« Padilla: Guilty | Main | Internet could kill local papers »

Tax hike attempt brewing in Senate

The latest brilliant idea to raise taxes "on the rich" targets so-called "private equity partnerships," including hedge funds, and aims to take away their ability for profits to be taxed as investment gains instead of as regular income. This sounds plausible on the surface, as if they are "eliminating a loophole," when in fact it's just the same old tax on business. Ken Blackwell at Townhall.com:


Always hungry for more money to spend on pet projects, spendthrift members of Congress have found new taxable cash cows to fillet -- private equity funds, partnerships, venture capitalists, and hedge funds. Foolishly, they have opted to fillet these cows for a month's worth of steak instead of milking them for economic nutrition for years.

Specifically, the members of Congress have placed a 130% tax increase bullseye squarely on the backs of fund managers. These are hyper-aggressive and competitive financial managers who work hard, take risks, drive innovation, and earn tens of millions of dollars on a single completed deal.

* * * * *

The funds these individuals have made so profitable have an enormously positive impact on the U.S. economy and Main Street America. Ham-handedly tinkering with such an important capital driver will have a negative impact on the nation's economic vitality.

In the past two decades, these funds have yielded returns in the hundreds of billions -- benefiting a wide array of individuals and projects. From constructing shopping malls, office buildings, and hotels to funding pensions for teachers, firefighters, and police officers, the funds' capital investments have substantially contributed to job creation and improvement in the quality of life many Americans enjoy.


Read the rest at the above link. Somehow, I just know the fellow who cut open the Goose That Laid The Golden Eggs was a politician.

Today's Wall Street Journal editorialized on the effort by Senators Grassley and Baucus to push this hike through:


The tax "loophole" they want to close is a 1987 law that allows certain publicly traded partnerships to pay a capital gains tax rate (now 15%) on investment earnings rather than the corporate income tax rate (now 35%). That law lets corporations that earn at least 90% of their income from investments ("passive income") pay the lower tax rate. Mr. Grassley, the Iowa Republican, now calls that "unfair."

But wait. It turns out he's a cheerleader for this same loophole as long as it applies to his favorite industry: corn-based ethanol. On June 29, the Iowan successfully sponsored a tax provision that allows "certain income and gains" related to alternative fuels to be "treated as qualifying income for publicly traded partnerships." His co-sponsor was none other than Mr. Baucus, the Finance Committee Chairman who is Mr. Grassley's running mate in closing the private equity "loophole."

Apparently some partnerships are more equal than others.


Sorry, most of this article is behind a subscription wall.

The unlikely hero in this fight may be Chuck Schumer. The New York Senator, whose constituents number among the hardest hit if the tax increase passes, challenged the corn state Senators to apply the higher rate to all partnerships. Because this will affect substantially more people, it makes it almost impossible to pass.

It's a true pleasure to see Senator Schumer recognizing his wealthy constituents don't deserve to be penalized for their success. I hope he will soon extend that thinking to the rest of us, too.

The reason the lower rate applied to these partnerships in the first place is that the corporations they own already pay the regular corporate income tax on profits, and shareholders pay again on dividends when profits are distributed. The politicians want to tax the same income at a higher rate the third time around.

By increasing the taxes on investments, the return is reduced, and thereby the attractiveness to investors. This would have a profound and lasting effect on our economy, raising the cost of capital and giving our best money men a strong incentive to ply their trade internationally, since few other countries tax their corporations and investors as punitively as the United States.

It's just an all-around bad idea - unless you're a corn state Senator in the pocket of Archer Daniels Midland.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/23421.

Comments (5)

Freedon fries, get real. Ta... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Freedon fries, get real. Taxing the rich is taxing everyone that works and/or spends money. Sh** flows downhill on it's on but requires a pump to flow it uphill. Chuckie Schumer has other plans to take away 'your' money. Those in Ohio (most of them) that were surpressing votes were democrats and have been arrested, tried and convicted. Go do a little research. The hate that has ate the democrats brain is getting dangerous to everyone and will soon have to eleminated, the democrats that is.

Note that FF apparently can... (Below threshold)
C-C-G Author Profile Page:

Note that FF apparently cannot come up with a response to the substance of the article, so instead he launches an ad hominem attack on one of the people involved.

This is your modern Democratic Party, ladies and gentlemen: no ideas, just attack the people on the other side.

Schumer has other ... (Below threshold)
Schumer has other plans to take away 'your' money.

Scrappy, glad you used a '' around your. We all know it's actually Congress's money and due to their magnanimousness they allow us to 'keep' some of it.

FreedomFried, why are you so envious of the wealthy? Are you jealous of their work ethic, their smarts, their willingness to take risks? Just what is it about them that seems to make you want to single them out for exceptional penalties for their success? Why are liberals so bigoted against success and wealth?

Wouldn't it be unconstituti... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Wouldn't it be unconstitutional? Doesn't the Constitution state that all revenue generating legislation must originate in the House of Representatives?

I know that the Democrats view the Constitution as an inconveniece that should be ignored, but still...

Oh yes the tax and spend de... (Below threshold)
spurwing plover:

Oh yes the tax and spend demacrats cant wait to regain power and their already preparing more tax hike for more pork spending




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy