Just a warning, as the elections get closer, expect more of these.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/22/business/WBobama23.php?page=2The Tax Policy Center, a research group run by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, has done the most detailed analysis of the Obama and McCain tax plans, and it has published a series of fascinating tables. For the bottom 80 percent of the population - those households making $118,000 or less - McCain's various tax cuts would mean a net savings of about $200 a year on average, in 2012. Obama's proposals would bring $900 a year in savings that year. So for most people, Obama is the tax cutter in this campaign. He would then pay for the cuts, at least in part, by raising taxes on the affluent to a point where they would eventually be slightly higher than they were under Clinton. For these upper-income families, the Tax Policy Center's comparisons with McCain are even starker. McCain would cut taxes for the top 0.1 percent of earners - those making an average of $9.1 million - by another $190,000 a year, on top of the Bush reductions. Obama would raise taxes on this
top 0.1 percent by an average of $800,000 a year.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htmUnder both plans, all American taxpayers could pay a price for their tax cuts: a bigger deficit. The Tax Policy Center estimates that over 10 years, McCain's tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama's could add as much as $3.3 trillion. The reason: neither plan would raise the amount of revenue expected under current tax policy - which assumes all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire by 2011. And neither plan would raise enough to cover expected government costs during those 10 years.
And the TPC itself:
http://209.85.135.104/search?q=cache:VUn1EWUSlK8J:www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411693_CandidateTaxPlans.pdf+tax+policy+center+mccain+obama&hl=de&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=deThose at the top of the income scale benefit from a number of provisions in the McCain tax plan in 2009. Senator McCain would raise the estate tax exemption from $3.5 million to $5 million and would drastically cut the rate on estates above that amount to 15 percent from 45 percent. In addition, the benefits of the cuts in the corporate income tax would accrue largely to those at the top of the income distribution because of the progressive nature of the distribution of capital income. In addition, the extension of the AMT patch would benefit households in the 80th to 95th percentile, reducing the amount of AMT that they would owe or sparing them from the tax altogether. In contrast, more moderate- and lower-income households would tend to benefit only from the increased dependent exemption. And that increase would not benefit households that do not owe individual income tax under current law. Thus, while Senator McCain’s plan provides a tax cut to nearly 60 percent of all households, fewer than one in five households in the bottom quintile and less than half those in the second quintile would see their taxes go down.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
dalen_talas. Deep Purple, live at the California Jam, April 6, 1974, with Burn
