Skip to comments.Tim Geithner Just Quashed Hopes Of A Bush Tax Cut Extension
Posted on 07/22/2010 12:49:00 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Following comments from Senate Democrats expressing willingness to extend Bush tax cuts, the White House dispatched Tim Geithner to kill the buzz.
Tim just announced Obama's plans to let the tax cuts expire for wealthy Americans in January, according to WSJ. Which is what people expected all along.
Mr. Geithner said there is "still some uncertainty about how strong the recovery is going to be," which may be impacting spending decisions by businesses and individuals. But he discounted that as a reason to extend the Bush-era tax cuts for top earners, saying most private forecasts show moderate economic growth and increasing public confidence in the recovery.
He also rejected concerns voiced by business groups and many Republicans that the administration's economic policies are creating uncertainty and holding back private investment. "Business always wants their taxes lower and always wants to live with less regulation," he said, adding that U.S. firms are "doing very well
competing around the world."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
Mr. Geithner said there is “still some uncertainty about how strong the recovery is going to be,”
...BWAHAHAHAHA Mr Tax Cheat! You funny you are! You need your own TV sitcom! Call it “America Idled”.
Ok, so they’ll expire for “wealthy Americans” - so where’s the bill to extend the 10% bracket, then? Where’s the bill to extend the adoption tax credit?
I hope the GOP members running in the November elections hammers this subject home. This should be a winner.
This guys is living in fantasyland. I guess medicre growth is enough for him. Those phrases should be used against all Rats in the elections. Obama and the rats think the economy is growing strong enough.
I seriously doubt Tim Gietner could quash a pecan without a pair of pliers. He really doesn’t hold that much sway on the Hill, even with the true believers.
Please, let’s stop using this term “wealthy” to describe the highest bracket taxpayers. The 33% bracket runs from the 170s to the low 200s for single or married. The 35% kicks in at 373k.
Ask professionals or business owners who work their asses off if they thing they’re “wealthy.”
If the Democrats are so concerned about this, then why don’t the tax the truly “wealthy” rather than cut the brackets at these levels?
I’m sure CEOs of some businesses contemplating a move offshore are making their minds up today.
I thought the only people whose taxes were cut by Bush were “the rich.” You mean the libs lied about that?
The dude isn't using gov't forcasts?
If this nitwit doesn't understand that these rate increases will have massively deleterious effects on the economy, he shouldn't be treasurer for the kids' afterschool baseball league, much less Secretary of the Treasury.
However, I am certain that the Kenyan Clown and all of his circus would be delighted to see such massive damage to our economy.
Stupid arrogant @$$hole ! **** these Goldman Sachs executives. They should be hung up to dry instead of being involved in gov’t policy which is good for executives who already made their money but pull up the ladder behind them as they climb up so no one else succeeds financially !
I don’t know why anyone attributes any authority whatever to a Treasury Secretary who is an acknowledged tax cheat and who, after over a year and a half in office, has still to see his signiture on the currency.
I bought a little “Tax Cheat” rubber stamp to use upon the appearance of the first Geithner Federal Reserve notes. It’s been gathering dust on a shelf above my desk for well over a year.
I saw an article somewhere today that came right out and said that 0 wont even run in 2012. Might explain why he's doing some of the things he's doing. The article also speculated that PIAPS would step in and be the dims candidate.
Gotta think fire to the frying pan on that one.
Geez, when will it end?
I don’t care how many Democrats say whatever, there is no way in hell Obama will sign a bill to extend the Bush tax cuts.
Prove me wrong.
Exactly! Lets see the bill that extends the lower marginal rates and lets see it RIGHT NOW!!! Face it, all income levels are going to get SLAMMED with higher federal income tax rates resulting in all working American having less take home pay.
When did the Sec. of the Treasury become a member of Congress? ‘Cause according to my reading of the Constitution, CONGRESS is the body which has the power to tax, the power to reduce same, not one or another of the members of the Cabinet.
That’s funny - my tax liability went down when the Bush tax cuts were enacted, and yet I don’t feel wealthy.
“...plans to let the tax cuts expire for wealthy Americans...” = raising MY taxes. And I’m far from wealthy.
Hey, Geitner, without those tax cuts there will BE NO RECOVERY.
The last thing America needs in 2011 is a 50% tax increase, yet that’s exactly what many are going to see. And then, this guy and many RATS will say ‘’Gee we didn’t know this could happen, must be Bushs’ fault.’’
Geithner is worth between $300 million and $ 600 million, of course. Is there anything as vomitous as a man with that money demanding you and I pay more taxes?
My business is slowly recovering from your 1st year in office.
I was considering hiring 2 people in a few months, but I will have to hold off on that and use that money to pay my family's higher taxes.
Please Stop your jihad on America Business!!!
-Texas Small Businessman-
Well, that good you don’t feel wealthy. In 2011 you won’t have too far to fall. By 2012, you might ‘get it’ - it takes a while for some.
Because they will ‘change’ the name from what they called it, ‘a tax cut for the rich’, now they will call it a tax cut for the ‘middle class’. Why?
Elections are coming .
WE ARE COMING FOR YOU CONGRESS.
Because after all, only rich folks got the Bush tax cuts.
I am of course using THIS administrations’ definition of “rich”, which keeps getting revised down every day.
Eventually if you are not on some form of government welfare you will be classified as “rich”.
I do not consider 170 to 370 a year to be wealthy. It’s definitely upper-middle class, but that person’s not going out to buy extravagant properties, build impressive buildings, or get rich in land speculation.
Tim Geithner is an idiot!!
Which is to say, none.
I will make sure that I flood the IRS with paperwork on every purchase that I can. I want them to feel like they're drinking out of a fire hydrant.
Don't feed the beast, CHOKE the beast with paper.
for the libs that lurk and read this, people like me studied during college and banged your girlfriend while you smoked pot, played with yourselves and talked about how great you were without doing anything.
Sad thing about the Obama economy is that if you happen to be fortunate enough to have a job, you're rich.
Stock market was up today on good tax rate news.
Stock market will crash tomorrow based on Obamanomics.
Not sure 1% GDP growth in 2011 can be considered “strong” at all...
I can see a Tax Revolt from my house!
Is the MSM finally catching on to that notion, or was this someone else realizing it?
“Mr. Geithner said there is ‘still some uncertainty about how strong the recovery is going to be,’ which may be impacting spending decisions by businesses and individuals.”
So let’s kill the recovery by raising taxes. Rocket Scientist.
Glenn Beck is right. Congress has been shut out of budget decisions.
Republicans are idiots for not throwing that back at Dems everytime they push for their progressive income taxes--that they are just trying to keep people in their place.
Funny, I was just thinking about that the other day while looking at the reverse of the new penny that looks like something I would have seen in Loony Tunes.
I was arguing with a Lib the other day about “wealthy” Americans. She considered anyone that made more than $35K a year to be “rich”.
Also, I don't believe in any progressive income tax. If the tax is an American's way to contribute to the nation, then those who don't contribute are less American than those who do. Those who contribute less are less American than those who contribute more.
I don't like the income tax, but if it were my only option, I'd push for one rate that probably wouldn't have to be more than 8 or 9 percent.
“...I don’t FEEL tardy...”
LOL. Sorry, that was the first thing that jumped into my mind.
My wife and I live on a quarter acre in ranchland in a little 1963 simple ranch (the ones that were built by the millions back then) and we are going to be hit big. We aren’t “rich”, but we are comfortable.
I suspect anyone seen as ‘comfortable’ is also seen as ‘rich’. Never mind we never bought things we couldn’t afford and tried to manage our own financial future without depending on Social Security income. People like me are viewed as the cash cow.
As damaging as letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire will be, I also think the cumulative effect of a LOT of things is going to be amazingly destructive to the economy.
For example, they want to get rid of the Health Care Savings accounts. Sure, that may only be a few thousand off your taxable income. But it is a few thousand. It is the tip of the iceberg.
When I explained this to someone, she said “Why would the government get rid of HSA’s? They don’t cost them anything? I told her they were viewed by the government as potential revenue.
Next, the mortgage credit will go. Now, I can see where we could do it, if the entire housing industry and tax structure is revamped in lock-step.
But we all know it won’t be. They will FIRST get rid of the mortgage tax credit, and somehow never get around to addressing the reasons why it was there in the first place and the results of having it in place for so long.
I see lots of iceberg tips. And as I have said before, I don’t think the deleterious effects of all this are unintended.
“that U.S. firms are “doing very well competing around the world.”
Gee Tim, what firms would those be Tim? How many small businesses are in that count?
As someone in the top 1% myself, I understand what you mean (when I think of “rich”, I think of Warren Buffett with $60 billion). The thing is, the average household in the United States makes $4,167 per month. The top income tax bracket doesn’t kick in until $31,083 per month.
To most people that is rich, *especially* when you consider that those of us in the top 1% know how to use private pensions, tax shelters, trusts, partnerships, and corporations to lower our income considerably. (By the time all of the tax breaks after factored in, an income of $31,083 is probably really an income of $50,000+ per month if it’s done right.)
Also, at that level of income, whether you are “wealthy” or not depends on if you on a business or you are collecting a paycheck.
What I mean is, if you are a high paid executive and you get $31,000+ per month, that’s it. If you stop working, the checks cease. Game over.
If, however, you get that same $31,083 per month from owning shares of a private business, such as a commercial plumbing firm you built from a start-up, at even a low capitalization rate of 11x EBIT, your “shares” are worth nearly $4,000,000.
You may have $0 in the bank but the reality is you are still worth a cool $4 million. Instead of owning stock in McDonald’s or Berkshire Hathaway, you own shares of *your* company. Most people can’t “see” it so they don’t believe it. They suddenly think they got rich after selling their business but they were always that rich, they just exchanged stock in a private firm for cash.
A much, much bigger problem is the middle class is being taxed out of existence. When Buffett was in his 20’s and 30’s, the payroll tax was only 3% if I remember correctly. Today, it can go as high as 15.3% for self-employed business owners. A family making less than $150,000 per year has to work their ass off just to pay the IRS and, proportionately speaking, they are paying more than ever before. That is the sick part of this mess.
The ONLY way I would support increasing my taxes would if they raised the bracket on on income over $1,000,000 per year and they drastically CUT the payroll tax back to the level of the 1950’s to give small business owners a shot at getting off the ground.
Someone who is self-employed has to be able to keep most of the money he earns in the early years and Congress is killing off these men and women with tax increases. It has to be fixed. I know it was my biggest obstacle when I started out and, frankly, I’m not sure how much longer the American dream can stay alive if they keep reaching their hands into the pockets of entrepreneurs.
I don’t understand how this contradicts yesterday’s article at all.
The Dems emphasized middle class. It was pretty obvious they were going to let the rich suffer, not EXTEND ALL the cuts.
This article is just being a bit overdone.