Mitt Romney says “every year I’ve paid at least 13 percent [of my income in taxes] and if you add in addition the amount that goes to charity, why the number gets well above 20 percent.”

Tax the Rich Banner(photo: Marcus Demery / Flickr)

This is supposed to be in defense of not releasing his tax returns.

Assume, for the sake of the argument, he’s telling the truth. Since when are charitable contributions added to income taxes when judging whether someone has paid his fair share?

More to the point, Romney admits to an income of over $20 million a year for the last several decades. Which makes his 13 percent — or even 20 percent — violate the principle of equal sacrifice that lies at the core of our notion of tax fairness.

Even Adam Smith, the 18th century guru of free-market conservatives, saw the wisdom of a graduated tax embodying the principle of equal sacrifice. “The rich should contribute to the public expense,” he wrote, “not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion.”

Equal sacrifice means that in paying taxes people ought to feel about the same degree of pain regardless of whether they’re wealthy or poor. Logically, this means someone earning $20 million a year should pay a much larger proportion of his income in taxes than someone earning $200,000, who in turn should pay a larger proportion than someone earning $50,000.

But Romney’s alleged 13 percent tax rate is lower than that of most middle class Americans who earn a tiny fraction of what he earns.

At a time when poverty is increasing, when public parks and public libraries are being closed and when public schools are shrinking their offerings and their hours, when the nation’s debt is immense, and when the 400 richest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million of us put together — Romney’s 13 percent is shameful.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/08/18-1

More than a third of my paycheck goes to taxes and fees every week.
This is on top of property taxes, sales taxes, and all the other
taxes.

So Mitt pays fifteen percent. That leaves him with, what, seventeen
MILLION to live on? Poor guy.

Who would cry foul if there was a straight tax of 30% of all incomes?

One of the main reasons the elite contribute to any charity is for the tax break.

Wanna' find out if there is a conflict of interest on donations?

Check all donations he and Barry have paid out and look closely to see if any friends or relatives are on any of the boards.

PS
I am an ally of neither Robme or Barry.
They both from the same elitist club.

Here is the stupidity of this argument.

If you tax dividends at individual tax rates no one is going to invest a damn thing.

I don't know if you all realize this, but someone has to invest in something otherwise there will be 80% unemployment.

Publicly held companies rely on investment from outside sources to fund daily operations.

It doesn't make a damn bit of sense to risk your money on investing if when you get a positive return you are paying 30 plus %..

Its idiotic..

Any of you that have a 401K want to pay 30% on the money you put in then another 30% on the money you made in investment income?

I seriously doubt it..

Your argument also applies to those of us who earn a paycheck why would I get taxed when I earn it and then when I spend it. Why work at all?

The taxes on investments are different from wages for a reason and it's the law. No one has said Romney has broken the law or evaded taxes, they just want to make a big deal to pit rich against poor.

Look at the election with John Kerry. He was just as rich as Romney but the democrats NEVER made an issue of his wealth.

Because Kerry never groveled before the rich and tried to sell how cutting the taxes on the rich and programs for the poor was good for the economy.

You aren't earning money from your initial taxed income. You are spending it on a good or service.

Here is an idea..

Put your money in a savings account and then they can charge you 30% on the .005% you make per year..

You in on that or are you against paying your fair share?

Read...........

“America has two tax systems. Separate and unequal,” says David Cay Johnston, a bestselling author and columnist for Tax Notes, who has spent much of the past decade exposing ways the tax system favors the wealthy.

It wasn’t always this way. Until the 1990s, the capital-gains tax was 28 percent. The rate was lowered to 20 percent during Bill Clinton’s tenure—and, lo and behold, says Johnston, the tax rate paid by the country’s 400 wealthiest souls fell by the same 8 percentage points. When the second President Bush lowered the capital-gains tax another 5 points along with his other tax cuts, the country’s richest citizens saw their tax rate fall another 5.5 percent, Johnston says.

Obama recently proposed bumping the capital-gains rate to 20 percent for those earning around $250,000 a year or more. That increase, according to estimates by his budget team, would add $12 billion to the Treasury in 2014.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/capital-gains-tax-rates-benefiting-wealthy-are-protected-by-both-parties/2011/09/06/gIQAdJmSLK_story.html

If you gonna talk about taxes then Let's compare apples to apples. If he is talking about lowering income tax then you can't look at taxes he made on investments. Working is working and you get paid for your job. Investing is a risk and as such your reward should be higher or no one wants to invest. Anyone can invest. Not only the rich and they will pay the same tax percentage. Middle class people own stock. I can finite some right now if I want and if I get dividends from them then I pay the same percentage.

because paying taxes is the law... can you name a place on this planet where people don't pay taxes?

if you tax the rich people, then they will move and take their money with them... then where is that 12 billion dollars coming from? it seems to me that the government just needs to quit spending instead of raising taxes, that would solve most of the problems...