Introduction
The US tax policy has created controversy among the presidential candidates vying for the 2016 elections. Democrats consider the current tax code as the basis of the conflict over income inequality. In the perspective of the democrats, the best way to tackle the issue is to reform the tax code in order to compel the wealthy to pay more. Accordingly, this will ease the tax burden on those who earn less. The republicans on the other side believe that tax cuts should be administered to all, irrespective of their earning capability. The republicans thus believe that the best way to ensure that the economy thrives is to tax everybody without considering their wealth. Most candidates vying for the 2016 presidential nomination ascertain
…show more content…
The presidential candidate has been condemning the Johnson controls-Tyco merger for tax evasion (Tucker, 2015, p. 67). The company is destined to relocate to Ireland in order to lower its tax liability. Clinton has emphasized that if she were to ascend to power, she would stop this move to ensure that Johnson controls-Tyco merger pays its taxes accordingly. Apparently, the move by Clinton is meant to ensure that the rich continue to pay more taxes to the economy. Clinton, who is fighting with Bernie Sanders for the democratic ticket has often been critical of his fiscal policy (Hendrickson, 2015, p. 3). Bernie Sanders has been reserved in his tax plans and has instead been evasive in his pronouncements. Compared to Bernie, Clinton has been having a more aggressive approach in discussing her tax plan for the …show more content…
Accordingly, Clinton believes that America is not taxing its wealthy sufficiently. She thinks that corporations and wealthy individuals need to pay a fair share to the government through taxation. In Clinton’s proposal, taxing the fortunate members of the society would raise about $150 billion in ten years (Tucker, 2015, p. 107). This plan will affect only 2 people in every 10,000 taxpayers. This plan seems attractive considering that it is targeting the wealthiest people, and is not aimed at the middle class. If Clinton’s proposal can be implemented, the rich will be taxed more than they are being taxed by the Obama administration. Clinton’s plan is hinged on the so called, ‘Buffet rule’, which envisages the raising of taxes to 30% on all US citizens who are earning more than $ 1 million (Klein, 2015, p. 26). With the new tax plans, Clinton expects to be the president of the successful, the struggling, and the striving. Apparently, the ‘buffet rule’ is named after Warren Buffet, a renowned investor who is an avid supporter of Hillary Clinton (Lee, 2015, p. 6). Considering that Buffet supports the new tax plan targeting the rich, Clinton believes that other wealthy individuals will be supporting the tax
While most taxpayers agree that tax reform is necessary for our country the problem they encounter is the difficulty they experience when trying to understand all the political terms used when discussing tax reform. This paper is an attempt to help the taxpayers of our country to better understand the political terminology and gain knowledge about some of the proposals that have been explored.
In the United States, the top one percent received about 20 percent of the overall income for 2016. This creates an uneven distribution of income causing Americans to argue about whether or not the wealthy should pay more in federal income taxes. One side of the argument is that the wealthy make a huge portion of the nation’s income; therefore, they should have higher tax rates. The other side argues that wealthy Americans already pay their fair share of taxes by paying nearly 40 percent and should not be forced to pay more. These arguments both use compelling evidence to make their claims; however, a solution could be reached by increasing the tax rate of the top one percent by only 10 to 20 percent.
People do not enjoy talking about taxes because they are too political, confusing, and depressing. It is no secret that the American tax code is a mess and something many economists describe as too broken to fix. Despite this, politicians have never stopped from trying to “fix” the code, yet they have had very little success. The U.S. Government’s tax code currently comprises “more than 67,000 pages of complexities” (Boortz, Linder, & Woodall 14). The Americans for Fair Taxation (AFFT) was founded in 1995 with one goal: create the simplest and best tax reform plan that would work in the modern market and economy. The AFFT’s best solution was a bill which they promptly called the FairTax.
