individuals who make more money than others and yet pay a smaller percentage in taxes. What we have is a mixed taxed system with a few progressive elements.
Now, try to prove what I said as dishonest. Here it is. Prove me wrong. You won't be able to because it is a statement of fact, unless you are actually one of the 1%.