Quote:
Originally Posted by Commissioner
Something else folks might want to think about before they decide to vote for a democrat. Now what was it that Obama wants to raise the capital gains tax up to? 25% or 35%?
<http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html>
The Tax Foundation - Publications > Overview w/151.html
Taxes under Clinton 1999
Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
|
Quote:
Comparing Income Taxes under Bill Clinton and George Bush
by Gerald Prante and Alicia Hansen
Recently an incorrect comparison of income taxes under Presidents Clinton and Bush has been making the rounds of the internet, showing up in forwarded e-mails and on numerous blogs and message boards. (See examples here, here, here, and here.)
This message shows that income taxes under George Bush are lower than income taxes under Bill Clinton, and it relies on Tax Foundation data to make this comparison. The author used a Tax Foundation chart showing the federal individual income tax rates and brackets from 1913 to the present to calculate the income taxes paid by hypothetical married and single taxpayers at various income levels under 1999 tax law and 2008 tax law.
While the basic message of the comparison is correct (federal income taxes have indeed fallen under George Bush for groups at all points on the income spectrum), the chart created by the author of this comparison contains some mathematical errors. Furthermore, the comparisons are exaggerated by the fact that annual inflation adjustments in the tax code would have lowered tax bills in 2008 relative to 1999 under a constant nominal income amount.
The table below presents the correct amount of tax paid by each of the hypothetical taxpayers in the comparison. Note that this comparison does not take into account the Alternative Minimum Tax, and the taxpayers in these examples take the standard deduction and do not have children.
(Click here if you're having trouble viewing the table.)
Individual Income Tax Due in 2008,
Bush Law versus Clinton Law
For taxpayers who take the standard deduction and have no children
Single, income of 30,000....$3,157.50....$2,756.25
Single, income of 50,000....$7,262.50....$6,606.25
Married, income of $50,000..$5,085.00....$4,012.50
Married, income of $60,000..$6,585.00....$5,512.50
Single, income of $75,000...$14,262.50...$12,856.25
Married, income of $75,000..$9,426.50....$7,762.50
Single, income of $125,000*..$29,378.50..$26,472.25
Married, income of $125,000*..$23,426.50..$19,462.50
*This chart does not take into account the Alternative Minimum Tax
|
Of course, the assumption is that a person who made $30,000 at the end of the Clinton administration is making correspondingly more today, taking into account inflation. However, thanks to the Bush tax policies that promoted lots of borrowing from overseas, the dollar has fallen in value against a basket of foriegn currencies, so the costs of critical imports like oil and gas have increased for too many people to dwarf the tax cuts.
What is the benefit of earning the same as you did under Clinton, and while saving $400 a year in income taxes you must now spend an extra $500 for things because of the higher oil price which is the result of Republican policies that discouraged investing in sustainable energy, the huge deficit created by tax cuts which weakened the dollar, and a war that both increased the deficit and further weakened the dollar and also consumes massive amounts of oil?
|