Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Pigs fly! Even the WSJ says Mitt’s tax returns show need for a tax overhaul
Even the Wall Street Journal thinks Mitt’s tax returns point to the need for tax reforms. Its editorial obviously comes at the issue from a different angle than the Economist’s editorial call for tax-code changes. See below. But there seems to be a consensus on the need to clarify and simplify our absurd tax system.
The most interesting part of the WSJ editorial: It concedes it “might be reasonable” to eliminate the “carried interest” provision allowing venture capitalists and other financiers to claim “capital-gains” status on what everyone else would consider “income,” in exchange for lowering the corporate income tax rate and other changes.
I can go for that. It’s just a matter of fairness. Financiers and others of their ilk shouldn’t be paying at lower rates as a result of screwed up definitions of what constitutes income vs. capital gains.
Btw: I wouldn’t mind a small hike in the capital gains tax rate. Historically, as you can see here, the current 15 percent rate is lower than it has been in the past. But it’s not that much lower compared to other eras (excluding the deplorable Jimmy Carter 1970s). If they got rid of the loopholes, I could live with 15 percent.
Even the Wall Street Journal thinks Mitt’s tax returns point to the need for tax reforms. Its editorial obviously comes at the issue from a different angle than the Economist’s editorial call for tax-code changes. See below. But there seems to be a consensus on the need to clarify and simplify our absurd tax system.
The most interesting part of the WSJ editorial: It concedes it “might be reasonable” to eliminate the “carried interest” provision allowing venture capitalists and other financiers to claim “capital-gains” status on what everyone else would consider “income,” in exchange for lowering the corporate income tax rate and other changes.
I can go for that. It’s just a matter of fairness. Financiers and others of their ilk shouldn’t be paying at lower rates as a result of screwed up definitions of what constitutes income vs. capital gains.
Btw: I wouldn’t mind a small hike in the capital gains tax rate. Historically, as you can see here, the current 15 percent rate is lower than it has been in the past. But it’s not that much lower compared to other eras (excluding the deplorable Jimmy Carter 1970s). If they got rid of the loopholes, I could live with 15 percent.