The American government has struggled with the issue of taxes and the budget for over a hundred years. Class conflict, adversarial political parties, and convoluted economic philosophies have resulted in a never-ending debate over taxation. The New York Times newspaper article, “Senate Panel Vote Backs Budget Plan”, from June 1993, discusses the current feelings of the time in regards to the budget and taxation. Moreover, the article mentions factors such as democrat-republican debate, trickle down economics, and high verse low taxes for the middle class. The issues discussed in this 1993 article differ only slightly from the taxation conversation of today. However, now in 2011, we face a budget crisis that threatens the American economy
The tax policy in the United States is very confusing. When the tax policy was originally written in 1913 it was four hundred pages. Now, over the past ninety one years, that tax policy has evolved to over 72,000 pages. Since the tax code has become so lengthy and nearly impossible to understand, the topic of tax reform has been in the minds of many. Although, most barely think about tax reform until tax season. It is a controversial subject due to the impact a change in tax code would have on the American people. The two most popular and widely known stakeholders in this debate are the two major political parties in the United States, the Democrats and the Republicans. The two parties share absolutely no common ground on the subject of
As most people should KNOW that if you focus on getting more money from the rich, you’re losing jobs. Because, in order for there to be jobs you’re going to need money, and if you keep taking larger amounts from these successful companies; the amount of income the worker gets is reduced or they get fired because there just isn’t enough money to keep them working. Hillary Clinton thinks the American people should be taxed more in order for her “plan” to work. Taxes is what her plan consists on, so obviously she wants to raise taxes but as is the average American pays over $10,000-$20,000 in
A big part of being president of the United States of America is either fixing the taxes or maintaining them the same. When a U.S. citizen is going to vote for their president they see what that president’s tax policies are like. Every president goes into office with a different idea for their tax policies, especially between a democratic and a republican. President Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan’s tax policies are different because they cut and raised taxes differently, different tax regulations, and how much money they put into programs but they are similar in the aspect that they were both fighting a financial crisis.
The debates on tax cuts are making their way to headlines of every radio station, newspaper, and television station in America. Today, tax cuts would only benefit the wealthy and wouldn’t really benefit the lower class. “The administration and it’s congressional alleys are proposing to sharply reduce taxation of the business income primarily benefiting
“Considering that the top marginal tax rate for the wealthiest Americans today is 35 percent, that figure seems astounding. But it's true that in the 1950s, the top marginal tax rates were over 90 percent” (Farley). Many may think, how does lower taxes on the highest income earners have an effect on them. Simple, less funding of programs that enrich the quality of one’s life. When the government does not receive the needed funding spending cuts must be made. Unfortunately, these spending cuts are more often than not are on government programs that help those who are
This week the reading by Frank in the Inequality Reader caught my attention. It talked about how the current tax system in the US is not conducive to helping society. It also mentions how an increase in taxes for the top earners would help not only the poor but also the rich. He also includes how the wealthy “have been made worse off, on balance, by recent tax cuts” (Frank 732). This reading made me think of the current GOP tax plan being signed and debated in congress.
Clinton refers to taxes in a parallel way in an area of his address to the American people. During his election era, the people had representation, but “the tax
We have all heard the famous quote by Benjamin Franklin who stated, “In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” (“Benjamin Franklin Quotes”) We find this to be true as we begin working and feel the pain of money being taken from our paychecks. Then we face the chore of having to file income taxes yearly. Although there are many taxes we are subject to, most people are referring to federal income tax when they complain about taxes. There has been debate for decades about the current system but there has been no agreement on how to fix it. The United States currently has a progressive tax code which means people pay taxes according to their earnings. This has been in place since the time of Abraham Lincoln. An alternative
Policy makers have introduced a solution to the staggering proportion of taxes that Americans spend. The flat tax, based on an idea developed by Professors Robert Hall and Alvin Rabushka of Stanford University to create a fair, simple, and pro-growth tax system (Mitchell 1, 11). There are four basic criteria that make up a flat tax. First is a single low rate on taxable income, the baseline for taxable income would be raised to a certain amount dictated by a personal exemption. Second is simplicity, all Americans would fill out the same postcard-sized form to pay their taxes. Third is the reduction or elimination of deductions, credits, and exemptions, depending
In addition to economic issues, taxation is also a political issue. Political leaders formulate tax policies to bring reforms in the taxation system in order to promote their agendas. The major tax reforms include: increasing or decreasing the tax rate, imposing new taxes on certain products and changing the definition of taxable income. It is evident from the research studies that no one deliberately wants to pay taxes. U.S’ tax policy reflects expression of influence - i.e., those who have power are successful in paying low taxes and their burden is shifted to people who have no power. Therefore retired individuals, small business owners and farmers find ways efforts to reduce their tax burden. Since its existence, tax policy has been enormously used for promoting political and economic agendas.