Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Curbs U.S. Deficit [Democrats sadden.......]
New York Times ^

Posted on 07/08/2006 10:20:32 AM PDT by Sub-Driver

Surprising Jump in Tax Revenues Curbs U.S. Deficit By EDMUND L. ANDREWS

WASHINGTON, July 8 — An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the budget deficit this year, even though spending has climbed sharply because of the war in Iraq and the cost of hurricane relief.

On Tuesday, White House officials are expected to announce that the tax receipts will be about $250 billion above last year's levels and that the deficit will be about $100 billion less than what they projected six months ago. The rising tide in tax payments has been building for months, but the increased scale is surprising even seasoned budget analysts and making it easier for both the administration and Congress to finesse the big run-up in spending over the past year.

Tax revenues are climbing twice as fast as the administration predicted in February, so fast that the budget deficit could actually decline this year.

The main reason is a big spike in corporate tax receipts, which have nearly tripled since 2003, as well as what appears to be a big rise in individual taxes on stock market profits and executive bonuses.

On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office reported that corporate tax receipts for the nine months ending in June hit $250 billion — nearly 26 percent higher than the same time last year — and that overall revenues were $206 billion higher than at this point in 2005.

Congressional analysts say that the surprise windfall could shrink the deficit this year to $300 billion, from $318 billion in 2005 and an all-time high of $412 billion in 2004.

Republicans are already arguing that the revenue jump proves their argument that tax cuts, especially the 2003 tax cut on stock dividends,

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: economics101; economy; govwatch; laffercurve; noduh; onlynytissurprised; taxes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

1 posted on 07/08/2006 10:20:36 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Well that sucks .. more good news for our Country


2 posted on 07/08/2006 10:21:44 AM PDT by Mo1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE&search=Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Tax cuts always work.


3 posted on 07/08/2006 10:22:31 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver


The piece is spun with the usual NYT pessimism towards the end...


Any good news for the Bush Administration is always spun as bad by these cretins...and then Bad News is spun as World Ending Horror...the Slimes can always be counted on to use every rhetorical device in their arsenal to cover good news.


4 posted on 07/08/2006 10:22:45 AM PDT by in hoc signo vinces ("Houston, TX...a waiting quagmire for jihadis. American gals are worth fighting for!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the budget deficit this year
5 posted on 07/08/2006 10:23:43 AM PDT by AmericanMade1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Now if we could just sober up all those sailors on both sides of the Aisle...


6 posted on 07/08/2006 10:24:49 AM PDT by DTogo (I haven't left the GOP, the GOP left me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Unexpected by everyone except Republicans! How does a Party that is consistantly wrong have ANY credibility?

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters


7 posted on 07/08/2006 10:29:48 AM PDT by bray (Jeb '08, just to watch their Heads Explode!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: in hoc signo vinces

And yet the NYT cannot connect the dots....

Has anybody considered involuntary electroshock treatment for all NYT editors and writers? Or are they still convulsing from the last series?


8 posted on 07/08/2006 10:30:17 AM PDT by alloysteel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mo1

The Big-Bang Story of U.S. Private Business
By Lawrence Kudlow

Did you know that just over the past 11 quarters, dating back to the June 2003 Bush tax cuts, America has increased the size of its entire economy by 20 percent? In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy, and much larger than the total economic size of nations like India, Mexico, Ireland, and Belgium.

This is an extraordinary fact, although you may be reading it here first. Most in the mainstream media would rather tout the faults of American capitalism than sing its praises. And of course, the media will almost always discuss supply-side tax cuts in negative terms, such as big budget deficits and static revenue losses. But here's another suppressed fact: Since the 2003 tax cuts, tax-revenue collections from the expanding economy have been surging at double-digit rates while the deficit is constantly being revised downward.

For those who bother to look, the economic power of lower-tax-rate incentives is once again working its magic. While most reporters obsess about a mild slowdown in housing, the big-bang story is a high-sizzle pick-up in private business investment, which is directly traceable to Bush's tax reform. It was private investment that was hardest hit in the early-decade stock market plunge and the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist bombings. So team Bush's wise men correctly targeted investment in order to slash the after-tax cost of capital and rejuvenate investment incentives.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/the_bigbang_story_of_us_privat.html


9 posted on 07/08/2006 10:31:31 AM PDT by Sub-Driver (Proud member of the Republican wing of the Republican Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

The democrat party is collectively tearful and sobbing with rage over this good news for the USA.


10 posted on 07/08/2006 10:32:59 AM PDT by FormerACLUmember (No program, no ideas, no clue: The democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
I sure hope the Slimes' Krugman has an apoplectic fit over this.

< snicker >

11 posted on 07/08/2006 10:35:16 AM PDT by Thumper1960 (Politicians are like diapers. They need changed often, and for the same reasons.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

I have a vision of Paul Krugman standing on a window ledge on the NY Times building shouting "No No, this can't be true" (LOL)


12 posted on 07/08/2006 10:36:11 AM PDT by steve7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Surprising.

Not to Ronald Reagan and millions of conservative Americans.

13 posted on 07/08/2006 10:36:21 AM PDT by CT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FormerACLUmember

Can't the 'Rats spend some more money to fix this problem?!


14 posted on 07/08/2006 10:38:07 AM PDT by C210N (Bush SPYED, Terrorists DIED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: in hoc signo vinces
The piece is spun with the usual NYT pessimism towards the end...

And how!  It came on dripping with so much acid that now I'm going to have to re-tile my floor.

15 posted on 07/08/2006 10:43:34 AM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

They must have strangled several at the NY Slimes to get this printed. Of course Khan, a Dem on the House Budget Committee says it's bad in the long run. More gloom and doom, go figure.


16 posted on 07/08/2006 10:48:18 AM PDT by jazusamo (DIANA IREY for Congress, PA 12th District: Retire murtha.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

I proudly accept thanks for my role in these increased tax receipts! I changed jobs two years ago and doubled my salary and bonus. I pay a lot more income tax than I did then, but of course I am taking home much more too. And I know many other people who are enjoying significantly higher incomes than they were a few years ago. It isn't just wealthy investors with cyclical increases in capital gains and investment income. But go ahead and believe the Treason Times' propaganda if you want to.


17 posted on 07/08/2006 10:51:36 AM PDT by Dems_R_Losers (Meet the new dictators of America.....Bill Keller, James Risen, Eric Lichtblau, and Dana Priest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Year___Deficit/Surplus ($Billions)______Debt ($Billions)

2000______+236.2____________________3,409.8
2001______+128.2____________________3,319.6
2002______-157.8____________________3,540.4
2003______-377.6____________________3,913.4
2004______-412.7____________________4,295.5
2005______-318.3____________________4,592.2

Source: CBO

(I hope this formatting comes out OK. I couldn't remember how to use courier, and had to wing it).

So, this will get the deficit back to roughly 2002 levels. However, our Republican President, Senate, and House have added ONE TRILLION DOLLARS to the national debt in those three years, and the out-of-control spending just keeps on going.

I'm not impressed. I wont be impressed until I see the numbers on the right go down to at least what they were before Bush took office.

18 posted on 07/08/2006 10:53:14 AM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
It was really no surprise to those who were paying attention. But the NYT and the liberals will pretend that it is merely an accidental phenomenon.
19 posted on 07/08/2006 10:53:16 AM PDT by NonValueAdded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
once again krugmanomics has been flushed down the cesspool.
i guess that makes him a lock for the nobel prize this year.
20 posted on 07/08/2006 10:53:31 AM PDT by JohnLongIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy

That just can't be - I have been hearing over and over how the deficit is continuing to grow exponentially because of all the tax cuts to the mega-rich - the ad that uses a Paris Hilton impersonation (a rather bad one at that).... The ad encourages us to contact our Senators to tell them we don't want any more tax breaks for the mega-rich...

Stupid liberals.

21 posted on 07/08/2006 10:54:04 AM PDT by TheBattman (Islam (and liberalism)- the cult of a Cancer on Society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Note to the NYT: It's not surprising.
22 posted on 07/08/2006 10:54:25 AM PDT by mewzilla (Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
"Tax cuts always work."

It's more accurate to say that tax cuts work more than liberals (including our Canadian Liberals, and socialist New Democrats) believe.

Even Laffer, (he of the Laffer Curve) believes that there's a point where lower tax rates will yield lower revenues. Liberals thought the U.S. was already past that point. Apparently, you actually weren't there yet. In Canada, we're way, way above that point.


23 posted on 07/08/2006 10:55:11 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jazusamo

maybe instead of Democrats sadden it should have read New York Times sadden.


24 posted on 07/08/2006 10:56:18 AM PDT by Sub-Driver (Proud member of the Republican wing of the Republican Party)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel


Remember...to the jurno-tards at the NYT, they are the informed and the rest of us are just the misinformed, naive, masses in dire need of enlightment.

Group Think is so pevasive at the NYT, that the place is beyond all hope and should just be marginalized, and their publication should be put to more practical purposes...fish wrap, bird cage liner, packing box stuffing, and (last but not least) puppy blotter...


25 posted on 07/08/2006 10:57:07 AM PDT by in hoc signo vinces ("Houston, TX...a waiting quagmire for jihadis. American gals are worth fighting for!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Once again, Bush's fault! LOL


26 posted on 07/08/2006 10:57:21 AM PDT by fish hawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

I'm coming around to supply side economics. I've been a conservative more because of social issues than economic ones but I have been watching the federal government revenue growth since the tax cuts and it's amazing. It is also having a ripple effect on state government revenues. They have also increased dramatically in the past couple of years. Of course revenue can alway be spent faster than it's taken in. It time to start telling liberals we might need a tax increase to slow the economy. I'm sure they'll appreciate the comment.


27 posted on 07/08/2006 10:59:17 AM PDT by Hamilcar_Barca (Hamilcar_Barca)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

I should have added: there's no reason that taxes shouldn't be lower -- even if that actually decreasing, rather than increases government revenues. In fact, it's easy to argue that decreasing government revenues is a good thing. However, the point of this article was that revenues increased despite tax reductions -- and that sort of thing has its limits.


28 posted on 07/08/2006 10:59:48 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Now if they can only control the spending...


29 posted on 07/08/2006 11:00:49 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (What you know about that?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp


Added a trillion in national debt...huh?

I'll give you three guesses what that spending has been on over the last three years...but you are only going to need one.


30 posted on 07/08/2006 11:01:25 AM PDT by in hoc signo vinces ("Houston, TX...a waiting quagmire for jihadis. American gals are worth fighting for!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Actually I think both are deeply saddened, especially since November is not that far away. Their platform of criticism is rapidly eroding.


31 posted on 07/08/2006 11:05:38 AM PDT by jazusamo (DIANA IREY for Congress, PA 12th District: Retire murtha.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

And all this IN SPITE of the terrible economic impact of 9-11, an expensive war on Islamofascistism, rebuilding of Iraq, Afghanistan, and the ever-increasing Federal budget with its myriad of wasteful programs.

If Albore had been successful in stealing the 2000 election, we'd be in an economic sinkhole right now.

Tax RATE cuts always work!


32 posted on 07/08/2006 11:06:14 AM PDT by Zman516 ("Allah" is Satan, actually.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: in hoc signo vinces

The national debt was artificially low at the end of Clinton's term considering he spent practically nothing on maintaining our military forces. Had he been investing properly in national defense, the debt in 2000 could easily have been 4 trillion.

Considering we were then sucker punched on 9/11, 1.2 trillion to fix our military and rid the world of vermin is money well borrowed in my book.


33 posted on 07/08/2006 11:09:05 AM PDT by nhoward14
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
it's easy to argue that decreasing government revenues is a good thing.

Only for those who enjoy arguing about everything under the sun.  I prefer to argue in favor of increases in my income, regardless of taxes.  Not everyone feels this way --some would rather live penniless and in squalor if it meant less taxes.   Personally, I wouldn't mind paying an extra $thousand in taxes as long as it meant an extra after-tax $3thousand in my income.  

In general, this is what's been happening nationwide.

34 posted on 07/08/2006 11:09:13 AM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: in hoc signo vinces
I'll give you three guesses what that spending has been on over the last three years...but you are only going to need one.

Historically unprecedented increases in Medicare/Medicaid. Massive increases in Social Security. Across the board increases in all other socialistic spending programs, designed to keep incumbents in office.

There's your three. The WOT is a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the budget (just in case that is the "one" you were talking about).

