Buffet yearning for higher taxes.

The other day, the guy who reads my site was complimentary about my Buffet post so I’ve updated it and sharing it with you.

Warren Buffet has copped a bit of flack over an Op-ed in the NYT last week in which he complained about tax breaks for the rich:

Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

This is a reasonable point in that it’s a bit silly having a higher marginal tax rate for those over a certain income, only to give breaks to those who can afford to play the system. This creates an inherent unfairness in that with the Administration pushing ‘millionaire rates’ for those who earn over $250,000 per year, the lower end of that bracket are going to be slugged much more than the Buffets.

It would be more sensible to have a lower overall rate with no breaks at all. The mega rich lobbying for them as special cases causes these breaks. Generally they are designed to guarantee politically desirable results by manipulating the system, and as such are a form of social engineering.

He then goes on to contradict his claimed good intentions:

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

Why, Hell Warren, the fact that the breaks exist does not mean you have to apply them if you disagree with them. You can always decline to do so and pay the full amount if that turns you on. Apart from that, there is always the possibility of sending another $7 mil off to the IRS as a donation; with an explanation that you feel you should pay more. This will put you in a 35% bracket, and might get you a thank you letter. You will of course probably get audited very thoroughly by them to find out, “just what this bastard is covering up.”

What Warren seems to miss is that if he gave the IRS his entire personal fortune, estimated to be around $50 billion, with government expenditure for this year at $3.8 Trillion, it would only take them 4.8 days to chew through the lot. Better to hang onto it Warren.

Charles Koch has responded:

“Much of what the government spends money on does more harm than good; this is particularly true over the past several years with the massive uncontrolled increase in government spending. I believe my business and non-profit investments are much more beneficial to societal well-being than sending more money to Washington. — Charles G. Koch, Chairman and CEO, Koch Industries, Inc.

5 thoughts on “Buffet yearning for higher taxes.

  1. It is unfair to expect us to comment on a piece like this when it is so even-handed! What is there to say? Except, if warren wants to give his own money to the Government, he must have too much already! Maybe he could spare a few billion to finance a new nation in the Kimberleys?

  2. Of course, if you know someone in the button world, or the plastics world, you might help me to get rich, and I could finance the Kimberley project! When I mentioned, a few weeks back, that I had created The Self-hooking button, I meant it! But, after getting a patent, who do I see next? Anyone know any millionaires looking for a good investment? Once the millions start flowing my way, I promise to invest in a new nation conceived in libertarianism! Promise!

  3. Buffet is right. And the super-rich would be in a much more precarious position, if they were taxed a little bit more and everyone else was taxed an whole lot less, because what they are missing out on is competition from down below. Up and comers biting at their ankles. The fortunes of the super-rich today did not come about under free enterprise conditions, so we ought not act as though they are sanctified by natural law. There are all sorts of subtle extra-market ways in which these people have been advantaged. Besides that, our movement just isn’t ever going to get traction unless we are overtly hyper-egalitarian. There are frightful cronyist tendencies in our movement that must be over-matched.

    Supposing I see a sole trader whose in manufacturing, and his outfit makes ten million in revenues a year, he makes 1000 000 in profit, and he ploughs most of that one million back in to improve his business. I don’t want one dollar of his to go to the government. Its against my interests as its his business improvement that supports my living standard. But I cannot get the same self-interested feeling about new billionaire Al Gore, or all those welfare recipients, on wall street. A lot of alleged libertarians just laughed at us who arked up at the lawlessness and anti-egalitarianism of the bailout. This lack of inner sense of justice is marginalizing our movement.

Comments are closed.