• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Obama Finally Enters the Taxmageddon Debate—With a Tax Increase

    With more than half the year gone, President Obama today finally broke his silence on Taxmageddon and thus brought a smoldering debate front and center. How? By continuing to push for raising taxes on the wealthy.

    President Obama and his allies had been perfectly content to continue to allow Taxmageddon to weigh on the economy and then deal with it in some fashion in the lame duck period after the November election. He was reluctantly drawn into the debate now—not because he is trying to lead on the nation’s most important economic policy issue, stopping Taxmageddon, but because of recent dismal economic data—capped off by the June jobs report.

    As the President often does, he seems to be trying to distract people from the bad economic news that reflects poorly on his policies. He’d rather focus attention on his class warfare agenda. Rather than lead, the President is reacting.

    Of course, the substance of President Obama’s position is to call for avoiding tax hikes on some while raising taxes on others. The tax increase du jour is a recycled one: The President’s long-held plan to raise taxes on incomes over $200,000 ($250,000 for families).

    He had offered a budget with little fanfare in February, with the same proposals to raise taxes on investors and job creators (those earning over $250,000) that he endorsed today. Earlier, he had sought a distracting debate over the so-called Buffett Rule tax hike. But otherwise, the President had been silent on the nearly $500 billion tax hike barreling down on the economy, slated for January 1 of next year.

    The list of prominent economists and market shapers calling for Congress and President Obama to stop Taxmageddon now has been growing longer by the day.

    House Republicans have already indicated they intended to take up legislation delaying the expiration of the 2001 and 2003 tax policies, though leaving some matters, such as the pending Obamacare tax hikes and the payroll tax hike, for another day. The Senate had signaled nothing, likely waiting on the President.

    Interestingly, President Obama differs with his allies in Congress such as Senator Charles Schumer (D–NY) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D–CA) on the definition of the “rich” who will be soaked. Schumer and Pelosi set the mark at as those making more than $1 million annually. That is five times higher than President Obama’s $200,000 mark. Apparently even they recognize the President’s plan would be too punitive on job creators—although they are still willing to stick it to the most successful job creators for the sake of class warfare.

    The President has pushed for this tax increase ever since he started running for President back in 2007. It is old hat by now, and since he has failed to get it through Congress for three and a half years running, the proposal has near zero chance of prevailing now. What is surprising is that he continues pushing this unpopular, economically damaging tax increase even as the economy continues to languish. When he should be signaling to job creators Washington’s intense desire to help, instead he signals his continued antipathy toward the private sector and job growth.

    President Obama’s tax increase would fall directly on small businesses, investors, and entrepreneurs—in other words, job creators. These are the very people the country needs to start creating jobs to put the 13 million Americans who are out of work today back on the job. President Obama’s tax increase would slow already stagnant job creation and make it even harder than it already is for these unemployed Americans to find work. The economy remains weak, and the President’s tax increase will only make it worse.

    Once again, the House of Representatives is leading, the President is reacting with a misguided tax hike on job creators, and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D–NV) and the rest of the Senate’s leadership have yet to be heard from at all. For all this, the silver lining should not be ignored: President Obama has joined the debate to prevent Taxmageddon. Thus, it is inescapable for Reid to join in.

    The economy remains weak. Preventing all of Taxmageddon—for all Americans, including job creators—should be President Obama’s top priority.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    14 Responses to Obama Finally Enters the Taxmageddon Debate—With a Tax Increase

    1. HPD says:

      To Obama and the left, debt and wasteful spending matter not. The bigger the debt the more control they think they have, and they MAY be correct.
      Especially when an effective, vocal opposition party does not exist anymore…Living in constant fear of being called racist, uncaring, and caring only for the rich…

    2. AnnRandy says:

      Class envy, income redistribution, and unsustainable spending / debt are he hallmarks of the Obama and the American communists.

      With another 4 years, it won't be the 50 state America anymore…
      It will be part of the 57 state Islamic Caliphate…

    3. Bobbie says:

      all I know for a fact is taxes trickle down. the acts and costs of our state and local governments alone is costing us our independence. Increasing taxes because government wants to on who the democratic government and President, considers "rich" in the private sector at a $250,000 gross total when the private sector foots their own expenses is not fair in the least bit. What's fair if he's only talking directly to government employees who doesn't make the money, just takes the money without the responsibility of costs and expenditures, who take no accountability to the economy, who work for their own interests giving nothing but hardship to some at the benefit of others and at thieves wages all the same while the Obama governments more or less profitable but elite businesses just the same, will add higher prices to cover any losses on the already overtaxed people/consumer if they don't get a bail out! No tax increases! Yes government restrictions! Yes government discipline! Yes government compliance to the people and the peoples' American constitution!!!!!!!!! The government of America is restricted from the inalienable rights of human life which is all this administration has been presiding over, with intimidation and raging insistance!

    4. Steve h says:

      Wrong, as usual, Curtis. This is a tax cut for every single American compared to current law. Every single American will get a tax cut on the first $250,000 of income they earn. It's as simple as that. Every single working American gets a tax cut. You can try and make up lies, but that's the truth.

      I thought you cared about deficits and debt? And you want to gvie even bigger tax cuts to millionaires?

      • Bobbie says:

        Where's "even bigger tax cuts to millionaires" who've earned or earns their money, Steve h? You wrote "EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN is going to get tax cuts? that is hideous when the President has said in his own words YOU are lying and THAT is truth and if you don't allow your mind to think further than what is said to grasp the difference between words and the actions that are contrary to the words said, then you're depriving yourself the truth! Anything seemingly honorable to the people will be taken out somewhere below the fed level!

        Idiotic to involve government unconstitutionally when all areas they're involved prove government untrustworthy, a hindrance and at unnecessary, outrageous expenses where government isn't necessary!

        The "old policies" the President of America doesn't want to go back to is diverse and disingenuous to say as he didn't experience the "old policies" that he claims doesn't work even though ignorance aside, if they didn't work America wouldn't have gotten to where she had less government, more freedom, more self worth, before Barack Obama took office. Just because he didn't take part to see her success, doesn't mean he should avoid crediting her and the people that make it so for themselves. It's the misleading, reckless spending, overreach, undisciplined and unconstitutional acts, silly!

      • Stirling says:

        Steve, you are buying into the propaganda from the liberal media. The Bush "Tax Cuts" are current law tax rates (for the past 10 years). The middle class will not see any tax cuts, if anything obamacare will increses their burden thru additional taxes writen into the law.

        Buying into the class warfare propaganda shows ignorance, as the top 2% pay more then 50% of the current federal tax burden.. How is that fair Steve ?

      • Tom T says:

        According to his own Treasury department this tax increase on the "rich" would bring in enough extra money to run the country for EIGHT DAYS!!!! According to Goldman Sachs it would reduce growth by 1/2 to 1% when we are only experiencing around 1.8 to 2.2% growth now. There is no logic to damaging our economy like this along with the additional taxation from Obamacare unless he is intentionally trying to collapse the economy. Hmmmm?

    5. Stirling says:

      The class warfare of the past 3+ years is getting as old as the European Model which it came from.. The European "punish the rich model" (to prop up the lower and middle class) is also failing and no ammount of stimulus will help that in the end. Progressives have ruined many countries as a result of bad economic policies which they refuse to acknolege as their doing. Thus until they are removed from office our country will continue to suffer under their marxist regeims.

    6. Disgusted says:

      Why do we continue to wonder why this president acts contrary to the best interest of the nation. Hello, McFly, it should be pretty clear by now. Do you really believe it is naïveté, stupidity, no it is malice a forethought. This nation elected a Trojan horse, a one man wrecking ball, and if he is not voted out of office this November, when the nation is broke, in four years or less the whole entitlement merry-go-round will crash, kiss Obamacare, fat pensions, tax subsidies, free handouts goodbye. Maybe Obama will ask for citizenship in Singapore when he is done or perhaps Kenya.

    7. Greg Cannonie says:

      It's not wise to raise taxes in a recession.
      See what happened during the Depression.
      President Hoover recommended a tax increase from 25% to 63% in 1931. Congress approved it in 1932.
      And down went the economy.

    8. confused says:

      Can anyone explain to me how the tax increase would slow job creation? I'm no economist, and I just don't understand it.
      The small business is only taxed on profits – the amount left over after expenses are paid from revenues. If your small business has a profit of $300,000, then $50,000 of that is subject to the new tax increase (the amount over $250,000). If you hired a new employee (say $50,000 expense), then your profit would be $250,000 and no tax increase.
      I don't see how the tax hike is a disincentive to hiring. What am I missing

      • Stirling says:

        Most Small Businesses put their companies tax obligations on their personal tax forms. Thus someone who owns a company that makes $300,000 in profit is taxed at the highest tax rate (currently 35%, going to 40% after the bush tax cuts expire this year). These taxes are just part of a business owners tax liability since they probably also have personal taxes (state, local) on top to pay out to support their family, and other obligations.

        In theory depending on the state that you live, and own business in your total liability could top 60-75% of your total income going to the government.. Leaving the business owner with little extra money to hire or buy new equipment.

        • confused says:

          Thanks for response. I am certainly NOT a proponent of raising taxes, but I still feel like the argument that it is "job killing" is not our strongest argument. If your business is successful and clearing over $250,000, it is hard to claim that you can't afford to hire a new employee because of high tax rates, since the money spent on the employee is not taxed. It almost seems like the higher taxes are an incentive to spend more (to get profits back under 250K).
          Now if you've done all the purchasing and hiring that you need and still have a large profit, then I can see where you've got a gripe. I just don't see how you can blame the taxes from preventing you from hiring.

          • Stirling says:

            Money spent on employees IS taxed (since it had to be made first by the business, and taxed before the employee gets their paycheck). To sum things up – Higher taxes are never an insentive to hire more people, since any "Tax" produces less of whatever it "Taxes." Each business is unique in what they consider enough "profit" to cover expences, loans, and personel. So to put a one size fits all 250K profit on eveyone (as this president has) shows the lack of understanding of what capitalism really is.

            I'd recomend reading up on what the differences in "Captialism" and "Socailsim" is. The current liberal and progressive media prefers the socialism to our free market capitalist system (which has allowed business to succeed where socialism has failed.)

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.