35 posted on 07/08/2006 11:11:11 AM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
"...corporate tax receipts... have nearly tripled since 2003..."

"In less than three years, the U.S. economic pie has expanded by $2.2 trillion, an output add-on that is roughly the same size as the total Chinese economy..."

Where are the voices that were so quick to cry "prosperity!" during the Klinton years?

36 posted on 07/08/2006 11:13:10 AM PDT by WireAndWood (Hell hath no Fury like Plymouth, 1969.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

So does spending constraint.... which is the other half of the equation that both parties appear to be missing at the moment.


37 posted on 07/08/2006 11:13:57 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Tax cuts work, every time they are tried.


38 posted on 07/08/2006 11:14:34 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DTogo

I know some drunken sailors and they resent that. The Congress gives them a bad name.


39 posted on 07/08/2006 11:15:19 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama
it's easy to argue that decreasing government revenues is a good thing.

Only for those who enjoy arguing about everything under the sun.

The more money government gets, the more money government will spend. Curtailing government revenue would be a good thing. Tax cuts are good because they let people keep more of their own money, despite the fact that they increase revenues.

40 posted on 07/08/2006 11:17:07 AM PDT by supercat (Sony delenda est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: nhoward14

Actually, Clinton spent close to what President Bush has spent on Defense per GDP. They both are close to 3.5 overall I think.

Carter was spending close to double that. I'm surprised it's been so low while we are fighting WWIII. We all know that War spurs other advances in technology, Health, and other areas.


41 posted on 07/08/2006 11:20:12 AM PDT by Marius3188 (Happy Resurrection Weekend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

It wasn't unexpected and it wasn't a surprise.


42 posted on 07/08/2006 11:22:22 AM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marius3188; nhoward14

Nhoward

My apologies, I was incorrect on Carter. He was closer to 4.5. Not the amount I said before.


43 posted on 07/08/2006 11:26:57 AM PDT by Marius3188 (Happy Resurrection Weekend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

As far as I know, cutting taxes results in increased government revenue after a few years at the outside. Every time.

If liberals really want to raise money to spend, they should cut taxes.

But they'd apparently prefer to slam the brakes on the economy, take money away from families, and hurt everyone, all under the guise of doing something compassionate.

It's madness.


44 posted on 07/08/2006 11:38:53 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: wyattearp
"I wont be impressed until I see the numbers on the right go down to at least what they were before Bush took office."

What did Klinton do about Bin Laden, Al Quaeda and the Taliban again, despite repeated attacks against America during the Klinton administration?
Apart from firing cruse missiles into empty huts in Afghanistan that is.
Throughout history, counrries have run deficits when fighting big foreign wars.
Much rather have deficits then get planes driven into my office one morning
45 posted on 07/08/2006 11:39:23 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Of course Bubba's platform was "It's all about the economy, stupid" and he raised our taxes. Poor Hillary. Things just aren't working out.


46 posted on 07/08/2006 11:43:56 AM PDT by Sacajaweau (God Bless Our Troops!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marius3188
"Actually, Clinton spent close to what President Bush has spent on Defense per GDP."

I know Klinton initiated deep cuts in defence spending, and was averse to taking any real action against Al Quaeda, The Taliban or Afghanistan.
There is simply no way Klinton spent "close to what President Bush has spent" on Defense.
47 posted on 07/08/2006 11:45:53 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

But the budget would be balanced this year if the Congress had not spent so much money.


48 posted on 07/08/2006 11:51:12 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Hate to rain on everybody's parade, but I've abandoned looking at the official "deficit" years ago... The bottom line is the increase in the national debt>>

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpdodt.htm

... notice how the debt has increased over $450B since the end of Sept. 05.. just over 9 months...

The war spending is old-fashioned Keynesnian government spending, much of it is "off budget". Not the model of a true free enterprise state I'd like to see.

49 posted on 07/08/2006 11:53:52 AM PDT by detroitdarien
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Look for extensive reporting on this tomorrow on "This Week With George Steponallofus", "deFACE the Nation", and "Meet the DEpressed". NOT!
50 posted on 07/08/2006 11:55:33 AM PDT by Recovering_Democrat (I am SO glad to no longer be associated with the party of "dependence on government"!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson