|
rulemylife -> RE: projected increase in our taxes if Senator Obama wins the presidency (10/20/2008 3:46:15 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bestbabync
here is a little information. Sen. Obama stated this past week that our taxes will be no higher than the Clinton years. Just giving everyone a little heads up. i found this interesting:
www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/
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
You know what I found interesting? That your link didn't show the data you presented. I wondered why.
So I did the research you should have done before you posted this inaccurate nonsense.
The first link here, is an exact copy of the chart you posted that this Tax Foundation article debunks. It is NOT a Tax Foundation chart.
www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/22958.html
February 19, 2008
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 )
While it does show taxes under Bush in 2008 lower in the corrected chart, it does not take into account the rebate package for that year, which was a one-time deal, not a part of tax law. Eliminate that and the tax amounts in 1999 and 2008 are virtually identical.
Which brings us to the question of why we are comparing Clinton and Bush tax rates since the last I heard it was highly unlikely either of these guys will be President in '09?
|
|
|
|
