作家
字體：小 中 大 |
|
|
|
| 2010/04/01 22:01:44瀏覽1280｜回應2｜推薦39 | |
新法案將在十年中增收 $210 billion , 其來源為3.8%的抽頭, 抽些什麼頭呢? 這些富人的利息收入, 出租收入, 股利, 長期投資所得. 同樣的在十年中增收$364 billion, 來自提高個人所得稅中最高的兩個稅率36%-39.6%和 33%-35%,不用說自然上述的富人都在內. 加上把股利知長期投資所得的15% 提高到 20%, 所得$105 billion. 再把現有的一些寬減免額拿掉, 又得 $500 billion. 所以這些現在就已負擔超過50%所有個人稅收的傢伙,在美國 那些人交稅? 在未來十年中要再多繳 $1.2 trillion善款! 不會成的, 從來不會! 懲罰性的高稅率無法真正提高稅收, 這些富人不是待宰的肥羊; 相反的他們精於打算, 那邊涼快, 那邊閃, 股利, 長期投資所得不行, 我買免稅州市債總可以吧! 夫妻合報超過廿五萬, 分開來報不行嗎? 根據研究(2003 by the Paris School of Economics' Thomas Piketty and Mr. Saez) 1993年增稅後, 最有錢的1%報稅人所申報的股利掉成 3 billion(稅率39.6%), 以後這數字上上下下差不多,到小布希在2002年,把股利率降成15%,申報股利所得立刻沖成8 billion! 一葉不知秋? 就個人所得稅來看. 最高稅率在1988-90降至28% ( 50% in 1986), 然而個人所得稅收在1989達GDP的 8.3% (vs. 1986 的7.9%). 1991年稅率提高成31%, 1992年的稅收又降回GDP的7.6% . 1993年克林頓手下漲至39.6% , 外加其他增徵, 稅收僅得GDP的7.8% . 高稅率等於高稅收乎?! 民主黨人不知? 歐巴馬不知? 這是歐巴馬2008年4月16在民主黨辯論會中和 Charle Gibson就歐巴馬主張提高長期投資所得稅率的對答, GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected? OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness. 詳見: Obama and Clinton Debate 聽到了嗎? 做為候選人只問公平, 不計財政結果. 這會兒當上總統又可用來支付健保?! 總之, 沒有下不完金蛋的雞, 健保如真照案實施下去, 最後的大洞仍是全民買單, 政客從不吝惜開支票, 因為他們為全民, 而他們不同於全民! 如果萬歲只是喊喊騙人, 為什麼萬稅就可以呢? 在下免錢財務理專給的萬萬稅! Health Care Reform 2010 – A Brief Overview Of Tax Implications (Compiled from varied media sources). As we stated earlier in the newsletter the new health care reform bill is a huge additional tax on the Middle‐class as well as an immediate hit to the bottom line of corporations as seen by recent announcements of Caterpillar, Deere, AT&T, and others. There are at least a dozen direct and indirect tax increases that would break President Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on those making less than $200,000 for singles and $250,000 for couples. These include: ‧ A $32 billion “Cadillac tax” on high‐cost plans, So‐called "Cadillac" plans costing more than $10,200 a year for individuals or $27,500 for family coverage (not counting dental and vision plans) will be subject to a 40% tax on the portion of the cost that exceeds the limit, beg. 2018. Though the tax would actually be paid by insurers, it's expected that it would be passed along to plan holders in the form of higher premiums. ‧ An individual mandate tax on Americans who do not purchase government‐approved health insurance. Requirement begins in 2013 for most people to have health insurance. Subsidies begin for lower and middle‐income people. People at 133% of federal poverty level pay maximum of 3% of income for coverage. People at 400% of poverty level pay up to 9.5% of income. (Poverty level currently is about $22,000 for a family of four.) Individuals who don’t purchase insurance would be subject to a fine of $325 in 2015 and $695 in 2016. Individuals may be subject to a charge equal to as much as 2.5 percent of their income in 2016, if the total is greater than the flat payment. ‧ An increase in the 7.5% AGI floor for medical expense deductions to 10%. Starting in 2013, Americans under 65 won’t be able to deduct medical expenses until they exceed 10 percent of income, up from 7.5 percent now; retirees would keep the lower threshold. ‧ Limits on Flexible Spending Accounts in cafeteria plans. The legislation for the first time would place a $2,500 limit on what can be contributed to employer‐sponsored flexible spending accounts, another type of account funded with pre‐tax dollars that can be used to pay for medicines, co‐payments, and other expenses. Employers currently set their own limits, typically between $3,000 and $5,000 in the absence of a government cap. This change would cost an average worker about $625 in tax savings. ‧ Increased penalties for nonqualified HSA distributions. Improper withdrawals from the accounts also would be hit with a new 20% tax up from 10% currently. ‧ other restrictions on Health Savings Accounts, Health Reimbursement Accounts, and Flexible Spending Accounts, The bill in 2011 places new restrictions on what can be purchased using special savings accounts funded with pre‐tax dollars including health savings accounts. ‧ A tax on tanning services. Consumers who frequent tanning salons would pay a 10% excise tax ‧ An employer mandate tax. Employers with 50 or more workers would pay $2,000 per worker if they don’t offer health insurance ‧ A sales tax on medical devices. Those who buy devices such as wheelchairs would pay a 2.9% excise tax (beg. 2013). ‧ A tax on health insurance premiums. ‧ A tax on prescription drugs. Drug makers face annual fee of $2.5 billion (beg. 2011, rises in subsequent years) and; ‧ A tax on insured and self‐insured health plans. A special deal for union members. Starting in 2018, a single union worker in a multiemployer health plan would be completely exempt from the “Cadillac tax” (a 40% tax on high‐cost plans) unless the price of that plan exceeds $27,500. In contrast, a single, non‐union worker living right next door would start paying that Cadillac tax as soon as the value of her health plan exceeds $10,200. Medicare surtaxes. Under the Senate version, the Medicare surtaxes on both earned income (imposed at a rate of 0.9%) and investment income such as realized capital gains, dividends, interest, rents, and royalties (imposed at a higher rate of 3.8%) have lower thresholds now of $200,000 for singles and $250,000 for couples. Tax on wages rises to 2.35% from 1.45% in 2013. Higher taxes on real estate investments. The 3.8% Medicare surtax would hit average, middle‐class investors in real estate. A middle‐class taxpayer who happens to sell real estate for a significant gain in a particular year would be liable for this new tax, regardless of how low her income might be in other, more typical years. Broad new IRS powers. This health care bill vastly expands the responsibilities of the Internal Revenue Service and would strengthen the IRS’s heavy hand in dealing with ordinary taxpayers who play by the rules. If this bill becomes law, the IRS may have to hire up to 16,500 additional auditors, agents, and other employees just to enforce all the new taxes and penalties. The bill would empower the IRS to: (1) verify that Americans have “acceptable” health care coverage; (2) fine Americans up to $2,085 or 2 percent of income (whichever is greater) for the failure to purchase “minimum essential coverage”; (3) confiscate tax refunds; and (4) increase audits. New marriage penalties. Because the Democrats’ subsidies for health insurance are solely based on the federal poverty level, if two people make $32,000 per year, they would pay between $6,000 and $10,000 more for health insurance than before they said “I do.” This is because as singles they were poor enough to receive health care subsidies, but as a married couple, these Americans are too rich for federal assistance. A Cadillac tax. The Cadillac tax in the Democrats’ health care bill would not keep pace with medical inflation after it comes into effect in 2018, meaning a larger and larger tax hit over time. Beginning in 2020, this tax would be indexed by only the consumer price index. Given that health insurance premiums will likely increase faster than CPI, the Cadillac tax would hit more and more plans each year and take a bigger bite from those already covered. Non‐indexed surtaxes. Instead of learning the lesson of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which hits more and more Americans every year because the exemption level is not indexed for inflation, the Democrats’ bill repeats this mistake by failing to index the exemption threshold for the Medicare surtaxes on both earned and unearned income. Higher catastrophic costs. Current law provides important tax relief to Americans who suffer catastrophic out‐of‐pocket medical expenses, permitting a deduction for costs above 7.5% of income. The Democrats’ bill would raise that threshold to 10% of income in 2012 (2016 for seniors and the disabled). This is a particularly hard hit on those with the highest medical costs who can least afford to pay more taxes. And, according to the non‐partisan Joint Committee on Taxation, more than 95% of the revenue generated from this tax increase would come from taxpayers earning less than $200,000. Higher taxes on investments. Under the Democrats’ bill, the Medicare tax would, for the very first time, apply to capital gains, dividends, interest, rents, royalties, and other investment income of singles earning over $200,000 and couples earning over $250,000. Currently, capital gains and dividends are taxed at a top rate of 15%, but those rates are already scheduled to rise in 2011 to 20% and 39.6%, respectively. When the expansion of the Medicare tax is coupled with the already scheduled rate increase, capital gains rates on these types of investment income, long‐term capital gains rates would rise by almost 60% next year – from 15% to 23.8% – and the top tax rate on dividends would nearly triple – from 15% to 43.4%. Under the Obama plan the new Health Care Reform will be equal for all. Yeah, Right! |
|
| ( 時事評論｜公共議題 ) |
